JLV Posted May 4, 2009 Share #1 Posted May 4, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hi all, I just saw a Summilux 50mm first version in very good condition for a decent price (750 euros). With my M8 it would make a approx 66,6mm wich seems perfect for portrait in available light (ie: parties, restaurant, birthdays, etc..) Should it only be dedicated to B and W or also good for colour. Pros and Cons. Thanks for your advices. All the best. Jean-Luc Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted May 4, 2009 Posted May 4, 2009 Hi JLV, Take a look here Summilux 50 first version- worth to buy ?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
lars_bergquist Posted May 5, 2009 Share #2 Posted May 5, 2009 What do you mean by 'first version'? There are two versions before the current aspherical one, and the answer would very much depend on which one is intended. The old man from the Age of First Summiluxes Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLV Posted May 5, 2009 Author Share #3 Posted May 5, 2009 Hi Lars, I am talking of the first one as said. (not the one before the asph). Best regards, Jean-Luc Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
peter_n Posted May 5, 2009 Share #4 Posted May 5, 2009 There are two versions before the current aspherical oneI think there are three. v.1 was mostly in silver chrome and had a scalloped focus ring, v.2 was mostly black with a finer knurled focusing ring, then v.3 had a closest focus of 0.7M and a much shorter focus throw than the earlier two (both had a closest focus of 1.0M). All are good, check out Mike Dixon's photos with the v.1 on photo.net, I use the v.2 and v.3 and they are both great lenses. I like them all. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
roguewave Posted May 5, 2009 Share #5 Posted May 5, 2009 Jean-Luc, as discussed above, all are great lenses. One could spend the rest of their lives trying to master any of them. I have the early Chrome S/N 1644071. It's hard to put into worlds the extraordinary beauty that this lens renders. I doubt you will make a poor choice with any of them. 750 Euros seems pretty high to me for an early lens. I paid US $425 for mine. The bokeh is singular and it renders delicate details with an unmatched glow. Of course, stopping down, it's sharp as a tack. You will never tire, but often be challenged, to meet the excellence of this amazing optic. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philippe D. Posted May 5, 2009 Share #6 Posted May 5, 2009 Hi Jean-Luc. I second that the price you mention is not that decent (Red Dot Camera have one for 680€ (£559) and it is still quite expensive for that lens). On the M8, You are going to use the B+W 486 IR filter, as this Lux has a E43 filter thread. To be in optimum use with the M8, have a look at the second version or even the third (pre-Asph) version. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted May 5, 2009 Share #7 Posted May 5, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Optically, there are only two versions before the current aspherical one. The first was introduced in 1959, and was simply a slightly updated version of the Summarit 1:1.5 (the first specimens were actually engraved 'Summarit 1:1.4/50mm'). Both Nikon's and Canon's high speed lenses shot it out of the water. Serial numbers in the range from 1,640,601 to 1,844,000. A new much improved version, which was no longer a cooked-over 1935 vintage Xenon, was surreptitiously introduced in 1962. But Ernst Leitz did not admit this until several years later, in 1968! The lenses were at first outwardly identical, though the v.2 was a bit heavier. This second version was produced from 1962 to 2004, probably an unbeatable record. The optics were not changed, except for successive improvements in coating. There were of course new looks in mounting. There was a change first to a version with even knurling of the focusing ring (this mount offered in silver, black paint and later black anodizing, all as before with E43 filters. This type was changed in 1992 to a more cylindrical style with pull-out hood and E46 filter, which was kept to the end (with small series in various finishes). But optically this was the same lens, and therefore, it is usually regarded as one version. If you think changes of mount rates as changes of versions, then this v.2 Summilux would be not two, but three different ones! This (optical) second version is a nice lens, within its limitations, and it says something about its quality that Leica had to pull out all known stops (floating element, aspherical, exotic glass) to improve it after all those years. The first version, I would not touch. It is for collectors, not for photographers. The old man from the Age of the Xenon Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wizard Posted May 5, 2009 Share #8 Posted May 5, 2009 The first version, I would not touch. It is for collectors, not for photographers. The old man from the Age of the Xenon Lars, although I agree with you in principle, I believe your comment requires a little more explanation. Stopped down I'd say that you would be very hard pressed to distinguish the first and the second optical version from each other. At full aperture, however, the second optical version is much improved over the first one. So it depends on what you want. If it is available light photography (which the original poster pointed out it is), then the second optical version is a far better choice, no question. Andy The not so old man from the Age of inherited Summarits Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLV Posted May 5, 2009 Author Share #9 Posted May 5, 2009 Dear All, Thanks for all these informations. The shop lent me the lens till saturday afternoon. Its number is 1897875 from 1961! in almost perfect condition with its hood.(12521G). I want to use it at full aperture for very selective focus or for available light in the evening. I wil try it ASAP and will post some pics. If I want to keep it , I will try to bargain. All the best, Jean-Luc Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philippe D. Posted May 5, 2009 Share #10 Posted May 5, 2009 Its number is 1897875 from 1961I have one of the very same batch, i love it on the M2. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colorflow Posted May 5, 2009 Share #11 Posted May 5, 2009 Dear All, Thanks for all these informations. The shop lent me the lens till saturday afternoon. Its number is 1897875 from 1961! in almost perfect condition with its hood.(12521G). I want to use it at full aperture for very selective focus or for available light in the evening. I wil try it ASAP and will post some pics. If I want to keep it , I will try to bargain. All the best, Jean-Luc I have serial no. 1898xxx with the XOOIM hood. It is a great lens. Although not as sharp as the latest asph version, IMO its images on the M8 are just as beautiful and holds its own against the asph. In addition, I think it is also the most beautifully finished of all Leica lenses IMO of course. Alan Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLV Posted May 5, 2009 Author Share #12 Posted May 5, 2009 Dear All, I came back home tonight (around 7 pm french local time) with the lens and started to shoot just for tests in available light. No real artistic purpose in these pictures but just wanted to see and share before night what this lens could give. All of these pictures have been taken @1.4, 160 iso and slightly PP with LR2 (some cropped and sharpness added) Comments are very welcome. All the best, Jean-Luc Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Quote Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/83974-summilux-50-first-version-worth-to-buy/?do=findComment&comment=890579'>More sharing options...
colorflow Posted May 5, 2009 Share #13 Posted May 5, 2009 Very, very nice. You are lucky this lens does not need to be adjusted for focus. Mine is off at 1.4 on both my M8s and I have learned how to compensate. Alan Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLV Posted May 5, 2009 Author Share #14 Posted May 5, 2009 2 more samples. Of course, I didn't try it on bright light and couldn't check the "bubling Bo-Ke" but I probably will have a chance to test that on friday wich is a day off in France.(1945 armistice). IMHO It seems to be a great lens, very well built. Another question, Highjacking my own post; What would you choose between this one and a the latest version of an Elmar 2. 50mm (mint) for 450 euros?( same Leica dealer) All the best, Jean-Luc Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Quote Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/83974-summilux-50-first-version-worth-to-buy/?do=findComment&comment=890739'>More sharing options...
Runkel Posted May 5, 2009 Share #15 Posted May 5, 2009 Its number is 1897875 from 1961! So you are, in fact, not talking about the first version but the second. I had a long conversation with Sherry Krauter about the first version, which she highly recommends. She told me that when she was introduced to the v1 while working at Leica, everyone there knew it was leagues ahead of the Summarit. She said the "slightly updated Summarit" theory is a myth. I have a very, very early v1 (1640621) and love the results. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
echorec Posted May 5, 2009 Share #16 Posted May 5, 2009 I have a very, very early v1 (1640621) and love the results. I have an early one too (168xxxx) and l really like mine: Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Quote Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/83974-summilux-50-first-version-worth-to-buy/?do=findComment&comment=890824'>More sharing options...
sbelyaev Posted May 6, 2009 Share #17 Posted May 6, 2009 I have one of those Summiluxes. SN 175xxxx It is a terrific lens. It is somewhat soft @1.4, but razor sharp at F2 and beyond. It became one of my favorite lenses. Flickr Photo Download: home0202 Flickr Photo Download: home0224 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted May 6, 2009 Share #18 Posted May 6, 2009 Jean-Luc, if you have an offer of a v.2 Summilux, and the lens is technically OK, and you like the pictures, and the price--then by all means buy it. I used a late version of this lens for several years, and I liked it. It is quite crisp axially at 1.4, and keeps improving all the way up to 8. It is quite resistant to flare and internal reflections, much better in that respect than the Summicron. I did finally replace both lenses with a 50mm Summilux Asph, which is as flare-resistant and as fast as the previous 'lux, and as tack sharp as the 'cron. But I do still remember that fine silver 'lux fondly. As for the first version, there's no accounting for taste. There are people who make pictures with Lomo cameras, and like them. But wide open, it is quite soft, with low contrast, and fine detail is pretty well absent. It is certainly true that stopped down, it is as good as the v.2. But if you do not need its full speed, then a Summicron, even a first version rigid 'cron, is a more practical choice. The optical layout of the v.1 is undistinguishable from that of the 1.5 Summarit, which is undistinguishable from the Xenon. Leitz used some of the new lanthanum glass in the v.2, but improvements were marginal. I was never able to see much difference. The difference between the Xenon and the Summarit, which was great, was a matter of coating. Imagine a double-Gaussian 1.4 lens with ten uncoated glass-air surfaces! Horror! The old man Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wizard Posted May 6, 2009 Share #19 Posted May 6, 2009 Jean-Luc, from the pictures above it would appear that the Summilux is a good copy. If you are happy, I would go for it. The Elmar is a nice lens, too, but only has 2.8 as maximum aperture, which is not much if you are looking for improved available light capabilities. Also, the Summilux draws very nicely and so is perfectly suited for portrait work. Andy Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tobey bilek Posted May 6, 2009 Share #20 Posted May 6, 2009 The 1959/1961 version or very first Summilux is a beautiful lens, although not technically perfect. The best sharpness is confined more to the center at 1.4 and 2.0. A nice one is difficult to find and I never did when money was available. It is much like my Summarit which I cherish. The next version, made for 40 years, has the sharpness spreads more across the frame at open apertures, but the samples I tested are never as sharp as the first anywhere. It has better flare control and coma control at the expense of significant barrel distortion. It never really achieves really good sharpness until F8. Despite the fact it was made for 40 years, I dislike every one I ever found. The latest ASPH is a gem of a lens, nearly perfect. The latest 50 2.8 compares favorably with the ASPH 50 Lux at 4 to16. The earlier one is more like the DR / Rigid series of Summicron, with lower contrast and the sharpness more confined toward the center at 2.8. If you like older lenses, you will like this or a DR/Rigid. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.