Jump to content

50 'cron vs 50 Rigid


james.liam

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Recently picked up a used MM-my first digital M-, been using the 50 'cron (latest, non-APO) on film. Can't say I love it on the MM particularly WO (the 35 cron ASPH seems to be much sharper @ ƒ/2). Impressive at ƒ/5.6 and smaller apertures. Any of the hype around the venerable 50 Rigid worth believing? They sell for lofty prices lately; anything notable about it to merit swapping the new(er) for the old?

 

My other option is selling the 'cron and using the proceeds toward a Lux ASPH.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lofty prices, that's a surprise! Mine is certainly venerable but still puts in a good performance, high resolution but slightly less contrast than newer lenses. I was thinking of getting a new 50 sometime! With any old lenses, beware of fogging and fungus (ugh!).

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have the 50 rigid and the 35 cron asph.

 

At F2 the 35 is sharp. Don't ask me how, but the 50 ridig is sharper.

My version of the 35 cron asph gets optimum at f4-f8, while the 50 rigid is already optimum at f2-f2.8.

 

I will never sell any of them, tho. You can't go wrong w/ the rigid. It's that good.

Look for the optics. Mine 50 has user marks on the body of the lens, but the glass is mint. 100%.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you're really picky on sharpness I would skip the rigid and go for the newest lux. I own the v4 cron, rigid DR and the 50 lux asph which is the sharpest of the three. The rigid DR is sharp wide open but has less contrast compared to modern lenses. The bokeh is smooth and classic at close distance but can get busy at medium or long distance. The v4 cron is the most neutral of the 3, I'm surprised you don't find it sharp enough as I personally think its a stellar wide open.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't own a Monochrome, but found the Summicron 50 pre-apo (iv) to be excellent on film and difficult (basically impossible) to focus on my RD-1. Could there be a focussing issue at work? My 50 DR focuses fine on this digital and will appear therefore sharper -- which it is not, given the results on film.

I cannot say that the 50 DR it is less sharp than the 50 iv, but would probably need to look harder; it does have less contrast and I prefer it for b&w because of a more "organic drawing" (call it what you wish). The 50 iv seems more transparent/cooler and neutral in colour and very subjectively a bit less interesting in b&w. It does have more contrast and is more flare resistant (I have yet to encounter the often reported flare issue but do have the all but last version and use a detachable hood).

Alexander

Edited by xalo
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The v4 cron is the most neutral of the 3, I'm surprised you don't find it sharp enough as I personally think its a stellar wide open.

 

I don't know whether it's a function of an adjustment and calibration but at f/2, it just doesn't hit a sweet spot. I'll practice a bit more but it seems to behave differently than on film. I know the focus shift is purportedly more pronounced from f/2.8-5.6 and will see this for myself.

 

Don't own a Monochrome, but found the Summicron 50 pre-apo (iv) to be excellent on film and difficult (basically impossible) to focus on my RD-1. Could there be a focussing issue at work? My 50 DR focuses fine on this digital and will appear therefore sharper -- which it is not, given the results on film.

 

Alexander

 

Seems to be my experience with v. IV as well; the Lux ASPH appeals on several levels (extra stop, lovely bokeh but higher contrast); the lower contrast of the 50 Rigid may play better with the monochrome sensor.

Edited by james.liam
Link to post
Share on other sites

If your 50 Cron isn't pin sharp @ f2 then there's something slightly off either with it or the rangefinder. A discrepancy you didn't notice with film will show up on digital. I had exactly that experience with my 50 Cron (IV, with focus tab). An adjustment to one or the other or both will cure it. Of course if you need an excuse to buy another lens, then you probably don't want to do that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course if you need an excuse to buy another lens, then you probably don't want to do that.

 

:cool:

 

After the Monochrom, that would be a bad thing. A very bad thing.

 

In truth,I prefer the compactness of the E39 lenses which allow swapping of filters. Would rather stick with it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

:cool:

 

After the Monochrom, that would be a bad thing. A very bad thing.

 

In truth,I prefer the compactness of the E39 lenses which allow swapping of filters. Would rather stick with it.

 

I've had all the various versions of the Cron at one time or another except for the APO which is way too rich for my blood. Properly adjusted the 4th gen is blisteringly sharp. If you have access to a multitude of lenses you should be able to determine if the issue lies with the body or lens. In my case out of a dozen or more lenses the Cron was the only one that did focus perfectly when I got my new M9, and the rest of them back focused exactly the same amount. I thought that was way too much of a coincidence (no rangefinder pun intended!) so I adjusted the rangefinder. Then of course the 50 was front-focusing by that amount. Sent it off, they confirmed it was front-focusing and readjusted it. Cost me $100.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a MM and found that my 50 cron (from 1993) had developed a slight focussing issue. I am sure this didnt happen overnight, but it wasnt until I put it on the ultra high res Monochrom that I noticed it. Sent it to germany for 6 bit coding, which included calibration. It is now as good as new and super precise and smooth focus. Needless to say, it IS slightly soft wide open (current lux probably better wide open), but by f4-f8 it is as sharp as can be, corner to corner.It also has the "classic" look of not being too contrasty while having troves of micro contrast. I doubt the lux or even the Apo is dramatically better at mid apertures, (where I do 95% of my shooting).

 

Morale: If you have a monochrom you might want/need to have your lenses calibrated. This will mean much more than whether lens A is how many % sharper than lens B. If you shoot a lot wide open and towards the sun, get the Lux or Apo, otherwise stick with what you have got.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Getting it checked is a good idea because I think your 50 cron is an excellent all rounder. Either way in case you're still wondering about the 50 rigid here's an example of a photo taken with it. You'll notice that it has gentle contrast, quite sharp and has smooth bokeh in closer distance. This is taken wide open and is an SOOC raw with sharpening set to 0 in lightroom + the 100% crop.

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!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Getting it checked is a good idea because I think your 50 cron is an excellent all rounder. Either way in case you're still wondering about the 50 rigid here's an example of a photo taken with it. You'll notice that it has gentle contrast, quite sharp and has smooth bokeh in closer distance. This is taken wide open and is an SOOC raw with sharpening set to 0 in lightroom + the 100% crop.

 

The centers are sharp at wide apertures, it is the corners that are not.

 

With each generation, the circle of sharpness increases wide open. The current one is very good except for the very far corners.

 

With the M9, I am using the 1.4 ASPH and last version 50 2.8. Both make beautiful images.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well the corners aren't spectacular but its not distractingly soft like the smearing you might get in some lenses. I didn't get the DR rigid for its sharpness anyway and if James is after a really sharp lens he's better off getting the lux/cron asph or even a Zeiss planar.

 

Here's another sample wide open with crops of corners and centers.

 

The centers are sharp at wide apertures, it is the corners that are not.

 

With each generation, the circle of sharpness increases wide open. The current one is very good except for the very far corners.

 

With the M9, I am using the 1.4 ASPH and last version 50 2.8. Both make beautiful images.

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!

Link to post
Share on other sites

My goals for a 50 were moderate contrast (Zeiss can be a bit much for the Monochrom; I have the 2,8/35, perhaps better suited for a color sensor). Given its use on the MM, I like the compact size and so-called "Mandler" look too. Sending it into Leica may be my best bet here (I dread the cost & wait). I have seen many images from the Rigid lately and was taken by the smooth bokeh when used at close range. Coming from a D700, my last digital camera, I will say that the MM's 18 MPs are perceptively more than the absolute # and consequently more demanding of the optics.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

UPDATE

Well, shot the 50 Summicron some more and still did not warm to it any further. I will say that it is something else for landscape work at ƒ/5.6-8. While waiting around for an elusive unscratched 50 Rigid, found a QM2 50 Lux for US$3000/2400 euros. So did the semi-impetuous thing, sold the cron + a bunch of old, no longer used Nikkors and a few $$$ for the swap. Just got the Lux yesterday and will be putting it through the trial run when I get over my cold. Let's see if my curiosity about the old 50 Rigid can now be quelled. (I should stop reading that damned Overgaard and his blog!!!)

Link to post
Share on other sites

50 cron v4 WO today on M9. No adjustment.

 

15392730904_d03018cbb0_b.jpg

L1025521 by unoh7, on Flickr

 

at f/8:

15989202846_0430d2287b_b.jpg

Doorway by unoh7, on Flickr

 

This is the early v4 tabbed, a very tiny and very great lens.

 

The DR has a huge following and many love it, but I'm not totally sure what the story is. I have a bunch of 50s but not that one. The only one I really lust for today is the Lux asph.

Edited by uhoh7
Link to post
Share on other sites

A Rigid was a decent lens in it`s day. Today you will need to stop to 4 or 5.6 to match the latest with resolution and contrast will be lower. At 2.0 the circle of sharp definition is very small compared to the latest.

 

I don't know what you experience is but that's no what I see.

My 50 rigid is scary sharp wide open. Maybe the 50 rigid you used need some service.

 

It gets a bit better at f2.8, and goes like that until f8.

Meanwhile, my 35 cron asph, only gets as sharp at f4. And goes like that until f8.

 

It is hard to see any difference from the 50 rigid at f2 to the 35 cron asph at f8.

I was scared when I found out as well. That's why I'm sure it will be hard to see any lens be sharper at f2 than the rigid. There might be lens as sharp as it out there. But sharper? No lens can be sharper at f2 than the 35 cron asph at f8. It's just not real. Maybe the new 50 cron asph? Maybe.

 

Of course I'm talking about center area. Wide open, corners are better on the 35 cron asph than on the 50 rigid. But still, it is a stellar performer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...