50mms

<p>Hello:</p>

<p>Probably, it has been discussed somewhere but I could not find any fresh postings.</p>

<p>I am currently transitioning from digital to film cameras. I will still have the digital however<br>

to shoot my daughter etc. I bought a Leica M7 and a few lenses. 90mm, 28mm and 15mm<br>

but I am shopping for a 50mm. I have two options: Summarit 50mm f2 or Summilux 50mm f1.4 non-asph.<br>

On ebay I found a few of these lenses. Summicrons are about $1200-$1500 and Summilux is around $1800-$2100.<br>

still debating... does any one have experience with both of these lenses? if so, would you please share your experience.<br>

Thanks,<br>

Serdar.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>A last generation non-asph lux should be less than $1K.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>the ones that I found on ebay are usually $1800-$2000 lux made in germany... not canada nor leitz.</p>

<p>if you know one for sale for that amount send me a link please, i will buy right away/</p>

<p> </p>

<p>The Summarit 50mm I have used was f1.5 it would not be my choice , never used a Summilux but the second non ASPH would be a very capable lens for the right price. Made by Leitz or Leica.</p>

<p>The Summarit 50mm I have used was f1.5 it would not be my choice , never used a Summilux but the second non ASPH would be a very capable lens for the right price. Made by Leitz or Leica.</p>

<p>Failing server sorry for double post.</p>

<p>Merhaba Serdar,</p>

<p>Why don't you consider Summicrons? If you don't mind being limited by 1 stop, they are very small and light-weight when compared to Summilux.</p>

<p>I tried Summicron DR, Rigid, and the current version (Canadian version, without built-in shade). The current version (Serial #'s 2,909101-3,xxx,xxx) has higher contrast and better corner sharpness when used wide open. Summicron DR is a tad sharper at the centre, and my copy of Rigid was a little bit less sharp than my DR (it was similar to current at centre). I kept the current version (Canada), because it is not flare-prone like earlier versions. I had trouble with veiling flare when I was using the DR and Rigid, so they are both gone now. If you don't mind Canada label, current Summicrons can be had for as low as $800. Plus, if they ever need CLA, they come out brilliantly (my copy had fungus and no trace was left after CLA).</p>

<p>Here is a nice web page laying out differences between these lenses:<br>

<a href="http://www.antiquecameras.net/50summicronmlenses.html">http://www.antiquecameras.net/50summicronmlenses.html</a></p>

<p>Good luck,<br>

Koray</p>

 

<p>I agree with Koray P. I did all my serious hiking with an M2 and 50 Summilux and would have found it much easier with the Summicron I have now. I did like the version 2 50 Summilux I had, but I don't now like being without a focus tab and I love the small size of the Summicron, on the camera and in the bag. Mine is Canadian and in no way inferior to any of my German lenses. My copy of the Summilux was very annoying to focus when vertical: maybe it needed a CLA but the focussing helicoid would stick which made precise focus at 1.4 in that orientation difficult. The look of the pictures at 1.4 was stunning. I miss it less than I thought I would, but I have now got an interest in the Zeiss Sonnar C. One day I would like to have some sort of Summilux again. What about non-Leica? There are lots of good choices. A second hand Zeiss Planar f2 would be great value, and some of the Zeiss lenses are under $1K US new at the moment. The Zeiss Sonnar C 1.5 50mm might take some getting used to for the focus shift, but you'd get lovely shots of your daughter, so long as she doesn't mind being photographed and you don't have to run after her. Really, a tabbed Summicron Canadian would be the best choice for your precise needs as stated: very quick to focus.</p>

<p>If you can afford two lenses, the DR with eyes and the 50 f1.5 Sonnar will give you an incredible range at this focal length..</p>

<p>Different thought: 35mm Summilux asph. -- finest Leica medium-wide</p>

<p>Hello:<br>

Paul:<br>

I already have a 28mm lens for Leica and I personally don't see too much difference between a 35mm and 28mm.<br>

Charlie:<br>

Affording is one question but hauling or keeping multiple same focal length lenses is another question. I personally don't see a point having two same focal length lenses. Thank you for the suggestion however.<br>

Richard:<br>

I think zeiss sonnar f1.5 is a very nice lens too and it is less than $900USD new.<br>

but my question is: Would I have Leica experience by using different brand names? I have 4 cameras, Nikon D3, Nikon F5 and Nikon F100 along with Leica M7. My only objective is to put my little hands on that Leica camera when I am still around. But price of Zeiss makes it very appealing. I try not to fall in that sweet deal trap thou. :)<br>

Merhaba Koray;<br>

I think I am leaning toward the summicrons. f2 is fast enough but at the end of the day I don't want to say oh god, I wish I had f1.4. What ever I buy for Leica WILL BE a KEEPER. I am not planning to circulate the Leica lenses on ebay and look for any others.<br>

In my opinion, 15mm, 28mm, 50mm and 90mm make a good set. I sometimes still think<br>

If I should have bought an 35mm instead but is too late for now.</p>

<p>Manfred: thank you. non-asph is also very appealing.</p>

<p>I guess I will have to sleep over these ideas for a few more days unless I see something very attractive on ebay that I cannot resist to use my CC</p>

<p>"I think zeiss sonnar f1.5 is a very nice lens too and it is less than $900USD new."</p>

<p>You must focus the sonnar f1.5 precisely because of focus shift.</p>

<p>I find there is a big diff between f/2 and f/1.4 as I was bottoming out rather quickly with f/2 lenses. My main shooter --35 Summilux ASPH-- allows me to shoot with impunity. The 50mm/1.4 Nikkor-S Millenium, is reputed to be a top notch performer, but the adapter isn't easy to locate.</p>

<p>How often do you shoot at f1.4? There are no bad summicrons. The third version is under rated and probably under priced compared to the fourth. The other option for B&W is the Zeiss Sonnar f1.5. The shift is only at the widest aperture at the minimum focal distance. The shift problem is over stated and the only time that I saw a problem was on the Net with photos using rulers. Therefore, if you plan on photographing rulers at the minimum focus distance you should not have a problem. I have used this lens at it widest apertures at a distance and have not noticed any problems. Sorry, but of the two listed neither would be my choice.</p>

<p>I used to have a Nikon 85mm f1.4 and sold it because I never found myself using it at f1.4 while shooting my daughter's photos. I could not justify keeping it so I sold it. She is way too fast for an f1.4 lens. I did not buy Leica for her. Mainly, to satisfy my ego-desire and shoot in different environment. Like I said, I have a Nikon D3 for her and for daily random stuff.<br>

I am thinking I will end up getting a Summicron and call it good. I am still debating. On the other hand, no need to be sorry, we are two different people, two different souls, have two different objectives, expectations and hope. Thank you for your sharing your insight.<br>

Paul:<br>

A friend of mine has that 35mm f1.4 asph and it is a breathtaking lens. However, I am sitting around and wondering if I can justify the price tag in my mind.</p>

<p>"A friend of mine has that 35mm f1.4 asph and it is a breathtaking lens. However, I am sitting around and wondering if I can justify the price tag in my mind."</p>

<p>Well, as they say, if you have to give it that much consideration then you probably cant justify this acquisition. As I see it, if you got the 35 Lux asph, you would still need the 50! Sort of. As your kit now stands your best bet is the pre-asph 50 or the Cron. Put the bulk of $ on the lens you use most. Only you know what you want, but here are a few common kit configurations:</p>

<p>1) 28, 50, 90</p>

<p>2) 35, 50, 90</p>

<p>3) 28, 50</p>

<p>4) 35, 90</p>

<p>5) 21, 35, 50 (my favorite)</p>

<p>Good luck -- Paul</p>

<p>You forgot the best one: Summicron. Its the best 50 for a Leica M</p>

<p>and... one more thing guys, any opinion on Leitz Wetzlar 50mm f2 Summicron 1971 lens? I found one for about 500 bucks but not sure how it compares to current summicron?</p>

 

<h1 ><br /></h1>

<p>The Summarit should be an F1.5. I had it for several years.<br>

If you are going to use the 50mm lens to take photos of your daughter, then neither the Summicron nor the Summilux are for you...well, not for me, anyway.<br>

I found distortions on both lenses not acceptable, for family members. The only lens that I found satisfactory is the Elmar 2.8. Maybe I am sensitive to distortions but I just could not get any keepers of family shots with these lenses.<br>

I am a minority (of one, it seems) on this forum for so saying, but this has been my own experience.<br>

My best shot of my wife was taken on a 90mm F4 (1954 version, I think).<br>

My best shots of my daughter was taken on the 80mm Summilux (An R lens).<br>

So it would seem that distortion is small in the short telephoto range.</p>

<p>Nee Sung, I am very surprised to hear this about the Summicron in particular. I'll have to look again at some of my family portraits. I am always amazed by how people can look at a horizontally stretched TV image to fill a widescreen inappropriately and not complain, including people with a highly developed visual sense. You may have a spatial sensitivity that is an order of magnitude greater. Conversely, you are expressing a strong preference for medium telephoto for a just likeness of your family members and maybe it's the 50 per se that fails you, with a couple of flukey Elmar exceptions...? Serdar, that 1971 lens ought to be fine from my reading. No tab, but otherwise indistinguishable results - see http://www.photo.net/leica-rangefinders-forum/004vme</p>

<p>"My best shot of my wife was taken on a 90mm F4 (1954 version, I think). My best shots of my daughter was taken on the 80mm Summilux (An R lens). So it would seem that distortion is small in the short telephoto range."</p>

<p>Certainly you are correct but in close quarters the short telephoto doesnt work very well with group potos. With the 50 if you back up instead of trying to fill frame the distortion goes away.</p>

<p>Hello Serdar,</p>

<p>I was shopping for 50's a few months ago and settled on a Summicron 50 version III (1970) for the same price you saw ($500). The store also had the next-newer version of the lens (Canadian with tab, no built-in hood) so I guess that would be the earliest version of the current model. I passed on the newer version because it had a bit of play in the helicoid and it weighed significantly more, being a chrome lens. It would have matched my 35mm Summicron better, mechanically speaking, due to its short-throw and concave tab but I welcomed the long-throw, non-tab for more accurate focusing. It took some time to get used to it after shooting my tabbed 35mm but now I prefer it.</p>

<p>As has been stated, the v3 is a bit of an sleeper lens, being designed for more contrast and less resolution compared to the rigid/collaps./DR Summicrons but my copy seems very comparable in all respects to those lenses. Compared to the rigids that I have tried, which is my personal favorite early 50, it has perhaps slightly more contrast but resolution seems identical and in most cases, exhibits less veiling flare in challenging conditions. I have been very happy with it. I do plan on adding a Summarit 1.5 and a rigid Summicron at some point though for different flavors.</p>

<p>I shoot a decent amount of stuff in low light and I was afraid that it might not be fast enough but, like my 35mm Summicron, I find it is JUST fast enough for the situations I have found myself in. I was really leaning towards a pre-ASPH Summilux in the beginning but after having settled on the v3 Summicron, I have no regrets. To paraphrase what the gentleman at Photo Village said when we were discussing 50's, it's often more about the 'effective' aperture, ie. even when equipped with f/1.4, it's often necessary to stop down to f/2 to get the needed results anyway. Then again, if you consistently find yourself "bottoming out" with f/2 perhaps the f/1.4 is your only choice.</p>

<p>Hi Brad<br>

thank you for your response. I know what you mean by "effective" aperture. I used to have Nikon 85mm f1.4 lens which I thought it was a great lens. Ended up selling it due to the fact that I found myself using it at f5.6.<br>

I found it very hard to use while photographing my daughter. Every week I make photos of her and I am building up a digital album for her so I can hand her childhood photos when she gets older. This is my long term project and a surprise for her. She is only 2.5 now and of course she has no clue.<br>

The only reason to consider f1.4 non-asph was its price and Leica brand name. I am leaning toward a<br>

summicron f2 and will have to buy something before the second week of November since I will have a Washington DC trip in the third week. It will be good opportunity to put my Leica in good use.</p>

 

<p>got a Summicron 50mm f2.0.</p>