LTM 50mm for Town & Country

[astral]

I have just bought a rather nice IIIf and am considering what would be the most

appropriate vintage 50mm lens for a long-term local history project. I wonder if

you can help please?

 

The aim is to use the IIIf for a mixture of village scenes and rural farm

buildings, pubs, local churches, etc; very few portraits or landscape vistas.

Most subjects will be in the middle distances. I normally work with hyperfocal

distance focussing. My preferred films for these subjects are FP4 (or Adox/Efke

KB100), Reala and Velvia 100, occasionally Tri-X.

 

I have read many comments here about the various LTM 50mm lenses, but so far

have not been able to deduce if any one lens is particularly well-suited (or not

really suited) to this style of photography. The currently available choices

appear to be: 50/3.5 Elmar (but field curvature may be an issue); collapsible

Summicron; Canon 50/1.8 (all chrome version); Summitar. I am not keen on the

Summar/Summitar because of the additional cost and complications of hoods and

filters; I don't need a fast lens; sadly the 50mm Heliar isn't available in the UK.

 

I am leaning towards the 'cron, but the Canon sounds like a strong contender for

sharpness, however I do not know it's broader characteristics. I have numerous

Voigtlander lenses if needed.

 

For the proposed project is there a clear winner? Many thanks, AC

[Rob F.]

"I am not keen on the Summar/Summitar because of the additional cost and complications of hoods and filters . . ."

 

--That's good thinking. There can also be complications of fungus, separations, fog, etc. with a lens of this vintage. Believe me, I know. I do not think you will have any problems with the performance of the f/3.5 Elmar. You will probably be shooting at middle apertures, and the old Taylor-Cooke-triplet concept on which the Elmar is based, is still quite viable.

 

But if you think you'll use apertures of f/4 and wider, then I think you should go with the Summicron, at least between those two. It will perform better at f/4, and at f/2 there's no contest. I'll reserve comment on the Canon lens, since I am less familar with them, and let someone else address that part.

[wai_leong_lee]

Why bother about sharpness if you're shooting at f 5.6? Or if your using LTM lenses which are more than 50 years old? Frankly speaking, images from that era weren't that sharp due to the technology of those days. If your images turn out too sharp, they won't be authentic any more.

 

Lastly, it doesn't matter if things aren't available in UK. eBay and Internet dealers deliver anywhere.

[luis triguez]

I`ll vote for an Elmar 50 3.5 with a Barnack IMO.

 

Sorry if I posted this three examples before.

 

Tri-X D-76 (1:1)<div></div>

[paul_neuthaler]

Elmar, one made after 1949 -- all coated. You will be very happy. IMHO, you won't need a sunshade either -- the four element triplet virtually never flares!<div></div>

[paul_neuthaler]

happy CHOICE, of course

[luis triguez]

second one<div></div>

[luis triguez]

and three<div></div>

[Troll]

I agree with Paul. I actually own most of these lenses, and while there's no doubt that the Summicron is sharper and faster, my favorite is still the post-WW2 f:3.5/50mm Elmar.

[john_shriver]

Elmar is "the classic". Absolutely the first thing to try.

 

If you want a good no-risk Summitar, which has a gorgeous look in B&W, try KEH (http://www.keh.com) or Kevin Li (http://www.kevincameras.com). Kevin certainly has some good coated ones, hoods, and filters. Sure, it will cost more, but no headaches from them.

[astral]

Thanks gents, all points are appreciated. The Elmar figures highly in my list alongside the 'cron. I feel the handling of the Elmar may be a bit twiddly (like the IIIf), but you folks have the experience I lack and your advice is valued. There are several available to me at very affordable prices, so it's no great loss to give it a try. A Summitar could be added once I (inevitably) get hooked on LTM ... M gear was bad enough!

 

For this 'project' I want to balance acceptable sharpness and pleasant rendition: the latter scoring more highly. Hence my Nokton won't normally be used. I don't want to recreate period photos, nor do some subjects look right as 'clinical' digital images (unless I spend too much time with PS). But I am aiming for a 'sympathetic' portrayal of timeless subjects like the local monastery (for which I can get behind the scenes) and the village pub, etc. These looked ok last time I ran the project using modern lenses, but the 'softer' images often look better than the sharper ('harsher') ones.

 

One additional reason for using old gear is that in my experience it seems to be more acceptable (to others) in some circumstances, compared to arriving with, say, a Nikon F5 or other modern gear: people want to know about the camera/photography, rather than being intimidated by it (the F5 even intimidates me!)

 

And Luis, thanks for the examples; your Elmar shots show it off rather well. AC

[ronald_moravec1]

Coated 50 3.5 Elmar, Summitar 2.0, or 50 1.5 Summarit. Don`t know anything about Japanese RF glass,some is good some is bad. Use proper shade.

 

Make sure anything you buy is internally clean, check with a pen light.

[jorge]

A LTM 50 that I like *very much* is the CV Color-Skopar 50/2.5. It's fast enough for some interior work, it's fairly compact so it doesn't dwarf the IIIf and it has a "signature" that is very akin to vintage gear, without falling to the soft side of the road. It also has some of the best handling behaviour among M and LTM lenses. Positive stop clicks, fast focusing thanks to its tab (which in the case of a Barnack camera doesn't really make a difference) and it's virtually flare free. Add the superb 1:1 Voigtlaender 50mm brightline viewfinder and you have a killer combo.<div></div>

[jtk]

You might consider a Summaron 35/3.5. Good examples are incredibly good (mine is). They're closer to modern mechanical design than the Elmars...easy to operate. As well, they're physically beautiful and they require that wonderful Leica bright line finder, the ultimate finder of any type of camera, including M6.

[rjm photo]

<center><img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/6077896-lg.jpg"></center>

 

<center> An old Elmar like my uncoated version is good for anthing historic! </center>

[dan flanders]

Unless you have frequent need for the additional stops the 50/3.5 Elmar should satisfy all your requirements. Collapsed it affords the most compact combination, especially if you enjoy carrying it on your person most of the time. Back when 100 ASA was a 'speed' emulsion it was still the choice of many of us to use with the Kodachrome of the time. With today's emulsions it will do the job that the 0.95 Cannon did then. From both the price and compactness standpoints it just is hard to beat. If you prefer a shorter focal length then the 35/35 Summaron is the ticket, but perhaps a bit less compact! Again, cost is a definite advantage.

[love4leica]

Elmar 3.5/50 should do the job well.

[astral]

Hey! This is like a night at the Oscars, with all the talented and famous passing by! You're all stars!

 

The IIIf RD has arrived, and it's a almost like new. I have an unused chrome Skopar 50/2.5, favoured by Jorge, which I can use to start with. I've settled on a late version Elmar for the project. In the meantime there are several Summarons going for a song hereabouts - quite tempting. The Summitar is the 'dark horse' - an future option if I can get a working package together quickly (filters, hood, etc) without a lifetime's wait.

 

Now it's a case of familiarization with the IIIf, and a test film with the Skopar (at last). The project itself should start in a few week's time after a trip to Scotland. Thanks, AC

[paul_neuthaler]

You go, Alan!<div></div>

[christopher_a._junker1]

IMHO, the "classic" lens/camera set up would be a IIIf with Leicavit baseplate winder and 50 briteline finder mounting a Nikon 50 f1.4 LTM lens. Maybe Jorge has a spare strap for you as the strap in his picture is correct for a '50's vintage IIIf.

[robert meier]

Dan and others, how does the 35/3.5 Summaron stack up to the 35mm Summicron? Is it as good at middle apertures?

[jorge]

Christopher,

 

>> Maybe Jorge has a spare strap for you as the strap in his picture is correct for a '50's vintage IIIf. <<

 

Not exactly but I know a local leather craftsman who can make one exactly like it.

 

Let me know if I should enquire.

[paul_neuthaler]

I'll admit that I do use a 25mm 1:4 V/C Color Skopar for wide shots --never had a problem with "focusing from the hip."

[dan flanders]

Robert Meier: I haven't compared the 3.5 Summaron to the 35mm Summicron, which I traded off long ago because of its inflated value. I have the Summicron C which I believe to be its optical equal. Back to the Summaron, it has satisfied my needs when a shorter focal length was required; but I use the 50 or 40 focal lengths most of the time. The 2,8 Summaron has a reputation for sharpness equal to the Summicrons, but its cost reflects its reputation.

[jtk]

Robert, I can't compare mid aperture Summaron 35/3.5 to Summicron 35 but I can say that without being CV-edgy-looking it's exquisite, much sharper than Elmar 50, not to mention the unfortunate Elmar 35.