Jump to content

Anyone Use Both 50mm Lux and Cron


BKimelb1

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I agonized over buying my first Leica setup and bought an M240 with a Summicron 50 F2. My primary photos are low light indoor portraits. Decison was based on cost and sharpness plus the ability to adjust ISO. But I somehow felt like a it was a "compromise ". My older setup was a Nikkormat FTN plus nNkkor 50 F1.4 and 90 F2.5.

 

still seem to be agonizing over the 50 Chron vs Lux choice.

 

Does anyone think there is a purpose for both? I love the Summicron but after 40+ years of shooting a 50 F1.4 Nikkor I feel I am missing something. but can't put my finger on it....maybe bokeh or comfort with low ISO settings.

 

Your thoughts would be appreciated. This is my first post here.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi and welcome!

 

If cost is a consideration, why not look into an older lux, the canon 1.4, or the zm 1.5 c-sonnar? They'll all offer something in addition to complement your cron without breaking the bank. Don't fear used glass, it's the leica trump card.

 

But be prepared for an infinite number of suggestions, the last cron vs lux thread is 139 posts and still going!

 

Cheers,

Michael

Link to post
Share on other sites

In addition to Leica 50mm lens you can still use your Nikkor 50mm f1.4 on M240 with the F-M adapter & EVF or Liveview.

 

I am thinking of asking Santa this year for Novoflex F-M adapter in order to utilise PB6 bellows with slide copier and selected Nikkors; 50mm f1.2 and 105mm f2.5, also Zeiss 100mm f2.

 

Question; which 90mm f2.5 would that be, maybe 105mm f2.5?

 

My older setup was a Nikkormat FTN plus nNkkor 50 F1.4 and 90 F2.5.
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

My older setup was a Nikkormat FTN plus nNkkor 50 F1.4 and 90 F2.5.

 

Very welcome to the forum.

 

I can't weigh in on the question from a digital perspective as I shoot film, but I use both a Summilux Asph and a Summicron (11817) and find that I have a need for both (in fact I have also a pre-asph Summilux which is an altogether different lens than the Asph).

 

On the cited part above, I would just say that the Summilux was the obvious choice when I added Leica M to my camera bag because I had shot EOS and their 50/1.4 for a decade. I am sure I would have regretted starting off with a Summicron and the speed penalty it imposes. Fwiw.

 

Philip

Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone think there is a purpose for both?

I think that you will find that there are two opinions on this!

 

Some will say that they find owning several 50mm lenses simply adds versatility and they are more than happy to do so. So add in a Summilux (money permitting of course),

 

Others (like myself) have only one (I have a Summilux Aspheric) and are quite content to operate in this way. (Mind you I do own multiple lenses of other focal lengths.....). My own experience is that f/1.4 is f/1.4 and when you want to use it, its well worth having.

 

So you will probably get posts suggesting both would be a good idea, and other suggesting that you just get/use one - [insert their recommendation] - lens.

 

Its tricky, but if you've managed for a long time with just a 50/1.4 on your Nikkormat I'd say that a Summilux would replace it very well indeed - just my opinion though and I have owned several Summicrons and don't miss them at all

Link to post
Share on other sites

BK, welcome to the forum.

 

I have used the 50mm Summicron for many years, upgrading to the latest when the Summilux was unobtainable. I fully intended replacing it with the Summilux, but I haven't. I simply love the size/weight/balance/ergonomics of the Summicron and find that, when low-light is not an issue, the slower lens travels with me. If the extra speed need is anticipated, then the Summilux is used. It is no embarrassment to have both, though it does seem overkill to some.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

In addition to Leica 50mm lens you can still use your Nikkor 50mm f1.4 on M240 with the F-M adapter & EVF or Liveview.

 

I am thinking of asking Santa this year for Novoflex F-M adapter in order to utilise PB6 bellows with slide copier and selected Nikkors; 50mm f1.2 and 105mm f2.5, also Zeiss 100mm f2.

 

Question; which 90mm f2.5 would that be, maybe 105mm f2.5?

 

Thank you for your all your input. It is helped clarify my thinking. Just to clarify, you are indeed correct my Nikkor 90 mm lens was actually the classic 105 F2.5. It is a great lens but that is another subject.

 

It seems like my choices are the pre-asph 50mm lux or an ASPH 50 lux or maybe using my Nikkor 50 1.4 with a converter or just sticking with my cron. I will probably get a lux either pre-asph or asph.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have both lenses as well as pre-asph versions of the Summilux 50. The 50/1.4 asph is the only option if you need sharpness at f/1.4 but i find it a bit harsh around f/2 - f/2.8 and i tend to prefer the Summicron for portrait at these apertures. Another option is the latest Summilux 50/1.4 pre-asph which is softer at f/1.4 but is as sharp as the Summicron at f/2 and on in the center of the frame without the harshness of the asph version. Beware that the 50/1.4 pre-asph is rather soft in corners and borders below f/5.6 though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

...

Does anyone think there is a purpose for both? .... This is my first post here.

 

Welcome to the Forum !! It's clear you are a newbie... :) lot of people, HERE, do think there is a purpose for ANY Leica lens ... ;) (many of us have dozens... and use them all) Seriously speaking, the Summicron is a superb all-around 50, and if you really miss 1,4, probably the Summilux 50 asph is the perfect "single 50" one can have... but for portrait in interiors, for instance, the "old" Summilux preasph (which can be found at not indecent cost) is a very tasty lens... and one can even appreciate the so called "creamy" rendering of the old Summarit 50 f1,5...

If you think that having 2 50s is unnecessary (considering, of course, that is ALWAYS A PITY to sell a Summicron 50 :cool:) , keep in mind that there are very interesting lenses for portraits in low light... the 75s (f2 or f1,4) or even the 90 f2 (the "old - pre - apo" can be found at good prices) ... and (sorry...this IS the LEICA forum.. :D) there is/was also a certain 85 f 1,5....

Link to post
Share on other sites

I also have both lenses as well as pre-asph versions of the Summilux 50. The Asph 50mm is best used at f1.4 to take advantage of it's attributes (kinda like the Noctiluxes). I have a ND filter mounted on this lens 90% of the time. The pre-asph 50mm is a glow lens wide open. The 50mm Summicron is light and compact. Otherwise they are optically similar from f4 on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have 50 mm ASPH Summilux f1.4 and 50 mm Zeiss ZM Planar lenses and am happy with both. I really like the way the Summilux renders an image in a very lifelike way with a fine combination of sharpness and bokeh. The Planar is lighter and produces sharp edge to edge images at most apertures and works well on both the M240 and Sony A7 series cameras.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agonized over buying my first Leica setup and bought an M240 with a Summicron 50 F2. My primary photos are low light indoor portraits. Decison was based on cost and sharpness plus the ability to adjust ISO. But I somehow felt like a it was a "compromise ". My older setup was a Nikkormat FTN plus nNkkor 50 F1.4 and 90 F2.5.

 

still seem to be agonizing over the 50 Chron vs Lux choice.

 

Does anyone think there is a purpose for both? I love the Summicron but after 40+ years of shooting a 50 F1.4 Nikkor I feel I am missing something. but can't put my finger on it....maybe bokeh or comfort with low ISO settings.

 

Your thoughts would be appreciated. This is my first post here.

 

I own both the 50 lux asph and 50 cron. The biggest difference to me is the rendering, both perform really well but the lux is very sharp even at f1.4. If you like to shoot wide open the lux has a much "smoother" rendering while staying sharp even wide open. Best to look at a few samples on flickr to give you a better idea of the difference. I prefer to take the cron most of the time because its just so light. I would only use the lux if I need that specific look, lets just say there's things the lux can do but the cron cannot and there's arguably no negatives on the lux vs cron (with the exception of weight and price).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have the Latest Cron (non apo) and Lux ASPH. and use the lux most, but sometimes I do like the Summicron look, so throw that on the M. Especially when I want to reduce weight for the kit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm an older guy (59) whose experience is with older Leica lenses. While I can't speak to the latest (and I'm sure great) aspherical lenses, I can tell you that my favorite Leica photographs were taken with a 50/1.4 pre-ASPH. I'm sure it measured poorly by today's standards but it had a magic that my more current crop can't quite match. There is a tonal smoothness and dimensionality to images from these older lenses that can be extraordinarily beautiful. Don't hesitate to try an older one, especially if price matters to you.

 

Don't sell your Summicron though. It fits on the camera and in the hand in a way that is tough for the larger Summilux to match. As a one camera, one body system, I can't imagine a better set-up that is easy to carry and easy to use.

 

For the record, I own a pre-ASPH 50/2 and 35/2, as well as a 35/1.4 ASPH v4. All are wonderful ... but I wish I still had that 50/1.4. These are the lenses that built Leica's reputation in the heyday of photojournalism, so they can't be bad, right? ;-)

 

John

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to change the subject though suggest you would gain much more by having a 35 or 28 in stead of another 50.

 

Have both Cron and Asph Lux and just can't avoid the Lux. That said have a 35 Cron and never wished for a 35 Lux.

 

If you have a Cron just go with it and add another lens. 50 Cron is wonderful and unless you use 1.4 a whole lot, you will be pleased. Hey just raise ISO if extra bokeh not critical.

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...