Which L39 lens for B&W? (A few choices)

[justin_ng1]

<p>Which L39 lens for B&W? (A few choices)</p>

<p>I already asked this question on a facebook group, but I want to get more opinions :) <br>

Anyways, I already have a collapsible summicron 50/2. I had a elmar 50/3.5 before, but it was a bit too slow. So yea, thanks~</p>

<p>Most people chose the Elmar on facebook</p>

<p>(Canon L39's are fine too, but not f1.5 as it's a bit to much for me)</p>

<p>Choices :<br>

1. Elmar 50mm f2.8 L39<br>

2. Summitar 50mm f2 L39<br>

3. Sonnar 50mm f2<br>

4. Nikkor 50mm f2 (Sonnar)<br>

You can always suggest some more </p>

[Brian1664876441]

I prefer the uncoated Carl Zeiss Jena 5cm F2 with a deep yellow filter.<p>

 

I have the F3.5 Elmar, do not have the F2.8. I have the Nikkor and Summitar.<p>

 

<img src="https://c4.staticflickr.com/6/5768/21039294675_8ab2cfcdff_o.jpg" width="681" height="1024" alt="nikki_f2_1934_sonnar"></a><p>

[Richard Williams]

<p>If you already have the collapsible Summicron and there's nothing wrong with it, I'm not sure there's a compelling reason to switch. The Elmar has a good reputation, but a full stop slower than the others and only 2/3 of a stop faster than the 3.5 you found a bit slow. The main reason to use the Summitar would be its rather distinctive swirly bokeh, perhaps the strongest 'signature' of any of these lenses. I recently bought one and look forward to experimenting with this, but if you don't like the effect or aren't interested in it, there's no real reason not to prefer the Summicron (which is sharper in the corners). I'll leave it to others to comment on the Zeiss and the Nikkor.</p>

[justin_ng1]

<p>Sounds good! I can save some money haha </p>

[Brian1664876441]

I also have several collapsible Summicrons- two Hot Glass, two late versions.<p>

 

Late Collapsible Summicron, wide-open.<p>

 

<img src="https://c5.staticflickr.com/2/1446/26352779620_0a18a9e820_o.jpg" width="1024" height="681" alt="Gunston

Hall, Spring 2016"></a><p>

 

Between it and the Summitar: the Summicron is sharper across the frame, the Summitar has "very swirly Bokeh". The

Summitar uses hard-to-find "fluted" filters. Getting two full sets for the Summitar at a reasonable price took a lot of Ebay

time looking for "I don't know what these fit" type auctions.<p>

 

Summitar, coated, wide-open with orange filter:<p>

 

<img src="https://c7.staticflickr.com/8/7136/27806747542_52d11f879c_o.jpg" width="681" height="1024"

alt="Playground- Summitar"><p>

 

The Minolta 5cm F2 is the same optical formula as the Summitar, uses easy to find 43mm filters, is hard-coated, and in a rigid mount. Usually found for less cost that an equal condition Summitar.<p>

[mukul_dube]

<p>Any well corrected lens should be as good for monochrome as it is for colour. The collapsible Summicron was a good lens for its time, as was the earlier Summitar; but you may find the Nikkor 50/2 better.</p>

[robert_bouknight1]

<p>I am thinking that, for something different than what you have, a Zeiss 50/1.5 would be nice if you can find one that is reasonable, which is more difficult with the L39 requirement. (hate to mention it, but maybe a Russian clone version would be fun). Not sure why you mentioned that the 1.5 is "too much".</p>

<p>I have a 50mm Summarit that is nice and creamy at f1.5 and f/2, but the one I have never really sharpens up enough when stopped down to be a dual purpose soft-sharp lens. An Opton Sonnar 50/1.5 serves well as a dual purpose lens and is the only 50 in my "RF-Digital" bag right now.</p>

<p>I don't think that an Elmar 2.8 would be enough different than your Cron and Elmar to be worth trying, but I could be wrong. I have not used the one I have in a long time. I seem to remember that it performed well but not "better" than the Summicron.</p>

<p>I had a Nikkor 50/1.4 in LTM a long time ago. Maybe the one I had just was not quite right, but I could not find a reason to use it vs the DR Summicron I had at the time. Sold it but I would not mind trying another sometime.</p>

<p>Others have commented on the Summmitar. That is the first Leica lens I tried years ago, and I enjoyed using it for results very different than the Nikon system I had. Seems like there is an adaptor avaiable on Ebay that would allow use of mainstream filters for B&W work.</p>

[aplumpton]

<p>My preference of a 35mm focal length for B&W photography is the 35mm f2.5 Cosina-Voiglander lens, classic version. Excellent Q/P ratio if you want to avoid expensive alternatives. I no longer have a Tessar formula (4 element) lens, but it was always very fine in film B&W. I think the 50mm Elmar-M f2.8 collapsible in bayonet mount and previous f3.5 and f2.8 versions from the 60s or 70s in LTM also used the Tessar formula.</p>

[wgpinc]

<p>Those lenses you suggest were all okay and used by many famous and not so famous photographers. They are pretty old now and subject to the vicissitudes of time and use. They are all also only found on the used market where what you find is what you get at any given time. If you can find one in decent condition at a reasonable price the two 50mm Nikon lenses would be my choice. David Duncan used these Nikon lenses for his B&W photography early on. You left out Canon 50mm lens for RF cameras and the excellent Konica-M 50mm f/2 Leica M Mount. Given the lenses you are mentioning I assume price is a consideration. I personally like the Leica 50mm f/2 Summicron third version with the tab for B&W photography head and shoulders above any other lens for use on Leica cameras. I also like the Zeiss Sonar and Planar 50mm lenses, and finally I would probably be content to use the Voigtlander 50mm Nokton 1.5. You can find these last listed lenses in the $500 to $1k range new or most likely used. Good luck!</p>

[Brian1664876441]

The Summarit is optimized for F2.8 at minimum focus, and at F1.5 for infinity. I took five of them apart- all marked

"51.1" for actual focal length. Focus shift is fairly high on this lens. I modified one of mine to increase the focal length,

optimized for F1.5. It is a low-contrast lens, preserves shadow and highlight detail. I find this important for black&white.

<p>

 

Summarit, Wide-Open<p>

 

<img src="https://c1.staticflickr.com/6/5493/31019133432_e7d510ed52_o.jpg" width="632" height="1024"

alt="nikki_portrait1_small"><p>

 

The earlier Xenon 5cm F1.5 is quite good IF you can find a clean one. Soft front glass damged easily, as it does on the

Summarit.<p>

 

Mine is quite clean, Xenon 5cm F1.5, Wide-Open<p>

 

<img src="https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3944/15381540569_20dd64c92b_o.jpg" width="681" height="1024" alt="Marine

Museum, Xenon"><p>

 

I have a lot of lenses.<p>

[wgpinc]

<p>I don't have any idea why you want to limit yourself to the L39 lenses while i was researching to answer this question I ran across Steve Huff's article on Leica mount 50mm lenses. Steve Huff is a long time Leica user and a brilliant essayist about things Leica and his piece about 50mm lenses for Leica is worth reading.<br>

http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2013/06/19/the-voigtlander-50-1-5-aspherical-vm-lens-review/ </p>

[SCL]

<p>Justin - Unless you're into lens collecting, I'd stick with the collapsible Summicron 50. I had one for years and preferred its look to almost every other 50 Leica produced, including the Noctilux. I currently have 4 LTM 50s, and although slower than the rest often lean toward the Leica 3.5 Red Scale. Of course there's the limited production 50 Summicron IV in screwmount...it is an outstanding 50 in terms of contrast, sharpness across the full frame and modern rendition, but I'm assuming you aren't interested in spending that kind of money.</p>

[justin_ng1]

Thanks you for the replies guys :) yea, I'm not a lens

collector, just want another lens haha. The summitar

sounds to be a better choice so far, but tbh, it's the best

to stick with what I have now~

[justin_ng1]

Btw which one is the 4th cron? The summicron-m 50/2

but in l39 right? They are rare

[Richard Williams]

<blockquote>

<p>Btw which one is the 4th cron? The summicron-m 50/2 but in l39 right? They are rare</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yes, that will be the limited version from 1999, a modern formula in LTM.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Others have commented on the Summmitar. That is the first Leica lens I tried years ago, and I enjoyed using it for results very different than the Nikon system I had. Seems like there is an adaptor available on Ebay that would allow use of mainstream filters for B&W work.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Just got one from Heavystar on ebay, a copy of the rare Leitz SNHOO, which converts the Summitar's odd tapered fitting (what were they thinking?) to standard E39. Essential if you want to use modern filters or hoods (mine came with an E39 hood).</p>

[glen_h]

<p>I recently got a Canon 50/1.4 but haven't tried it yet.</p>

<p>I have a Canon VI that took my baby pictures (from about 1 year) with Canon 50/2.8. For many years, I thought that lenses only went up to 2.8.</p>

[justin_ng1]

<p>Nice :) And yea, the summicron-m 50/2 l39 is like 1521 US</p>

[kin_yu1]

<p>Justin: The Elmar 5 cm/3.5 too slow? Does it make any difference in digital ? Just take your M8 and take as many pictures as you can instead of weighing these suggestions regardless how sound they may be.</p><div></div>