New 50mm Summicron or old...

[jonathan_houser]

I'm looking at getting a 50mm Summicron. My options are between a mid to late 80's and

a newer late 90's version. I will be using it on my M3. What do you all think. BTW price is

very similar.

[frank granovski]

I don't think it matters but aren't the older ones built more solid, free from plastic?

[peterbilitch]

Why am I experiencing a certain sense of dejᠶu...?

 

Peter

[tekkie]

I believe that optical performance is better on the later optical formulations. The current

50mm Summicron is excellent.

[steve_york1]

I've always heard that the optical performance of the 50mm Summicron from 1979 has been the same. But the late 1990's 50mm Summicron which I owned in the past seemed to be much sharper and have more contrast then the late 1980's one which I own now. No objective testing here; just looking at my photographs. This could be due to a lot of things (e.g., processing, film, ect) but there is a noticeable difference.

[andrewlamb]

I agree with Steve and the only reason I can come up with is something to do

with an improvement in lens coating.

 

If price isn't much of a difference go for the later version. Mind you, either lens

is going to be pretty good.

[paul_neuthaler]

My 1957 M3 with 1959 50mm Dual Dange Summicron is a combination made in Wetzlar Heaven!

[andrewlamb]

"Dual Dange"? Doesn't it contain a lot of plastic? :)

[Rob F.]

The 50mm Summicron made beginning in 1979 (catalog# 11819) was replaced with the #11826, which has a different lens barrel design; but the two are optically identical. The differences are: The earlier version has the focusing tab, while the current model has a focusing ring. Some of those tabs were convex, others were concave. The current model has a pull-out lens hood, and the former one uses clip-on hoods. The 11819 with the tab holds its value because some prefer to focus with the tab, others prefer turning the ring.

 

The 50 made from 1969 to 1979 (cat.# 11817) uses a different optical formula, and focuses via a ring. The difference in performance between it and the later version is quite subtle. The 11817 has a much longer focus throw, and the depth of field scale is wider and more spread out, making it good for us pictorial photographers who need to check our DOF. The short throw on the 11819 is great for the tab-focusing street photography crowd, since it's faster.

[albert_smith]

Rob F's description of the two black (optical) versions of the Summicron are good, and I would pick from these two models if you shoot color, especially slides. I have and use both the 1969 and 1979 versions of the 50mm Summicrons, and both beat my previous 5 chrome models in terms of contrast. The early versions were sharp enough, and for B&W, the lower contrast can be great to keep shadow detail, but I mostly shoot color these days, so contrast is important.

 

I am partial to the focusing tab, so I use the next to last cosmetic Summicron, which has the same optics as the new one. The 1969 lens is optically very close in most situations, at least close enough as to ignore the very slight fingerprint difference. Again, for me the tab made my choice easy.

 

Basically, with a 50mm Summicron, you would be hard pressed to make a mistake. They are all very fine in their own way.<div></div>

[Sanford]

I got my 50mm late model Summicron because someone traded it in for an earlier model just to get the focusing tab! I prefer my later model with the built in hood but I do wish it had a tab sometimes.

[charles_stobbs3]

Hard to tell from this picture but it looks to me like the depth scale is compressed because the focus scale is compressed. If matched distances were set and the depth scales were both shown any difference might be more evident.

[Bill Blackwell Images]

"I don't think it matters but aren't the older ones built more solid, free from plastic?"

 

The plastic parts you may be referring to have been gradually integrated into the M camera (during the M6 run). The pinnacle was the M6TTL. As far as I know, the lenses and their mounts are still quite solid and plastic free.

 

However, the truth is Leica still makes a camera that will be shooting strong by your grandchildren long after you're gone (assuming they're able to buy film for it)!

 

As to your question about the Summicron, the current lens formula is identical to the prior version, so the choice is yours to make. You can't go wrong either way.

[Bill Blackwell Images]

BTW, the tabbed version has a shorter focusing throw, which is why the depth of field scale is different.

[SolaresLarrave]

Go for an even older Summicron. Newer versions have a minimum focusing distance of 45 centimeters, which your M3 won't reach and will give you a dead point instead (like you focus and the rangefinder patch won't move). I had this "problem" and solved it by getting an old, collapsible 'cron, whose closest focusing distance is 0.7 meters. <a href="http://www.danblackleica.com/prices.php">Dan Black</a> is selling one (collapsible) for $195 and I believe Adorama still has one for $225. They're worth it, let me tell you, and your camera will have a classic look with it.

[ben z]

I've got one of those 1969 types which I've been using for several years. I can see nothing in the results that make me want to try another version, this one has all the sharpness and contrast I could ask for. I've also got a rigid chrome one. I haven't shot any slides wide open with the two lenses to compare, but the weight and the infinity lock on the older lens is enough that I'm satisfied to leave it on my M3, which would never accompany me on a long trip.

[feli]

First off there is no, or next to no plastic, in Leica lenses and certainly not in any critical

area of their construction. Same for the bodies.

 

 

There are four optical versions of the Summicron 2/50. With each generation the optical

performance was increased, most notably from f5.6 down. The biggest improvements can

be seen at f2. I own a collapsible, DR and current Cron M/R. My collapsible and DR were

recently overhauled by Leica.

 

 

Type 1 Collapsible SN#1,124,000-1,548,000 / 1953 -1957

 

A medium contrast, high resolution design. Single coated. There are

a few variations, with different engravings. Close focus is 1 meter. This

lens has a beautiful, classic signature. It was HCB's main lens for most of his

career. A little soft at f2, but very sharp at f8.

 

Type 2 Rigid/Dual Range SN#1,303,000-2,260,000 / 1957 - 1969

 

This lens shipped as the Rigid, which focused to 1 meter, and the Dual Range version

(with clip on goggles) which alllowed the it to focus to 48/51 cm. Both versions share the

same optical formula. Single coated.This is a very sharp lens. High resolution, medium

contrast. Very popular with black and white shooters and a cult lens among Leia

shooters.The last of the "classic" fingerprint Summicrons.

 

Type 3 Rigid SN#2,268,000-2,995,000 / 1969 -1979

 

A modern high contrast design, with a modern fingerprint. Multicoated and sharp.

Focuses to 70 cm.

 

Type 4 Rigid SN#2,967,000-N/A 1979 - current

 

This lens came in two version. Early models have a focusing tab and clip on hood. The

current version has no tab and a built in, collapsible hood. They share the same optical

formula and focus to 70 cm. This version is a little sharper below f5.6, than the third

version, especially in the corners, but you will probably not see the difference until you

enlarge beyond 8x10 or 11x14. Needless to say this is an extremely sharp lens and I have

yet to see anything on the market that will outperform it. Supposedly the second version

of the Summilux-R and the new Summilux-M ASPH are it's only competition, but they also

cost 2-3 times as much.

[kelly_flanigan1]

There is also a "Type 4 Rigid" in LTM that only focuses to 1 meter; and is chrome.

[feli]

You're right Kelly. There also was a LTM version of the type2 Rigid, but it is extremely rare.

 

 

feli

[ben z]

Sorry to have to disagree but it is not correct that "there is no, or next to no plastic, in Leica lenses". From about 1979 at least, all the focus tabs are plastic. You can confirm that with Sherry or DAG or Dave in parts if you don't want to scrape or heat your tabs : ) In the last about 5 years, the R-cams used to upgrade 2-cam lenses are also plastic (again you can confirm with the repair guys or Dave in parts). And, more importantly, many if not all of the latest lens versions have some of the optical groups set into plastic sleeves. I've also seen a 4th-type 35 Cron apart and the jig that holds the diaphragm blades is plastic, so perhaps that is present on other lenses as well.

 

Certainly some of these are "critical" areas, in that if the plastic were to fail it'd surely impact the use or performance of the lens. However, as I remember saying somewhere else, these days plastics are so advanced in their physical properties that, assuming the correct type is chosen for the application, a plastic part could very well outperform a metal one.

[pensacolaphoto]

I use the Type 2 rigid Summicron, and I love the results that I can get with this lens. I also recently got a collapsible one from this forum, and I like it very much too. I don't feel like getting rid of either lens and I doubt that I will get a new Summicron. I believe that all versions are fine lenses.

[eliot_rosen1]

Feli is correct. The version IV 50/2 Summicron lens introduced in 1980 is the same optical formula as the current lens, the only difference is that the new one has a built-in lenshood. I like the earlier design with the concave tab. The handling is better and the lens is smaller, and you don't have to use the plastic attachable lenshood if you don't want.

 

As far as I and anyone else knows, the optical formula and the coatings have not been changed since 1980. The performance ought to be identical, unless there is some problem with the glass of the earlier lens or someone has opened it up to clean it and not realigned the optics properly.

 

This is Leica's best 50 except for the new 50/1.4 ASPH M, that has better MTFs. The distortion level is just about non-existent (0.2% pincushion at the edge of the field, which is so low is it almost unmeasurable). It's clos-up performance is also outstanding and it can be used for copying.

 

I personnaly recommend the "tabicron" for better handling, but either version of this lens should give superb performance. Just make sure the glass is good.

[steve_york1]

Has any of those folks who have used the tabbed 50mm Summicron used the later versions? I've used the a tabbed 50mm Summicron from the late 1980's which I purchased unused from the estate of a collector (which I own); a new 50mm Summicron with a built in hood from the late 90's (which I regettedly sold); and that 50 year Summicron (which I gave to my brother). In terms of clarity and sharpness, the latter two lenses really blow the tabbed Summicron away. So I don't know if that "no optical difference" is an internet myth or whether I just got a dud -- actually it is very good; just clearly not as good as the other two.

[e_b7]

Between your two choices, one has a built-in hood, and the other uses clip-ons. That's it. Choose your lens hood preference, and go from there.

[Troll]

I've heard that there are plastic parts in only the Leica stuff shipped to the US. The Japanese refuse to accept any lenses or camera bodies with any German plastic in them. Leica has a secret price list with the non-plastic items listed for high-roller collecters.