Jump to content

Summilux 50mm f/1.4 Pre-ASPH


Recommended Posts

Guest rivercityrocker

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I just picked up a near mint 1964 Summilux 50mm for $1200.

 

I've been looking around and that seems like a good price, right?

 

I really like the lens, it's quite sharp, but the 1m minimum focus drives me nuts. I sold my Zeiss 50mm f/2 Planar to help fund the purchase. I'm wondering if I made the best choice as I like to shoot close up a lot...:confused:

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's the second version of the Summilux 50 mm that was made from 1962 to 2004. Earlier samples had a minimum focus distance of 1 m; later samples were 0.7 m. Sorry I don't know when the transition happened.

 

So if shooting at close distances is important to you then you obviously bought the wrong lens.

 

By the way, the first Summilux 50 mm was made from 1959 to 1961 and is rare today due to the short production period. At full aperture it's significantly softer than its successor, so it's mostly considered a collector's item, not a user lens (except you want a soft lens—but then, a Summitar 50/2 or a Summarit 50/1.5 are easier to find). The third version is the current Asph.

Edited by 01af
Link to post
Share on other sites

I always thought the 0.7 and 1m focus distance would not differ allot, but in the end it does!!

 

I really mis the 0.7m on for example the Leica Elmar 50mm f/2,8 from 1960... since it only does close focussing to 1 meter.

 

So then I realized that the difference between 70cm and 100cm is ALLOT!

Link to post
Share on other sites

The chrome v2 Summilux is a desirable lens, and $1200 would be a good buy depending on condition. I paid a bit more for a mint 1960 v1, which is better than the reputation.

Selling an M-mount lens is usually a mistake, but those of us who buy used are glad people do!

The Planar is hard to beat. I use one as well as a late Summicron, and differences are slight.

If you like close work, Rangefinders, and classic lenses perhaps a Dual-Range Summicron would be a good choice, and would be a close trade.

(But I agree a Leicaflex or R with the 60 2.8 macro is a nice all-around combination.)

- Cedar Park Folkie

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest rivercityrocker

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I hate it when people do to me what I about to do to you, but if minimum/close focus is your gig, then grab a Leicaflex SL with 60mm macro. Maybe a rangefinder isn't the best of choice?

 

When I say close, I don't mean macro close. And the Leica isn't my only camera.

 

I guess I'm going to have to get used it because in the end I usually need the faster stop usually more than the closer focus.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I always thought the 0.7 and 1m focus distance would not differ allot, but in the end it does!!

 

It does. With a 50mm the maximum reproduction ratio with a 1m close focus is 1:17, with a 0.7m close focus it's 1:11 or so.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This lens is one of my quandaries, too. I had successively two black ones from the eighties and really like the drawing in the pics I took with them. It has some special characteristics: oof rendering, centre sharpness wide open, *beautiful natural* vignetting, balanced and rich contrast, flare resistance... Sharpness at closer distance is not supposed to be part of its strengths, but I found it ok for most purposes. The last copy's focus was spot on (film Ms and RD-1), which made a difference.

 

The price you paid seems good. If the focus is fine, great deal, if not I'd get it adjusted and it is still great value — perhaps paving the way to the version with the built-in hood and 0.7m focus distance. It was introduced at the photokina 1994. If I found one at a reasonable price (like the one I did foolishly not buy eight years ago:rolleyes:), I might consider selling a few lenses in exchange... As is, I kept my DR and version IV 50mm Summicrons, but am missing that other glass.

 

Cheers,

Alexander

Link to post
Share on other sites

...Sorry I don't know when the transition happened....

 

That's an easy one. The transition occurred when the hood was integrated into the lens. That is, all samples of this lens having the built-in sliding lens hood also have a minimum focus distance of 0.7m, except for the LTM version, which does have the built-in lens hood, but still has the 1m minimum focus distance.

 

Andy

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest rivercityrocker
Umm ... but you do understand that you just as well can have both, don't you?

 

Of course I can have both, but that would require purchasing another lens. Which will undoubtedly cost more.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest rivercityrocker
The chrome v2 Summilux is a desirable lens, and $1200 would be a good buy depending on condition. I paid a bit more for a mint 1960 v1, which is better than the reputation.

Selling an M-mount lens is usually a mistake, but those of us who buy used are glad people do!

The Planar is hard to beat. I use one as well as a late Summicron, and differences are slight.

If you like close work, Rangefinders, and classic lenses perhaps a Dual-Range Summicron would be a good choice, and would be a close trade.

(But I agree a Leicaflex or R with the 60 2.8 macro is a nice all-around combination.)

- Cedar Park Folkie

 

It's in excellent condition almost new condition. Since you're from Cedar Park I'm guessing you've shopped a Precision. Noel cut me a pretty good deal. I can't say the same for the guy they bought the lens from. Apparently he sold the Lux and an M3 (which were bought together new in 64) for a little over $600.

 

I sure wish I would have run into that guy before he walked into the store. They said it was some rich old guy who bought it years ago and it sat in a closet for about 40 years. If it came in a box I'd swear it was new.

 

 

This also leads me to another question. It came with the original hood. I find the hood obnoxious for one and also since I'm using it on an M8 I need the UV/IR filter which prevents me from mounting the hood. I'm thinking of selling it.

 

Any opinions on that? If the lens came with the box and caps, etc. I'd probably keep the whole kit intact, but if I can't use it is there any real point in keeping it around? If I can get a decent price for it it will offset the cost of the lens as well...

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would sell the lens and buy the latest version of the pre-asph Summilux with built-in hood. The hood is rather useless though, especially if you use filters, but the lens is a keeper IMO. Still my favorite 50 for not-too-sharp portraits at f/1.4. At f/2 and on, the lens is as sharp as a Summicron in the center of the frame more or less. Not the best lens for landscape though as it is rather soft on edges and corners below f/5.6 but this should not bother you too much with your M8 thanks to the crop factor. Excellent resistance to flare.

Edited by lct
Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest rivercityrocker
I would sell the lens and buy the latest version of the pre-asph Summilux with built-in hood. The hood is rather useless though, especially if you use filters, but the lens is a keeper IMO. Still my favorite 50 for not-too-sharp portraits at f/1.4. At f/2 and on, the lens is as sharp as a Summicron in the center of the frame more or less. Not the best lens for landscape though as it is rather soft on edges and corners below f/5.6 but this should not bother you too much with your M8 thanks to the crop factor. Excellent resistance to flare.

 

Not really looking to go through the hassle of selling the lens, then I'd have to drop at least another $1000 to get a decent version of essentially the same lens.

 

The lens seems plenty sharp to me for portraits.

8752448724

 

I'd never use this for landscapes. I rarely shoot them as it is and if I was going to purposely shoot go out shooting lanscapes I'd probably use whichever Nikon I have at the moment and a 14-24.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe the original hood was the "trumpet" version instead of the later "vented" hood that blocks less of the finder. Both clip on the groove at the end of the lens. Either will fit the lens - I got the later vented model for my 1960 lens to be more usable than authentic.

Both are on the rare side, and usually sell for over $100

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest rivercityrocker
I believe the original hood was the "trumpet" version instead of the later "vented" hood that blocks less of the finder. Both clip on the groove at the end of the lens. Either will fit the lens - I got the later vented model for my 1960 lens to be more usable than authentic.

Both are on the rare side, and usually sell for over $100

 

Yeah, it's the trumpet version. So if the vented one is a clip on as well then it's not going to fit with the filter on either I guess.

 

So my only other option is a cheapo screw-in hood? Not that I need the hood for flare reduction but more because I bang my stuff around a lot.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, it's the trumpet version. So if the vented one is a clip on as well then it's not going to fit with the filter on either I guess.

 

So my only other option is a cheapo screw-in hood? Not that I need the hood for flare reduction but more because I bang my stuff around a lot.

 

Both original hoods don't cause any problems with filters!

 

Since the older versions of the lens need 43mm-filters it might be difficult to find an UV/IR-filter for the M8. If you don't find them in your country or in the buy-and-sell-section this address could help perhaps: http://www.foto-huppert.de/default2.asp

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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