DandA123
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On
|
 p.13 #2 · Light Lens Lab Releases 35mm f/1.4 Aspherical "11873" | |
Fred Miranda wrote:
It's indeed intriguing. I've never shot with the Leica 35mm f/1.4 ASPH. "pre-FLE", so I can only comment based on the data, optical design changes, and sample images. From what I've gathered, the current FLE versions (I or II) use the same optical design as the pre-FLE, with one distinct and important change: the floating group. The rear 5-element group moves as a unit depending on focus distance, better correcting SA and other aberrations at closer distances.
So, if you shoot at MFD or moderately close, the pre-FLE's spherical aberration (glow) and slightly lower contrast should be noticeable. Leica also corrected focus shift in the FLE version, which means it may appear sharper...not due to higher resolution, but because focus is more accurate. When using a rangefinder, stopping down produces correctly focused images, which look sharper than on the pre-FLE, where focus shift can soften the result.
From the comparisons I've seen, anything beyond roughly 2.5m looks pretty much the same between pre-FLE and FLE, except that focus shift may make pre-FLE images appear softer when stopping down (since we don't refocus with the rangefinder).
In other words, the floating group improves correction at close distances, not by changing the optical design (Aside from the rear group moving), but by reducing aberration and making focus more precise.
As for the Light Lens Lab Releases 35mm f/1.4 Aspherical "11873", it doesn't have a floating group either, so SA might be more pronounced compared to the current FLE. At moderate distances, however, it should behave similarly....Show more →
Fred nailed most of the salient distinctions between the 35mm f1.4 pre FLE compared to its successor, the 35mm f1.4 FLE (Ver 1) in my opinion having owned the pre FLE for many years and the FLE (ver 1) for a brief time. The focus shift of the pre FLE at closer distances is moderately substantial (if the lens is adjusted for best focus wide open) and does contribute to some glow depending on subject lighting as a consequence of SA.
There are two notable observations in my time shooting both lenses. Aside from the focus shift and subsequent SA at closer focusing distances with the pre FLE. I felt the pre FLE had a bit of a painterly quality in a fair number of images, regardless of focusing distances, sort of a look between the ultra-modern FLE lenses and some older classic lenses. Dare I say a transition period, although the pre FLE definitely leans towards the FLE imagery. I also felt the FLE had more bite/sharpness and slightly higher contrast, especially in bright lighting and this may be due to possibly different coatings between the two lenses (improved with the FLE).
Often times I could pick which image was taken with each lens in a direct comparison. Whether what I observed was representative of simply the samples I owned, I cannot say, as I only owned one of each at the time.
|
to add to my collection.