50mm Lux or Cron?

In your experience with both lenses, which provides the more

luscious bokeh? The 50 1.4 ASPH or the 50.2 ASPH? Thanks.

And just out of curiosity, would the answer apply to the 35 as

well? Thanks.

Actually, neither of the 50's are ASPH - they both predate the use of

aspherics by a few (or in the case of the 1.4, many) years.

<p>

As far as bokeh goes, I think the 1.4 takes the title, but that comes

at a price. The Summicron is sharper at wide apertures, and has

somewhat higher contrast. I know many who are ardent proponents of

the Summilux, but I know most consider the 'cron to be the definitive

Leica lens, and I've never heard anyone complain about its bokeh.

<p>

I had a chrome Summilux on an M4 back in the mid 70's, and I have a

recentish Summicron now. All in all I like the look of the Summicron

better - it's snappier. I always felt the Summilux looked a bit

mushy, especially at 2.0 and 1.4.

<p>

About the 35's, they are both ASPH lenses (which is where the

confusion about the 50's probably came from) They are both amazing

lenses - sharp, sharp, sharp, and the colour rendition is as good as

you could ever ask for. The bokeh differs, though. I own both, and

it was the first thing I noticed in shots with the 1.4. The 'cron has

an overall smoothness and coherence to the image (in and out of

focus) that I think edges it ahead of the 'lux. The Summicron also

has smoother bokeh - the bokeh of the 1.4 is more angular. OTOH, the

'lux is just as sharp, and holds that quality right down to 1.4

<p>

If I had to keep one, I'd probably keep the Summilux, because nice as

the Summicron is, that extra stop is just so useful.

Just for your information, there is no ASPH models for the 50mm 1.4 and

2.0. The 50/1.4 is supposed to have the better Bokeh, (the Leica

'Glow). I have both the 1.4 and 2.0 and would have to say the 1.4 has

the better Bokeh.

This topic has been debated quite a bit lately on the LUG (Leica

users group). The thing that is clear after reading the arguments

for several days is... there is no real answer. The theory about

Bokeh is based on someone's opinion. Some of the images posted as an

example of "bad" bokeh are the ones I would love to have produced...

maybe I am blind or stupid. Or maybe that is why there is chocolate

and vanilla.

<p>

My personal choice for great background blur is the last non-ASPH

35mm Summicron. It has just the right amount of soft yet

recognizable background information, and a very gradual slide from

sharp to unsharp... at least to my eye.

<p>

Go to the tread below and scroll down to "BOKEH CONTROVERSY"... there

are hours of fun reading, after which you still won't know which lens

has the best Bokeh.

<p>

http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/v18/topics1.html

Augusten,

<p>

I'd have to go with the 50 mm Summicron. I agree that the extra stop

in the Summilux is nice but for the sake of lens weight (try to stay in

line with the spirit of what owning a Leica M is about) I'd buy the

Summicron. I agree that the 35 Summicron (non-ASPH) is probably the

King of Bokeh (but that's just my opinion). I reserve the large

apertures for the longer lenses (my 75 Summilux) as it makes more of a

difference although depth of field is literally non-existent (but so

can be said for the 50 mm Summilux too) at maximum aperture. Lastly,

$$$$$$. Just can't get away from that aspect.

<p>

Good luck.

Will there ever be a 50 1.4 ASPH or a 50.2 ASPH? Is there a need to

make these lenses aspheric

IMHO they don't need to put aspherical elements in the 50 mm lenses.

Leica had ASPH elements in the first generation Noctilux but the later

generation dispensed with the element and got better performance. IMHO

light falloff and spherical abberations are easily corrected for in

this focal length and the addition of ASPH elements is a waste of

$$$$$$. Wide angle is where you need it to control spherical

abberations and also in telephoto to help control chromatic

abberations. Like the tack-sharp 90 mm APO/ASPH is a good example (but

I have the equally sharp and faster 75 Summilux that doesn't use ASPH

elements).

<p>

P.S. Just my experience (limited somewhat) but the 35 Summicron ASPH

BOKEH is not as pleasing as the old 35 Summicron's.

<p>

Regards,

I agree with John, in that with the modern optical glasses, the

normal focal length does not challenge the designers enough to

require aspherical surfaces, even at f/1. I've been wanting a fast 50

lately. I have a collapsible Summicron, a 1969-79 Summicron, and the

one just after that. That's enough Summicrons. During a visit to

NYC last week, I looked at a recent but not current Lux at Stan

Tamarkin's. They wanted $1095.00 and I didn't buy. It gave me

sticker shock. I just couldn't do it. If I fing one at a nice

price, I will get it, but NEVER instead of my Summicrons, only in

addition to.

<p>

Regards,

To further add to the ASPH arguement,

<p>

I think with exception to the 90 and the 21 I wouldn't want ASPH

elements in my lenses. They DO make a difference in the correction of

spherical aberrations and vignetting in a wide-angle lens and in a

telephoto they are important for correcting chromatic aberrations BUT

maybe its just me.... the addition of ASPH elements complicates the

BOKEH of many lenses. Like the 35 Summicron and the 35 ASPH Summicron.

Light falloff is marginally better on the ASPH but the BOKEH suffers.

<p>

Anyone else feel the same??????

Bob, Which of your three Summicron 50's do you tend to use most? I

also have the 70's rigid black, and love it. Sharp enough (I hand

hold mostly, so the lens is not the limiting factor) with that lovely

bokeh.

Mark: I like the 70's black version also. The collapsible model

sees use for color, when I want to soften the contrast. I find it

differs with the later lenses in contrast, more so than for

sharpness. Sharpness differences seem to be wiped out by camera

movement, even at 1/250 or 1/500. Also, I like focusing and shooting

best with the 70's lens. I don't like the focus tab on the model

just after it, even though I like focus tabs just fine on my wide

angle lenses. It doesn't feel right on the 80's version. I think

it's a little too long, and curved the wrong way compared to my other

Leica lenses. The focus tabs on my 28mm and 35mm I find very natural

to use.

<p>

Regards,

You observant folks have voiced many thoughts which have sometimes

occured to me, but I never thought of formalizing them. It's hard

for me to imagine any newer lens producing pictures as beautiful as

my 35mm bugeye Summicron and 50mm DR Summicron did on Kodachrome II

film, back in the 70s. Sharper and contrastier ain't necessarily any

better, except for lenses like the old 35mm Summilux, which is

definitely soft wide open.