Anything special about an early version 50 Summilux?

[ymc226]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

You can never have too many lenses, correct?

 

I was wondering if there is any special quality in an early version 2 or 3 Summilux just as early version 35 Summiluxes or Noctiluxes have.

 

Rather than waiting for the current 50 Summilux ASPH which I will likely eventually acquire, would one also get special use out of the older version, especially for digital B&W?

 

Coming from film (exclusively B&W), digital B&W is so different that I still can't tell if these older lenses still provide the Leica "glow."

 

I do have a rigid 50 Summicron in great shape that I have reference to but never used a vintage or modern 50 Lux.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[wda]

I can only speak for the vintage Summicron. But I suspect that the Summilux of that period would behave in a similar fashion, with the bonus of a faster full aperture. It certainly would not match its modern rival. Unless you need the speed, while waiting for the new lens, I would exploit the Mandler magic in you old Summicron.

[algrove]

If you want a Mandler 50/1.4 from what I know you should look for a Version II. Version III was designed by Karbe who I believe designed the new 50/1.4 that you and I are waiting to get someday.

[lct]

Not sure what Peter Karbe did exactly on the Summilux 50/1.4 pre-asph as its optical formula did not change from 1965 to 2004 if memory serves. If what the OP means by "glow" is halos arounds highlights, the Summilux 35 pre-asph shows them at f/1.4 mainly but not its 50mm counterpart, at least the last version i own. The previous Summarit 50/1.5 could be a better candidate possibly but i have no experience with it sorry.

[MarkP]

Have you considered the ZM 1.5/50 C-Sonnar if you are not already familiar with it. There are many threads on it here in the forum.

 

I think it is a fantastic lens, having a 1.4/50 Summilux ASPH and 1.0/50 Noctilux for comparison. It is readily available, relatively cheap, and is fairly light and compact. Wide open it has that older soft 'look' you may be looking for, and then becomes razor sharp once stopped down. Sort of two lenses in one.

 

If you look through the relevant threads you will see discussion about the 'controversial' focus shift. This can be more-or-less corrected with a quick trip to Zeiss for free warranty re-calibration for digital (the lens is factory adjusted for film cameras as Zeiss don't make a digital RF camera) and then some experience shooting with the lens. But of course many of the older fast Leica lenses also demonstrate significant focus shift.

 

At least one forum member (Bill Palmer) sold his Summilux FLE to keep the Sonnar.

[lct]

... But of course many of the older fast Leica lenses also demonstrate significant focus shift...

Never seen this in 50mm so far but i'm still learning. Do you have special lenses in mind?

[algrove]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

You can never have too many lenses, correct?

 

I was wondering if there is any special quality in an early version 2 or 3 Summilux just as early version 35 Summiluxes or Noctiluxes have.

 

Rather than waiting for the current 50 Summilux ASPH which I will likely eventually acquire, would one also get special use out of the older version, especially for digital B&W?

 

Coming from film (exclusively B&W), digital B&W is so different that I still can't tell if these older lenses still provide the Leica "glow."

 

I do have a rigid 50 Summicron in great shape that I have reference to but never used a vintage or modern 50 Lux.

 

What do you mean by Leica "glow". Is it a Positive or negative comment? My view was that your Leica glow comment was positive, but then again perhaps it was negative meaning halo effects.

 

Could you please clarify for all of us what you meant in order that we may better understand your questions. Thanks.

[MarkP]

Never seen this in 50mm so far but i'm still learning. Do you have special lenses in mind?

 

I stand corrected:o

I was thinking of the earlier 35mm Summiluxes.

[lct]

I stand corrected […]

So do i as the Noctilux 50/1 seems to have some focus shift as well but i have no experience with it. Now i did not notice any significant focus shift on my German made 35/1.4 pre-asph at f/4-f/5.6 contrary to the lens reputation. I don't shoot rulers and brick walls though.

[MarkP]

So do i as the Noctilux 50/1 seems to have some focus shift as well but i have no experience with it. Now i did not notice any significant focus shift on my German made 35/1.4 pre-asph at f/4-f/5.6 contrary to the lens reputation. I don't shoot rulers and brick walls though.

 

I have a 1.0/50 Noctilux which does indeed have some focus shift, but I was really thinking of earlier 50mm Summiluxes and Summicrons (although I have no experience of the Summicrons).

 

Regards,

Mark

[richam]

I have the last pre-asph 50 Lux, purchased new in 2003 as I recall. It's my favorite lens. Focus has always been spot-on. Here are a couple of examples. The first is with TRI-X wide open. You can see the bokeh -- a bit odd but not unpleasant.

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!

 

Here is an M8 shot at f22, time exposure about 4 seconds. Perhaps a bit soft; whether you consider it "Leica glow" or not is up to you.

[luigi bertolotti]

The old Summilux (here, Ver. 2 from 1961, 50 years old at the time of the pic... ) can be very pleasant in bw... not top sharpness wide open, but very similar to contemporary Summicron when stopped down : this one is at f 1,4 onto M8 at 640 ASA, interior with candlelight only

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!

 

The old Summilux 35 is much more delicate in using at 1,4... if lightning isn't well positioned, flare is guaranteed, and it can be no pleasant.

[IWC Doppel]

I love the rendering of the 50 Summilux V2, it is low contrast at 1.4, not soft but not bitingly sharp, like the modern asph. But this is classic Leica for me and the bokeh I think is wonderful. The low contrast is easily rectified, if needed via LR and I find huge amounts of detail in the micro contrast that somehow some high contrast lenses seem to loose.

 

If other lenses painted like the V2 lux i would have one for the focal lengths I want. I nearly bought a pre asph 35, but this is for me looking at lots of pictures was just too soft, flare prone and low contrast for every day ( I think ).

 

There have been discussions before about the latest 35 and 50 lux asph. In many ways they are faultless, but somehow the rendering for me can be a little unusual, as the oof transition is very quick and can sometimes give the impression of sharp cut outs of the infocus on a very creamy oof background ( to quote another ) but that is a good description.

 

Depends what look you want I guess

[lct]

...The old Summilux 35 is much more delicate in using at 1,4... if lightning isn't well positioned, flare is guaranteed, and it can be no pleasant.

Nice pic Luigi. No current Leica lens could do pics like this out of the camera i guess. Aside from flare, what is great with the Summilux pre-asph is that its apparent DoF looks wider than it is really at f/1.4, so no sharp noses that asph lenses seem to be attracted to after a couple of glasses i don't know why.

[ymc226]

Thanks IWC,

 

I believe sharpness would be important to me, favoring the ASPH but I am interested in what you mean by micro-contrast. Is it in the mid tones that the Summilux V2 has the advantage?

 

I love the rendering of the 50 Summilux V2, it is low contrast at 1.4, not soft but not bitingly sharp, like the modern asph. But this is classic Leica for me and the bokeh I think is wonderful. The low contrast is easily rectified, if needed via LR and I find huge amounts of detail in the micro contrast that somehow some high contrast lenses seem to loose.

 

If other lenses painted like the V2 lux i would have one for the focal lengths I want. I nearly bought a pre asph 35, but this is for me looking at lots of pictures was just too soft, flare prone and low contrast for every day ( I think ).

 

There have been discussions before about the latest 35 and 50 lux asph. In many ways they are faultless, but somehow the rendering for me can be a little unusual, as the oof transition is very quick and can sometimes give the impression of sharp cut outs of the infocus on a very creamy oof background ( to quote another ) but that is a good description.

 

Depends what look you want I guess

[farnz]

... Here is an M8 shot at f22, time exposure about 4 seconds. Perhaps a bit soft; whether you consider it "Leica glow" or not is up to you.

Mike,

 

At f/22 my guess is that any softness would be the result of diffraction. I don't see the 'classic Leica glow' that so many refer to, which is largely an effect of Spherical Aberration, but since it's an aspherical design that's understandable.

 

Pete.

[IWC Doppel]

Not scientific but somehow the tones and shades seem more gradual and interesting with the lux, particularly as it goes out of focus. I wonder if there is a trade when a lens has higher contrast and some mid tones are reduced.

 

Difficult to describe but I seem to see more subtle difference in mid tones, nice for people shots

[farnz]

Not scientific but somehow the tones and shades seem more gradual and interesting with the lux, particularly as it goes out of focus. I wonder if there is a trade when a lens has higher contrast and some mid tones are reduced.

 

Difficult to describe but I seem to see more subtle difference in mid tones, nice for people shots

Someone may correct me but I think of this effect as micro-contrast. It certainly is good with the 50 Summilux asph but imho even better with the 28 Summicron.

 

Pete.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[leicanut2]

I have the last pre-asph 50 Lux, purchased new in 2003 as I recall. It's my favorite lens. Focus has always been spot-on. Here are a couple of examples. The first is with TRI-X wide open. You can see the bokeh -- a bit odd but not unpleasant.

[ATTACH]309372[/ATTACH]

 

Here is an M8 shot at f22, time exposure about 4 seconds. Perhaps a bit soft; whether you consider it "Leica glow" or not is up to you.

[ATTACH]309373[/ATTACH]

 

That last one is great love the color, I think all the 50mm lux lenses are great I still have the newest version and do not plan on parting with it.

 

Jan

[tobey bilek]

The ver 1 made from 1959/1961 is beautiful.

 

Then they introduced the one made for 40 years, perhaps what you call version 2 & 3.

I never could find one I liked. Not sharp untill well stopped down, ie f 8, nasty distortion is worst than any other Leica lens. The sharpness that does exist is spread across the full frame rather than concentrated in the center like most lenses. Coma is extremely well controlled so light sources in the photo corners remain round.

 

So it depends on what you are looking for.