rscheffler wrote:
I like the square hoods for a variety of reasons. Pretty much every Leica pull out design I've used has been wobbly and doesn't lock securely in place, whether in or out. I tend to handle lenses by the front a lot, whether that's right or wrong, and the loose feeling of such hoods gives me a sense that I don't have secure grip of a lens, which annoys me. The square design is another indicator of the lens's orientation for mounting to the camera, which I can partially determine just by touch when pulling it out of the camera bag. Makes for faster lens swaps....Show more →
I like the versatility but dislike the effectiveness blocking direct light shining on the lens because most Leica built-in hoods are too short to accommodate the lens' angle of view. Of course flare intensity is also a consequence of optical design and lens coating but an optimized hood always help.
The FLE II's new features may not offer a compelling reason for current FLE owners to upgrade but the shorter MFD and rounder aperture at smaller apertures is definitely a plus. Not sure if the 22-point sunstar will be attractive though.
I'll take subtle 22 points over massive 12 points.
The hood is a compromise of the rangefinder system. A truly effective hood will make the lens much larger and cause significant viewfinder blockage, things that go against the Leica M philosophy. Wider than a certain focal length and it would seem the pull-out round hood design won't be practical due to cutting into the image area sooner than a rectangular hood. Maybe pull out hoods is what Leica is settling on for 35mm and longer? I think the only 50 that had a square hood was the Summarit. Wasn't there a 28mm pull out hood design? Maybe a special edition? IMO Leica could put effort into improving flare resistance. That would minimize the need for an effective hood.
My Summicron 50mm with pull out hood always has its hood available. It is nice and tight so stable whether pushed in or pulled out. It may or may not be as effective as a large square hood in the 50mm FL, but it is always available and used often. My Summilux 50mm has the removable square hood. I find it large and cumbersome, so most often leave it home. When it is home it has no effectiveness. So, in my usage the pull out hood would be functionally more effective.
Too expensive to upgrade my existing Summilux 35mm for the minimal extra features of this new lens. But, I like the looks and specs of it and would prefer it over what I have now.
My Wife is in Copenhagen today on a business trip. She happened on the Leica store, went in and called while there. Said it was beautiful and so were the cameras and the asseccories. Normally she won't go in a camera store with me. She asked me if she could buy me anything while there. Anything I want. I exercised super human discipline and said no. I am saving my next big Leica purchase for an M11 equivalent that has IBIS, which I need in order to reasonably hand hold 60 mpxs.
Leica Store Copenhagen, Denmark. I could have had anything I wanted. My Wife is in a generous mood today...
Any thoughts on how this lens might match up to the 35mm APO Summicron? I mean, some of the Lux' are technically APO corrected. I'm curious as a 35 Lux FLE "version I" owner, because the new FLE close focusing has appeal (think wedding ring close-ups, portrait, etc.). But if I'm switching lenses, the APO cron appealed to me because it's matched performance for the M11 which I now use.
rscheffler wrote:
I'll take subtle 22 points over massive 12 points.
The hood is a compromise of the rangefinder system. A truly effective hood will make the lens much larger and cause significant viewfinder blockage, things that go against the Leica M philosophy. Wider than a certain focal length and it would seem the pull-out round hood design won't be practical due to cutting into the image area sooner than a rectangular hood. Maybe pull out hoods is what Leica is settling on for 35mm and longer? I think the only 50 that had a square hood was the Summarit. Wasn't there a 28mm pull out hood design? Maybe a special edition? IMO Leica could put effort into improving flare resistance. That would minimize the need for an effective hood....Show more →
12 points? Like with recent Voigtlander 12 blades? I'm biased to defined sunstars but accept that many do not like the effect.
The previous FLE yields 18 points.
Yes, the Leica 28/2 cron black-matte has a built-in hood. One could consider the new Leica 35/1.4 FLE II a special edition version since the optical design is untouched.
I agree it's a compromise to keep things as small (short) as possible but given the choice I think I prefer going hood-less or using a better optimized hood when needed.
I'll add that the FLE II hood looks like a twist function like the 50 APO, not the 50-lux pull-then-twist-to-lock. The former I greatly prefer so this is a welcome option on the 35 FLE II.
grainsilver wrote:
Any thoughts on how this lens might match up to the 35mm APO Summicron? I mean, some of the Lux' are technically APO corrected. I'm curious as a 35 Lux FLE "version I" owner, because the new FLE close focusing has appeal (think wedding ring close-ups, portrait, etc.). But if I'm switching lenses, the APO cron appealed to me because it's matched performance for the M11 which I now use.
The 35/1.4 FLE is not the king in terms of ultimate resolution although it's still a competent lens considering its compact size. It's noticeably weaker at mid-field when shooting at wide apertures. Lenses like the Zeiss 35/1.4 ZA or even Voigtlander 35/1.7 Ultron provide stronger performance wide open. The Voigtlander 35/2 APO (and I'm pretty sure the Leica equivalent) perform better in terms of resolution.
Rendering is similar to the Voigtlander 35/1.7 Ultron which I consider pleasant for a 35mm lens. I've tested them side by side and could barely see any difference, except for the Voigtlander's higher optical vignetting.
I prefer the type of hood found on the currently-extant 11663 FLE, and do not find the closer MFD to be all that important, in a 35mm lens. This new 35mm Summilux seems unlikely to tempt me into a bout of Gear Acquisition Syndrome, except that this announcement should make it easier to find a good deal, on a well-preserved, pre-owned 11663 FLE.
1bwana1 wrote:
My Summicron 50mm with pull out hood always has its hood available. It is nice and tight so stable whether pushed in or pulled out. It may or may not be as effective as a large square hood in the 50mm FL, but it is always available and used often. My Summilux 50mm has the removable square hood. I find it large and cumbersome, so most often leave it home. When it is home it has no effectiveness. So, in my usage the pull out hood would be functionally more effective.
Too expensive to upgrade my existing Summilux 35mm for the minimal extra features of this new lens. But, I like the looks and specs of it and would prefer it over what I have now.
My Wife is in Copenhagen today on a business trip. She happened on the Leica store, went in and called while there. Said it was beautiful and so were the cameras and the asseccories. Normally she won't go in a camera store with me. She asked me if she could buy me anything while there. Anything I want. I exercised super human discipline and said no. I am saving my next big Leica purchase for an M11 equivalent that has IBIS, which I need in order to reasonably hand hold 60 mpxs....Show more →
Take advantage of her good mood + strong dollar relative to Euro!
Something I noticed with the FLE II is that the focusing ring is very close to the aperture ring. On the FLE version, there is a bigger space between the rings.
Here is an excerpt:
"I've carefully compared the performance with my 35 FLE, and it does seem that the new lens has a slightly more relaxed and gentle bokeh."
Same optical formula but gentler bokeh?? It would be great to see a side by side comparison showing this.
From the official released specs, it's not 1mm shorter and 1mm wider. It's actually the same length and 2mm wider according to Leica. (not that it makes much of a difference)
Fred Miranda wrote:
I always enjoy reading Jono's reviews.
Here is an excerpt:
"I've carefully compared the performance with my 35 FLE, and it does seem that the new lens has a slightly more relaxed and gentle bokeh."
Same optical formula but gentler bokeh?? It would be great to see a side by side comparison showing this.
From the official released specs, it's not 1mm shorter and 1mm wider. It's actually the same length and 2mm wider according to Leica. (not that it makes much of a difference)
Leica may have updated the coatings, which could affect contrast and therefore bokeh to a small extent (perhaps a coating change to slightly reduce contrast for a more gentle rendering). Leica never states when they improve or change coatings as far as I know. Also they could have left the optical formula the same but changed one or more element glass formula/composition/type.
Here is an excerpt:
"I've carefully compared the performance with my 35 FLE, and it does seem that the new lens has a slightly more relaxed and gentle bokeh."
The pictures with reflections on water show something very close to the 35 FLE: a bokeh that is ok but not as smooth as other lenses when it comes to small out of focus sources of light.
highdesertmesa wrote:
Leica may have updated the coatings, which could affect contrast and therefore bokeh to a small extent (perhaps a coating change to slightly reduce contrast for a more gentle rendering). Leica never states when they improve or change coatings as far as I know. Also they could have left the optical formula the same but changed one or more element glass formula/composition/type.
I like the idea but better coating would potentially increase contrast which in turn could be detrimental to OOF rendering. I don't see the logic but improved coating is definitely a possibly for the new version.
Minimizing specular highlight outlining would improve rendering but that would require a tweak in the optical design which according to Leica, it's not the case.
From the review, shooters may assume the new FLE II yields more pleasant rendering but we need a side by side comparison to confirm this. It could be the case though and perhaps someone with both versions could do a quick test for us.
Fred Miranda wrote:
I like the idea but better coating would potentially increase contrast which in turn could be detrimental to OOF rendering. I don't see the logic but improved coating is definitely a possibly for the new version.
Minimizing specular highlight outlining would improve rendering but that would require a tweak in the optical design which according to Leica, it's not the case.
From the review, shooters may assume the new FLE II yields more pleasant rendering but we need a side by side comparison to confirm this. It could be the case though and perhaps someone with both versions could do a quick test for us....Show more →
They could have lowered the contrast of the coatings, which would smooth out bokeh a bit. These lenses have so much contrast to being with, I'm not sure anyone would notice the change when stopped down, but it could help wide open.
But you're right – we need proof with side-by-side shots.
