Leica Summicron-M 50/2 or Summilux-M 50/1.4

Discussion in 'Leica and Rangefinders' started by kenny_chiu|8, May 11, 2000.

  1. What is your choice between the Leica Summicron-M 50/2 or Summilux-M 50/1.4 lenses and why if the cost the lens is not a factor? Thanks.
  2. Unfortunately, it depends on your subject. As far as resolution, the
    summicron is superior, by a slight margin at f2 and f2.8, to the
    summilux. After f4 you would need to magnify over 22x to notice. Of
    course, if you need to shoot indoors with no flash, the summilux is
    faster and renders out of focus areas (bokeh) beautifully. I believe
    the out of focus rendition of the summilux is finer than that of the
  3. A Leitz guy 20 years ago told me that the Summicron was the better
    lens, as far as sharpness and contrast at f/5.6 went. Photodo.com
    bears him out.


    However, in the real world, you'll never see the difference, it's very
    subtle, and hand holding erases it anyway. That extra stop makes all
    the difference sometimes, and I favor the Summilux, despite the extra
    bulk and intrusion into the bottom right of the finder's field.
    They're both exquisite lenses. You'll be happy with either, and never
    really know if you made the right choice.
  4. I just settled an Summicron-M 50/2 lens. The build-in lens hood is
    very handy and compact (in my camera bag) but a little bit thin. The
    front lens element is very closed to lens cover and a good UV filter
    is almost required to protect the lens being scratched. The focusing
    ring rotates with smooth(then I found my 90 Summicron-M is bit too
    tight) and easy feeling. I do not need the focusing tab but still it
    is good to have. It looks very good on my .85 M6 (possible the best.
    Almost 'full frame' for an eye glasses user like me). Only a bit
    blocked in the lower right corner when the build-in lens hood
    extended. Thank you for your information to help me selecting this

Share This Page