Jump to content

50 Lux upgrade conundrum


skinnfell

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I currently have summicrons 50 and 35. Both recent versions.

Then I have some money to upgrade ONE of them. The price of upgrade is about the same on both lenses. (50 brings less but 50 lux costs less too).

Neither lens is in stock, so order-and-pray is the only way. No way to get them both and test for my own.

Out of the two lenses, the 50 sees much more use, on about a 10-1 ratio. (that is 10, maybe more, shots with 50 for each shot with 35)

The 50 is my favorite focal lenght, but the cron is already screaming good.

 

So in other words, I am looking for potentially a small upgrade on a lens I use a lot or a big upgrade on a lens I use much less often.

 

 

So, dear forum,if any of you have upgraded from, or otherwise compared the 50cron to 50lux asph, I would love to hear from you on these subjects:

 

 

1) How much better would you say the 50Lux in regards to flare?

 

2) The infamous Rockwell complains about some "stiction" in the focussing of the Lux. I had this on another silver leica lens earlier and it bothered me a lot(24/2,8). Does this only apply to the silver version, or does the black version also have this stiction?

 

3) The lux is quite heavy. Do you feel the weight is balanced towards the front of the lens or more towards the back?

 

4) Are there any gains in the F/8 area?

 

5) Is the 50Lux sharper in the very close focus area? (say below 2m)

 

6) Sharpness in the extreme corners is important for me, since I do a lot of architecture with my 50 (but stopped down). The 50 cron is phenomenal in this regard. Is the 50 lux in any way inferior when it comes to sharpness in the very edges?

 

Thanks in advance for any input!:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you are missing shots often due to camera shake in low light then you need to "upgrade" from Summicron to Summilux. Otherwise, not.

 

Err ... with the possible exception of the flare issue. The Summicron-M 50 mm sometimes flares badly in certain backlight situations. To some owners, this is a troublesome issue; to others, it's not—I guess it depends on usage as well as on expectations. Is this a problem to you? If so then switching to a Summilux-M 50 mm Asph, or Summarit-M 50 mm (!), will make things better (but please note they are just less prone to flare, not totally immune to it).

 

But then, unless flare is a problem, the Summicron-M 50 mm is the best 50 mm lens for architectural use because of all current Leica M 50 mm lenses it has the best corner sharpness at medium apertures as well as the lowest distortion.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

the differences in regards of sharpness are minor from what I can tell on about 25-30 digital images that I have shot with the cron in comparison to the summilux... and I couldnt detect any visible distortion on the summilux either.

 

the focus is just a tiny little bit less silky because of the FLE from what I can tell. you have to move 2 helicoids at the same time while the cron just has one. but after about 2 months of usage the summilux is very smooth (and i got the chrome version)

 

sweet spot of the summilux is f/4-f/5.6 but its sharp at every aperture. I'm not a pixel peeper but all my architectural shots so far are pin sharp. the sharpness gets limited by grain and the scanner resolution rather than the lens (in my case.. I'm planning to borrow a tripod and get a lowspeed high resolution film to test out the summilux and see what its really capable of)

 

and I'm just asking myself why you even bother with 35mm at all if it gets just like 10% usage at all... did you think about another focal length? I found the 28mm elmarit asph very nice for architecture and landscape because it has no visible distortion and is razor sharp (and very small/light for a secondary lens)... just a thought

 

cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites

So, dear forum,if any of you have upgraded from, or otherwise compared the 50cron to 50lux asph, I would love to hear from you on these subjects:

I've owned both.

1. Its better but how much depends very much on mow much you shoot where flare is a problem. All lenses can be forced to flare but some will resist it more than others - the 'lux is in my experience, a pretty flare resistant lens and better than the 'cron.

2. Not been a problem on my 'lux asph..

3. Feels fine on the M9 - can't say this is something I've noticed and can comment on as its simply a well balanced combination.

4. Very few.....

5. Probably - but the 'cron isn't bad....

6. No - the 'lux asph is good in the corners even wide open.

BUT I'd say that the real difference between the two lenses and the real reason I bought mine is the extra stop. Sure there will be gains elsewhere but they will be incremental. If I didn't use the lens wide open, which I most certainly do for enough of my shots to make owning this faster lens viable, then I'd happily own and use a 'cron.

Link to post
Share on other sites

crons are just so balance across the board. everything is there at great performance. i love the lux for its 1.4 rendition, it is simply BEAUTIFUL. yes, the handling is a bit more sluggish (in Leica term) due to floating elements. BUT i actually prefer the lux's buttery focus feel better than the perfectly smooth feel of the crons. mind you though, try your lux before you buy one. i've tried about 6 or 7 lux asph. before i finally decided to buy one. SOME will have a sticky feel when it is static, making a slight focus adjustment more difficult b/c it will 'jerk' just a little when u try to move it. the one i got was perfect. no stricture, smooth action.

 

i highly recommend the lux for its character, and it will match the cron in performance across all aperture.

Edited by Tonki-M
Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a current cron 50 that I just didn't really get along with (a bad photographer needs all the help he can get), so I bought a lux asph and I love it. Not too much heavier, focus is really smooth but a bit "stronger" because of the floating elements (something one would encounter in the current 35 lux asph too). All in all I love the lens on film and digital and the extra speed really does help in more situations than I would have ever imagined.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Thanks for input guys!

 

For the record I also own 28 cron and 24 elmarit asph, but I keep these outside of the equation for now as neither is intended for upgrade on my part. Both see more use than the 35 cron, and mostly because of the latter´s sloppy corners.

 

As far as the 50 go, I am not really that much in need to shoot at F1.4, but if its a better lens at say F2 or 2.8 and not any worse at F8 then I would consider it. Flare is a problem sometimes, but not really a deal breaker.

That said, if I did have access to F1.4 I would of course put it to good use.

 

I prefer 35 for low light work, since this usually means I am a bit closer to the action.

 

I doubt I will be able to get access to multiple 50 luxes to compare them side-by-side.

 

this is becoming harder than I thought.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have both lenses but use them on crop cams only (R-D1, M8.2) so i don't see significant differences in the corners. On the M9, according to J.M. Sepulchre, the Summilux asph is much sharper at f/2 and f/2.8 in the corners and is not worse at all at f/8. It has less chromatic aberration than the Summicron as well. If you like the rendition of modern Leica lenses it is a must have IMHO. But if you prefer the smoother rendition of Mandler lenses, the Summicron will remain your favorite most probably.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I should add that I don't have the Summicron versions so I won't comment in a comparative capacity. However, I do have both Summiluxes - both in black - and can say that when holding them in hand neither is front heavy.

 

The 35 can almost be balanced on the focusing tab. The element design shows that most of the mass is towards the rear of the lens due to the big floating element.

 

The 50 has a smaller floating element judging by the layout. The focusing tab is located more to the rear of the lens so can't be used for testing weight distribution, however it doesn't feel front heavy at all.

 

I am very impressed by both flare-wise but most with the 50 Asph which seems to be in a league of its own.

 

As for the Rockwellian "stiction", I noted the 50 Asph was rather tough to focus initially. Now, some 7 months since I received it, it is looser, verging on too loose. The 35 is pretty much like the 50 was when I received it but I haven't used it as much. There are quite a lot of posts about whether chromes are more tough to focus than black ones. Some say it is the other way around. I believe it is an item-specific matter predominantly. I also have a 50 pre-Asph in chrome which is, and has remained throughout my ownership, as heavy to focus as the 50 Asph was when I got it.

 

For me as a film user f1.4 means a real advantage in many situations. That may not apply to you if you're using digital.

 

Cheers

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

Fifty is also my preferred focal length. I have both the current Cron and the current Lux. Like children, I love them both for their own unique qualities. My thoughts...

 

The 50 Summilux ASPH is the best all-around 50 in the world. Very flare resistant (much improved over the Cron), extremely well-corrected for aberration, excellent resolution, lovely bokeh, beautiful signature, and very fast. It simply does everything.

 

It's downsides? It is much heavier than the cron (mine is the chrome version). It handles slower - the stiction in the focus mechanism is markedly higher than the Cron. These are minor nits.

 

The 50 Summicron is by far the longest unchanged member of Leica's M lens family. There's a reason for that - and a reason why the only way Leica could bring appreciable improvement to it (vis-a-vis the imminent APO version) was by giving it's optical engineers an essentially open field and a price point north of seven grand. The current Cron remains a stellar piece of glass.

 

Occasional flare from backlit subjects aside, the Cron is very well behaved. It is sharper than the Lux. It has a beautiful signature, retaining a hint of that Leica glow of legend. To me, it straddles the old world of the 50's/60's/70's when lenses were less well-corrected and hence held more "character" and the more modern lenses of today that are highly-corrected, very sharp, and some (not I) would argue as being "sterile." It produces lovely images. Of my seven M lenses, my 50 Cron is also easily the best-handling. Its light weight and fast, easy focus throw make it the quick choice when time is of the essence.

 

I wish I had some good advice for you. Alas, I think you need both.

Edited by Jager
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

2) The infamous Rockwell complains about some "stiction" in the focussing of the Lux. I had this on another silver leica lens earlier and it bothered me a lot(24/2,8). Does this only apply to the silver version, or does the black version also have this stiction?

 

This is the only point I can comment on: my chrome 50 lux did loosen up nicely after about a year. One thing that makes a huge difference is if you hold up part of its weight with the index finger in the groove left behind by the extended hood, as you focus with the middle finger in the tab and the thumb on the opposite side of the focus ring. The focus action becomes absolutely buttery smooth.

 

hth, it's an absolutely amazing lens.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Mine has never been "butter smooth" i must say. My Summilux pre-asph, Summicron, Elmar and most of my Leitz and Leica M and R lenses win hands down here. Only serious exceptions are two FLE lenses (50/1.4 & 75/2) which focussing action is not at the quality level of much cheaper glass so and i'm not tempted to pay strastopheric prices to get another one so far.

Edited by lct
Link to post
Share on other sites

The cheapest and most efficient IQ upgrade for both current lenses would be to use a tripod so you can use them at their optimum aperture. Camera shake is the biggest contributor to low image quality and affects all lenses no matter how expensive and well corrected they are.

 

Steve

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

If you are missing shots often due to camera shake in low light then you need to "upgrade" from Summicron to Summilux. Otherwise, not.

 

Err ... with the possible exception of the flare issue. The Summicron-M 50 mm sometimes flares badly in certain backlight situations. To some owners, this is a troublesome issue; to others, it's not—I guess it depends on usage as well as on expectations. Is this a problem to you? If so then switching to a Summilux-M 50 mm Asph, or Summarit-M 50 mm (!), will make things better (but please note they are just less prone to flare, not totally immune to it).

 

But then, unless flare is a problem, the Summicron-M 50 mm is the best 50 mm lens for architectural use because of all current Leica M 50 mm lenses it has the best corner sharpness at medium apertures as well as the lowest distortion.

 

My experience is that the latest summicron with the built-in hood is more flare-prone than the pre-latest with the separate hood and that there is otherwise no difference.

I would not change to the Summilux because of the extra stop but because of the shallower depth of field and last but not least: color rendition!!

It is heavy though (the body falls forward if it stands on the table unless you have a Luigi case on it). That is why I bought an Elmar 50 next to my summilux in situations where I want to be quick and handy. Before that, I sometimes had regrets of having changed from cron to lux.

The stiction is because of the FLE and is unavoidable. I do not notice it anymore so either I got used to it or it went away in a few years

Edited by otto.f
Link to post
Share on other sites

The stiction is because of the FLE and is unavoidable.

Why is it unavoidable? Floating elements are not a recent discovery. My Zuiko 21/2 is a FLE lens from the seventies and has been smooth from the very beginning. It is even smaller that its Leica counterparts so it is not a matter of size apparently.

Link to post
Share on other sites

no doubt it is stiffer but it loosens up quite quickly... I cant notice any difference anymore between my 28 and the 50 lux asph to be honest..

 

but at the beginning it was quite hard to focus with one finger, no sign of buttery smooth... right now its just as creamy as the bokeh :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like we don't eat same cream and butter here. :D

 

I'm serious... tested my lux vs about 7 other leica lenses the dealer had in stock..some of those used with recent CLA. was 1.5 weeks ago. the lux is very smooth... got the chrome version, maybe some differences there?

 

even heard of some with real stiction... probably got a great sample then :cool:

Link to post
Share on other sites

if u're a uv filter user and flare is a big deal to you. i've read reports that chrome version with chrome uv filter attached WILL, on a rare occasion, produce flare where the black ones will not. something to do with the chrome edge of the filter reflecting more light than the black one.

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...