Jump to content

50mm summilux ASPH black vs silver - quality identical?


Deliberate1

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Are these two lenses built to the same standards? The silver is heavier and encased in brass. Steve Huff suggests that the silver version is a better iteration - though he says he got a black one that did not focus properly, and the silver replacement did. I just bought a black one, and am wondering about this - not that I would put a silver lens on my black M9:eek:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Better is a relative concept.

 

I cannot speak on the 50 Summilux ASPH (I only own the silver version), but I do happen to own both black and silver versions of the 90 Elmarit-M (don't ask, one of them has to find a new home). Both are wonderful, and the focus and aperture rings are to me identical in feel and function. The only difference I notice is with the lens hood. On the silver version the hood is heavier, and has a very heavy and positive feel when being extended, whereas the black version is noticeable lighter and tends to "clack" into position. Absolutely nothing wrong with the black, just different. As for weight I've never noticed the small difference in actual use with black or silver lenses.

 

Considering that DigitalRev wanted $400 more for the silver version I think you made the right choice. If the price was the same I would probably opt for silver.

 

Stephen

Link to post
Share on other sites

I used to think distinctions between black and silver were silly, but when I sent my black 50 Summilux to NJ because of tight focusing (they couldn't do much to improve it), I talked with the technician by phone and asked if silver versions were different (since I had read about others' comments). I expected him to dismiss the notion; instead he said that they were made on 'different lines' and that could in fact result in differences, albeit not predictably consistent ones.

 

He further explained that this lens was made to such a fine tolerance that he was sometimes surprised when 2 lenses, seemingly measured to the same tolerance, in fact exhibited differences in focus feel. In other words, he couldn't account for the difference, but admitted it was there, and suggested that different people involved in the assembly process could be one of the reasons.

 

Jeff

Link to post
Share on other sites

The chrome version is heavier since it is all brass. It is possible for individual lenses to vary in 'feel' since they are hand assembled and adjusted after all. If you read tests of indivdual lens samples you are reading opinions on one or two samples only.

Due to the complex nature of the floating element system in this particular design we do see reports from a number of owners on 'stiffness' of the focus mechanism and anecdotally there can be variation. Mine is the a standard black version. After two years use and some abuse it was quite a bit looser than originally. Solms then adjusted it to perfection for me.

 

There's no reason to think that the chrome lenses are made to a different standard or calibrated differently. Every thing goes through the same testing and adjustment processes.

Some people prefer the appearance of one type over the other . Nothing wrong with that of course.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just read this from another post:

 

I won't comment on the chrome lens/black body aesthetic but rather on the chrome 50/1.4 asph itself. I previously had 2 black versions, both had stiff focus rings that also were slightly uneven in their resistance throughout the radius of turning the ring. The chrome sample I have now is very smooth, and gives better feedback in operation with a more even resistance. Since a stiff focus ring has been reported by many with black samples, I wonder if the chrome might have some advantage in this regard. As for optics, everything you've heard is true, an unparalleled lens, dead sharp at 1.4 and every other aperture (no shift)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I used to think distinctions between black and silver were silly, but when I sent my black 50 Summilux to NJ because of tight focusing (they couldn't do much to improve it), I talked with the technician by phone and asked if silver versions were different (since I had read about others' comments). I expected him to dismiss the notion; instead he said that they were made on 'different lines' and that could in fact result in differences, albeit not predictably consistent ones.

 

He further explained that this lens was made to such a fine tolerance that he was sometimes surprised when 2 lenses, seemingly measured to the same tolerance, in fact exhibited differences in focus feel. In other words, he couldn't account for the difference, but admitted it was there, and suggested that different people involved in the assembly process could be one of the reasons.

 

Jeff

I think the technician was not familiar with the assembly process of the lenses in Solms. There is a department that assembles the focussing mechanism, ie the helecoid in the lens barrel. It consists of some containers of parts and four ladies. They select the parts for best match and assemble them by hand. The smoothness is judged by hand as well. It would be highly surprising if this would not result in different feeling lenses. The technician is right, though, that the tolerances in prodution of the focussing movement ( Which is a different thing than the resistance between the threads which determines the focussing stiffness) are exceedingly narrow. The floating element movement has tolerances in the order of 1/1000th of a mm.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Jaap you may have one too many zeros there ;)

Everyone should see the folks assembling lenses at Solms though, exactly as you describe.

Since others are posting individual expereinces (as I did) I'll add that the only chrome M lens I've owned was the Macro Elmar 90. It had uneven stiffness in the focus movement (New Old Stock) although its focus accuracy even with the macro adapter was superb.

In the end it went to Solms and it came back perfectly smooth (and that done for free like my Summilux 50 ASPH).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there a consensus as to which finish ages or weathers scratches/dings more gracefully?

 

An interesting question, which I have not really thought about until now. Looking at my Leica lenses, which consist of about a 50/50 mix of silver chrome and black I would say that my silver chrome lenses are showing more "wear". The lens hoods on my 50 Summilux ASPH and 90 Elmarit-M in silver chrome have many small bright marks and blemishes, whereas the black paint lenses seem to be (from a purely cosmetic standpoint) holding up slightly better. Of course it's all academic, as lenses are meant to be used and blemishes are badges of honor.

 

The most durable silver chrome finish I have seen is my Fuji X100. That thing is bullet proof...

 

Stephen

Link to post
Share on other sites

An interesting question, which I have not really thought about until now. Looking at my Leica lenses, which consist of about a 50/50 mix of silver chrome and black I would say that my silver chrome lenses are showing more "wear". The lens hoods on my 50 Summilux ASPH and 90 Elmarit-M in silver chrome have many small bright marks and blemishes, whereas the black paint lenses seem to be (from a purely cosmetic standpoint) holding up slightly better. Of course it's all academic, as lenses are meant to be used and blemishes are badges of honor.

 

The most durable silver chrome finish I have seen is my Fuji X100. That thing is bullet proof...

 

Stephen

 

Stephen, can you describe what appears under the chrome over brass finish - does it look brass colored. And if the black over aluminum is scratched, do you see an aluminum metal?

Thanks,

David

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure why Steve Huff thinks the silver version is 'better', unless he just got a particularly smooth example. Carrying a bag of heavier silver lenses adds considerably to the lean angle of the photographer, meaning horizons are never straight, And the thermal expansion of brass is greater than aluminium, meaning to gain the most from it you have to wait for the same ambient temperature as the factory at Solms where it was built and calibrated (does anybody know?). :rolleyes:

 

 

Steve

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure why Steve Huff thinks the silver version is 'better', unless he just got a particularly smooth example. Carrying a bag of heavier silver lenses adds considerably to the lean angle of the photographer, meaning horizons are never straight, And the thermal expansion of brass is greater than aluminium, meaning to gain the most from it you have to wait for the same ambient temperature as the factory at Solms where it was built and calibrated (does anybody know?). :rolleyes:

 

 

Steve

 

He had to return the first one, that was black due to problems, I think that was the only reason he gave that impression.

 

I suspect some Lieca employees are simply not THAT good or consistent. I own an IWC watch and my brother and friend have one too. Lovely, but....... the attention to detail on some occasions was laughable when they were returned for service or damage repair. You expect the best, you don't ALWAYS get it :cool:

Link to post
Share on other sites

You know, I passed on a silver 50 1.4 just 2 weeks ago. Now that I have read this thread, it makes me wish I had gotten the silver one if only to compare it to the black I keep waiting to arrive, once it ever arrives. Then if all OK sell the silver. Hindsight is very 20/20.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...