redfalo Posted February 17, 2008 Share #1 Posted February 17, 2008 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hi folks, one thing which really fascinates me with respect to my M8 is that you can "warp" screwmount lenses which are decades old to the digital age. Provided you have the appropriate adaptor you can use them like a brand new lens. Compatibility at it´s best, from my point of view. Since I bought a IIIf with a Summarit 50/2.0 from 1951 recently and also got an old Russian Leica copy with a 50/3,5 from my father in law I did some tests last week. This is how my M8 looks with the old russian screwmount : 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! (Does someone has a clue what lens this exactly is and how old it is approximatly?) I was just curious how those lenses fare in comparasion to my Summicron-M 50/2.0 (IV) from 2003. This is what came out. This is a completly unscientific test, driven just by curiousity. All shots were taken with ISO=160 in DNG & AWB. No post-processing whatsoever except converting it to JPG in LR. For simplicity, I just post one complete picture, taken with the Summarit 50 from 1995 at f=4,0. All other shots are 100% crops. You can find all pictures and crops for severeal f-stops of all three lenses here: Screwmount lenses on the M8 - a photoset on Flickr Performance at the center: Summicron 50 at f=4,0 Summarit from 1951 at f=2 Summarit from 1951 at f=4 Russian 50mm at f=5,6 Performance in the corner (lower right corner of the pic) Summicron 50 at f=2.0 Summarit 50 at f=2.0 Summarit 50 at f=4.0 Russian 50 at f= 3,5 Those are my preliminary conclusions: 1)In general the difference in quality between the russian lens and the Summarit from 1951 seems to be larger than the difference between the old Summarit and the current Summicron. This is quite striking. I think it shows quite impressivly how good those old Leica lenses were. At least at the center of the picture the old Summarit at f=4.0 is almost as sharp as the current Summicron at f=2.0. So 35 years of engenieering tranlaste into two f-stops... 2)The old summarit is quite good at the center but quality deteriorates rather fast towards the edges, especially at f=2.0. Stopping down to f=4 shows remarkable better quality. 3)The Russian lens performs very badly with respect to contrast, but it´s sharpness is ok. Compared to the old Summarit, performance at the edges at full aperture seems better. More test shots here: Screwmount lenses on the M8 - a photoset on Flickr Comments welcome Yours Olaf Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! (Does someone has a clue what lens this exactly is and how old it is approximatly?) I was just curious how those lenses fare in comparasion to my Summicron-M 50/2.0 (IV) from 2003. This is what came out. This is a completly unscientific test, driven just by curiousity. All shots were taken with ISO=160 in DNG & AWB. No post-processing whatsoever except converting it to JPG in LR. For simplicity, I just post one complete picture, taken with the Summarit 50 from 1995 at f=4,0. All other shots are 100% crops. You can find all pictures and crops for severeal f-stops of all three lenses here: Screwmount lenses on the M8 - a photoset on Flickr Performance at the center: Summicron 50 at f=4,0 Summarit from 1951 at f=2 Summarit from 1951 at f=4 Russian 50mm at f=5,6 Performance in the corner (lower right corner of the pic) Summicron 50 at f=2.0 Summarit 50 at f=2.0 Summarit 50 at f=4.0 Russian 50 at f= 3,5 Those are my preliminary conclusions: 1)In general the difference in quality between the russian lens and the Summarit from 1951 seems to be larger than the difference between the old Summarit and the current Summicron. This is quite striking. I think it shows quite impressivly how good those old Leica lenses were. At least at the center of the picture the old Summarit at f=4.0 is almost as sharp as the current Summicron at f=2.0. So 35 years of engenieering tranlaste into two f-stops... 2)The old summarit is quite good at the center but quality deteriorates rather fast towards the edges, especially at f=2.0. Stopping down to f=4 shows remarkable better quality. 3)The Russian lens performs very badly with respect to contrast, but it´s sharpness is ok. Compared to the old Summarit, performance at the edges at full aperture seems better. More test shots here: Screwmount lenses on the M8 - a photoset on Flickr Comments welcome Yours Olaf ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/45710-summarit-50-from-1951-and-old-russian-lens-on-the-m8/?do=findComment&comment=485705'>More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 17, 2008 Posted February 17, 2008 Hi redfalo, Take a look here Summarit 50 from 1951 and old russian lens on the M8. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
cbretteville Posted February 17, 2008 Share #2 Posted February 17, 2008 Olaf, its a KMZ Industar 50 f3.5, most likely made in 1958. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
redfalo Posted February 18, 2008 Author Share #3 Posted February 18, 2008 Olaf, its a KMZ Industar 50 f3.5, most likely made in 1958. Thanks a lot! Olaf Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fefe Posted February 18, 2008 Share #4 Posted February 18, 2008 I also tested an old Industar on my M8 and came to the same conclusion about the low contrast.Along with it I tried a Jupiter-12 (35mm f2.8) which was much better but the lens protudes so far inside the body that the metering becomes not as reliable (but it fits without touching the shutter). For now the only LTM russian lense that I am using on a regular basis (and like) is a 50mm f/2 Jupiter 8 (from 1956). It is sold at a bargain and gives me results that I really like. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
@bumac Posted February 18, 2008 Share #5 Posted February 18, 2008 Show us some russian-M8 pictures please. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fefe Posted February 18, 2008 Share #6 Posted February 18, 2008 Both galleries shot with the M8+J-8 (besides the 3 last shot of the 1st one). All the shots without lense exif infos are the J-8. You can download the full size ones if you want to look at details - Zenfolio | El Fefe | Akko Harbour - December 2007 - Zenfolio | El Fefe | Akko Market - January 2008 Examples: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
el fotografo Posted February 19, 2008 Share #7 Posted February 19, 2008 Advertisement (gone after registration) This is a fun and interesting post. I like the look of older lenses and although I have a J-8, I haven't had the courage to mount it on my M8. I also have a Contax to M adapter that I use with 1950's Zeiss RF lenses on my M6; I think I'll give it a try on the M8. Thanks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
redfalo Posted February 19, 2008 Author Share #8 Posted February 19, 2008 Fefe, those shots are quite impressive. The KMZ Industar 50 fares much worse. Here is another shot I did with. M8, KMZ Industar 50/3,5 with f=5,6 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! large version: http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2042/2276784262_f8047bbbbb_o.jpg for a comparasion: M8, Summarit 50/2,0 (1951) with f=5,6 large version: http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2281/2276780496_1f85b11d34_o.jpg yours Olaf Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! large version: http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2042/2276784262_f8047bbbbb_o.jpg for a comparasion: M8, Summarit 50/2,0 (1951) with f=5,6 large version: http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2281/2276780496_1f85b11d34_o.jpg yours Olaf ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/45710-summarit-50-from-1951-and-old-russian-lens-on-the-m8/?do=findComment&comment=486933'>More sharing options...
fefe Posted February 19, 2008 Share #9 Posted February 19, 2008 On relatively low resolution pictures, the higher contrast of the summarit makes it much more attractive to my eye than the industar. About the J-8, I need to push the contrast in Lightroom for shots that were not taken under harsh lighting (but here the natural contrast is very high so in many situations I don't need to). At F2 it is significantly softer than my 35 cron Asph (no surprise) but sharper than my Nikkor SC 85 but I like the smooth OOF rendering at F2. When stopped down it becomes really sharp and the only thing I notice then is the lower contrast (which unlike the industar 50 I find acceptable). In the end I found the J-8 on the M8 a very nice match, and I end up using it much more often than I thought when I bought it for 25$... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
redfalo Posted February 19, 2008 Author Share #10 Posted February 19, 2008 On relatively low resolution pictures, the higher contrast of the summarit makes it much more attractive to my eye than the industar. To be honest I asked myself for a brief moment if I prefered the overall impression of the pictures taken with the Summarit from 1951 even more than those taken with the state-of-the-art Summicron, even if the latter one is clearly sharper... The performance of the J-8 is really amazing. Yours Olaf Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wizard Posted February 19, 2008 Share #11 Posted February 19, 2008 Interesting thread. However, there is no such thing as a Summarit 50/2. The Summarit lens of that age is a 50/1.5. I thus believe you are referring to a Summitar 50/2 lens (the immediate predecessor of the first Summicron lens)? Cheers, Andy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
@bumac Posted February 19, 2008 Share #12 Posted February 19, 2008 Thanx Fefe. Here in Spain we have the same light as you have in Israel. I think. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
redfalo Posted February 19, 2008 Author Share #13 Posted February 19, 2008 Interesting thread. However, there is no such thing as a Summarit 50/2. The Summarit lens of that age is a 50/1.5. I thus believe you are referring to a Summitar 50/2 lens (the immediate predecessor of the first Summicron lens)? Cheers, Andy This is really embarrassing. Your´re absolutely right... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.