Leica Summicron 50mm 2.0

[lewis_henning]

<p>Hi<br /><br />I'm thinking of moving over from my SLR to a Leica, I've done a lot of research and I think it's going to be an M6 TTL with a Summicron 50mm 2.0. I think the TTL is right as I think I will use a flash at some point.<br /><br />I was thinking of the Zeiss 50mm 1.5 C Sonnar T*but from reading some reviews, it's not that great. The Leica 50mm 1.4 is too much money and I've read that the 2.0 is sharper anyway. I have no problem with Zeiss lenses but they seem to be more difficult to get second hand and for a little bit more money I could get a Leica. Does this sound like the right decision? But then if the Zeiss just as sharp when it's stopped down to Summicron 50mm 2.0... And it's always handy to have a lightly faster lens. I know it's not all about the sharpness but I don't want to buy a lens and be disappointed that it's not producing as good a shot as another lens would. If the Zeiss has other qualities then maybe that would be something that swung it.<br /><br />Also if I were to go down the Summicron 50mm 2.0 route, can anyone give me some advice on different versions or different ages and if I need to look out for anything. For example the different serial numbers, I'm a bit confused by all that. Does it matter if it's an old one?<br /><br />And does it matter if it was made in Germany or Canada? Is one better than the other?<br /><br />Likewise with the M6, any advice on the different versions or ages would be great.<br /><br />Oh one other thing, sorry... Which magnification is best for 50mm? I've looked this up and apparently the 0.85 would be better. If I were to buy another lens, it would probably be a 35mm. I'm not too worried about seeing too much else around the frame.<br /><br />Any help or advice on this would great.<br /><br />Cheers</p>

[john_shriver]

<p>The Zeiss C Sonnar 50/1.5 is a "special purpose" lens, with the older Sonnar formula. It has a particular character wide open, sharp in the middle, with a sharpness falloff. It also has focus shift as you stop down.<br>

The Summicron 50/2.0 is truly a general purpose lens. <br>

You have to say if you wear glasses before anyone can offer advice with finders. Yes, a 0.85 will focus more accurately, but if you wear glasses, you may be disappointed with your view of the 35mm framelines.</p>

[aplumpton]

<p>I think you have answered part of your questions (the 0.85X finder, if you are not going to wide angle lenses). But if you like to see things outside of, or before they come into, the VF frameline, then 0.72X is not a bad choice. The limited f2.0 maximum aperture is also well within the focus accuracy capabilities of the 0.72X magnification VF-RF rangefinder effective base dimension.</p>

<p>I own both Wetzlar (and Solms) and Midland optics and see little difference between them. The version IV Summicron 50mm (from 1979) is the best (thanks to the considerably improved double Gauss formula of Dr. Mandler) and the optics of the lens have therefore remained unchanged to the present. It's probably the best 50mm optic available anywhere, unless the very recent Summilux f1.,4 aspherical is better at f2? The more recent Solms 50mm Summicron lenses (Midland stopped producing around 1991) have the advantage of a retractable cylindrical lens hood while the early Canadian Summicrons had a detachable (bayonet mount) lens hood, with the advantage of an upper left area cutout to aid VF vision. The only problem I have seen with older or oft used optics from Leica is a looseness in the focussing barrel in some cases (a 50mm Summicron and a 90mm Tele-Elmarit), which is to some degree reparable by a greasing of the helicoids. Because it is more recent, a used Solms Summicron may be more expensive than a 1980s Midland Summicron (I believe the oldest are from a serial number above about 3 million). You need to check the diaphragm ring movement and the clarity of the glass, of course.</p>

[Alex_Es]

<p>M6, 0.72, Summicron 50/2 (with tab). You're all set. That old Summicron has great ergonomics as well as great optics.</p>

[rgerraty]

I don't diasagree with most of the above, except that the Sonnar is very versatile, not specialist. I used it exclusively for

months. It's smaller than the Summilux and bigger than a Summicron. I've been using my tabbed late '70s Summicron a

lot lately. I love the compactness, especially with the reversible hood. I used this lens for 15 years nearly as my only lens.

Mine is Canadian and no different in quality to my German Leica lenses. If I only could have one, and didn't know what I

do know about the ZM C Sonnar, I would buy the Summicron. But since I do know what I do know I would buy the

Sonnar, my only absolutely indispensable lens. I agree with Alex about the 0.72 - without question the right mag for 50

and the 35 you're thinking of.

[philip_wilson]

The Zeiss 50 F2 has a very good reputation and is a relative bargain. That said I have not used it.

[lewis_henning]

<p>Thanks for all your replies. Really helpful.</p>

<p>So on the VF side, would I still be able to see the full of a 35mm lens?</p>

<p>If I have understood Arthur correctly the best lens to aim for is, Summicron-M produced from 1979-1994 (but better to get one made from 1991 onwards with an extendable hood). Or one of the new ones 1994 - today if I can afford it.</p>

 

[aplumpton]

<p>Lewis, I cannot answer for the 0.85X finder, but one of us mentioned that it might be probematic if you wear eyeglasses. The overall view provided by the standard 0.72X finder is fine, as Alex comments. The versions prior to the version IV Summicrons were no slouches either, but the later version seems to be the culmination of the designer's art. I don't know the modern Zeiss lens, but from what I hear it is very good indeed. The sliding hood of the recent Summicron is convenient, but the 1979 to 1991 (I don't know when they changed to the sliding hood) may be more affordable if that is a concern, and I personally like the tab on its focussing ring and the cut out in its attachable lens hood for ease of viewing, and the fact that the plastic construction of the lens hood provides a good shock absorber if you accidentally hit something in front while carrying the camera.</p>

[Uhooru]

The 50 v4 Summicron is a great lens. The magnifier works well too though i dont use glasses. Another thought if u just

must have an extra stop is the VC Nokton at 1.5 wth a screw mout to M adapter. That's also a good lens though i like the

Smm better.

[lewis_henning]

<p>Thanks again for all the info! I think this is confirming that I will buy one when I save up the money! Haha</p>

<p>Do you know of a good website that shows the serial numbers? I've been on a few but I wondered if anyone could recommend one.</p>

[gadge]

<p>I would not take issue with anything said above but respectfully suggest that you try a look through a .72vf with a 35mm lens attached before deciding. That is a truly awesome combo.<br>

Sadly geniune 35mm F2 Leica lenses are very expensive nowadays but there are alternatives.<br>

The .72vf works fine with a 50mm too although it is better with a magnifier attached.</p>

[steve_bellayr]

<p>What you have selected is very good. As for the differences & preferences in lenses those tend to be very personal. The difference in the Summicron III & IV is often overstated. The New Asph is better but 1K more but there is NOT a bad Summicron. On thing that you find different with a Leica is that under low light situations as opposed to an SLR it is OK to shoot at 1/30. Modern films have a 2 stop leeway so that you can photograph even though the meter reads negative. Another caveat is that with Leica you will be photographing more in B&W under low light because the lenses are just fantastic in B&W. </p>

[wayne_lee5]

<p>Any thoughts on getting a good old M3? If you don't need light meter, M3 is a true piece of classic and offers the best viewfinder for a 50mm lens. As for the summicron 50s, they are all good. My personal selection would be the Rigid or the DR version.</p>

[nozar_kishi]

<p>MP without a LeicaVit is not an MP; nor a Leica without a 50/2 is a Leica. I have 50/2 and my wife has the 1.4. I have tested them both. Nothing is a Summicron. Summicron is what has made Leica M famous, not the other way around. The grey scale from a 50/2 is silky and creamy. <br>

And by the way, if you can afford, buy MP, rather than M6.</p><div></div>

[lewis_henning]

<p>Steve, I take it the reason for the that you can use a Leica in lower light is due to the lack of the mirror causing vibrations? Can you can you also elaborate on the 2 stop leeway, I'm am little confused.</p>

<p>Wayne, M3 would be nice but I think really want a light meter.</p>

<p>Nozar, I've never been able to work out the differences between the MP and the M6. Why is the MP better?</p>

<p>Cheers</p>

[nozar_kishi]

<p>Hi Lewis<br>

I made sure not to use the word "better". Mechaanically, operationally, they are identical. And the minor difference in MP's brighter viewfinder is not that a big deal. The difference, is rather, psychological. Again, do not expect technical and logical reasons, yet tangible psychological ones:<br>

First, due to being made of brass, the sound, or rather the echo of the sound of the film advance mechanism is very soothing.<br>

Second, with passage of time, the paint on the brass goes away and the camera becomes personalized. I do remember when/why each scratch happened.<br>

Third, the film rewind mechanism is not as friendly as in M6 and as a result makes a noted distraction after each roll. It helps me unwinding the previous roll's experience and hope for a new one.<br>

In fact I do have an M6 Panda as well, and use it with an Elmar 50/2.8, in jacket pocket, always; however, my dear Dobermans are two MPs; one 0.72 and one 0.58 viewfinder magnification, one for Normal and one for Wide lenses; or one for B&W and the other for Color.<br>

In Japan some fenatics (more than me) are so crazy about the MP difference that they only want MP3, the original; the only one with perfect rangefinder and viewfinder clarity. But that is expensive!</p><div></div>

[lewis_henning]

<p>Nozar, thanks for your in depth explanation. Very interesting, no one has very told me all that before.</p>

<p>I does sound nice but for now I think I will stick with the M6 TTL. Bit cheaper.</p>

<p>Nice pics by the way.</p>

<p>Cheers</p>

[nozar_kishi]

<p>Lewis</p>

<p>Enjoy the M6. It is, as I said, every bit a Leica and similar to MP. It fits hands like a glove and quiet like you are pressing the shutter with "mind". I dont know how/why some people choose SLDs, etc.<br>

You had mentioned choice of 0.85 viewfinder for Normal lens. That is a great choice, but you have to be sure you will not be expanding to 35mm later, especially if you wear glasses. Also, if you are not shooting with flashes, then even TTL is not a necessary option, and you may find a non-TTL with lower price. Non-TTL is also a few milimeters shorter (different shutter dial system, rotating in opposite direction) and fits standard Leica leather cases. But as I said, they all are Leica, and made to enjoy. Happy Leica-ing!</p>