50mm - Leica vs. Voightlander (am I crazy?)

[Jakobben]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Thank you all for your input! The choice has not been made easier, but at least it doesn’t seem like I would be forcefully admitted to a rubber cell for choosing the Nokton ;-)

 

For some of the comments I’m not sure if you are talking about the new Nokton f1.5, or the old one. I heard that there is a good bit of difference between the two, and I’m only looking at the new M-mount Nokton.

 

Ecar – I may be looking into the Zeiss Sonnar as well ;-)

 

rramesh – I’ve heard different opinions about the Summarit lenses, but until now, they have mainly been negative (except for Leicas website ;-). Are Summarit lenses bashed for being “cheap Leica lenses” or because they are actually not that great. I haven’t looked into them very much…

 

jaapv – I actually don’t care about the name on the lens. My concern is more about the quality. Being new to Leica I read many places that one major reason for going into the Leica system is for the Leica glass. Even if the two were priced the same I would have the same question – again, I can afford either one.

 

CaptZoom – You raise a good point regarding the quality control. I’d hate to get a lemon… I live in San Francisco and I cannot find a single dealer around that sells Voightlander glass…

 

Dannybuoy – I think you are referring to the old Nokton. The new one is about the same size as the cron… But yes, “buy cheap and you’ll buy twice” is also what I usually go by. I just cannot justify 4k for the lux (which also seems like a fairly large lens).

 

Ecar – You are spot on :-)

 

Marc G. – another thumbs up for the Summarit :-). I may have to look into that one. However, I’m not sure I’m ready for two 50’s. I’m really trying to cut down on the amount of gear (part of the reason why I’m moving to Leica – want to sell all the DSLR stuff and live more simply). If I were to have two or maybe three lenses, they would be something like a 28, 50 and 90, not two of one focal length.

 

Sfage – I’ve read that the zeiss planar is sharper than the cron, but compared to the Nokton they render fairly similarly to me…

 

BerndReini – Fringing doesn’t worry me too much. It is pretty easy to correct, and I’ve seen some pretty bad stuff from the lux and the Nocti as well…

 

TomB_tx – Thanks for the comparison! Really cool. At f2 I actually prefer the Nokton (though it is the LTM not the M-mount version). It is quite similar to the cron though.

[TomB_tx]

I understand the new M Nokton has identical optics to the LTM, but the body is smaller. I prefer the LTM body, which is styled after the original Summilux (which I also have), even though it is larger.

For Voigtlander go to the CameraQuest website. I've bought several lenses from them with great service, and only one (LTM 50 f2.5) seemed a bit soft. Mechanically all mine have been fine, with focus close to perfect on my Leicas.

But overall I do like the Summicron!

[CaptZoom]

Jkobben

 

From what I've read, the LTM and the M mount Nokton share the same optics except the coatings- the latter getting a newer one. I don't know about the size differences. And obviously the housing is different.

 

I've purchased a few CV lenses, most but not all from CameraQuest. So far every single one has been spot on. But there are others here who have had the opposite. That being said, purchase through a dealer with good return/exchange policy so that you're not stuck with a faulty lens. It's surprising that SF doesn't have a CV dealer. Is there a Leica dealer close? They may have some CV stock.

 

I read that you're starting to get interested in the Planar. It's a fantastic lens, especially for skin tones. I don't know what it is exactly, but the ladies almost always end up liking the photos taken by it vs the other 50mm lenses.

[Guest Marc G.]

Marc G. – another thumbs up for the Summarit :-). I may have to look into that one. However, I’m not sure I’m ready for two 50’s. I’m really trying to cut down on the amount of gear (part of the reason why I’m moving to Leica – want to sell all the DSLR stuff and live more simply). If I were to have two or maybe three lenses, they would be something like a 28, 50 and 90, not two of one focal length.

 

I currently use this exact combination of focal lengths and am VERY happy with my choice. If you need a large aperture lens I would choose the Nokton if the Summilux asph is too expensive. No major faults except a slight focus shift. If 2.5 is okay for you (and it is for most applications) then by all means the Summarit will give you great image quality in a tiny package and is preferrable to the current Summicron (without APO ASPH) in many ways. Other than the 50 I would recommend the 28 Elmarit asph and 90 Summarit. These 2 Summarits and the Elmarit will give you 3 focal lengths with great image quality in a tiny tiny package which comes in at 800g for all three.

 

The Summarits are being bashed for being optically and mechanically inferior to Leica standards which is NOT TRUE. It's the usual song I sing in this forum which makes me feel like an audiotape at the moment but the 35 and 50 Summarits are optically on par with the 35 Summicron asph and 50 Summicron but preferrable in other ways. The 75 comes very very very close to the APO Summicron 75 ASPH which is a statement by itself and the 90 Summarit is a little bit behind the tremendous APO Summicron 90 ASPH but given the standard the Summicron sets this shouldn't surprise anyone.

 

I've shot with the 35 and 90 Summarits for 9 months now and can state that their optical performance is pleasing in every way.

 

The only major drawback, especially at 50mm where lenses regularly have aperture values of 0.95, 1 or 1.4, is the maximum aperture of 2.5 (but you can cover all applications but the most extreme ones with 2.5).

[MarkP]

The Summarits are being bashed for being optically and mechanically inferior to Leica standards which is NOT TRUE. It's the usual song I sing in this forum which makes me feel like an audiotape at the moment but the 35 and 50 Summarits are optically on par with the 35 Summicron asph and 50 Summicron but preferrable in other ways. The 75 comes very very very close to the APO Summicron 75 ASPH which is a statement by itself and the 90 Summarit is a little bit behind the tremendous APO Summicron 90 ASPH but given the standard the Summicron sets this shouldn't surprise anyone.

.

 

+1

[jdlaing]

+1

 

+2

[vertekijker]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Check what Erwin Puts had to say about the Summarits, they are excellent Leica lenses!

--------------

Frans

[250swb]

Am I crazy to go for that one over the Leica lens? The money I save could also go towards a 28mm Elmarit at some point...

 

Not crazy at all, Zeiss and CV lenses are very good quality.

 

But you would get around to wondering about a Leica lens sooner or later, and as your first lens I think you should create a datum point to judge other lenses by. For that you need a Leica lens on your camera.

 

It is very easy to be wowed by a good CV lens and start to think it can't get better than this. And a couple of CV lenses are on a par with the Leica equivalent (like the 75mm Heliar f/2.5 with the 75mm Summarit), but a 50mm Summicron, or a Summarit etc. is just that bit more refined and trains the eye to spot the failings in other designs. I'd suggest that you go down the CV/Zeiss route later, when you can decide with the authority of having a top lens to compare with, and one which suffers from much less chance of build quality variation.

 

Steve

[TomB_tx]

Steve has very good advice, and I agree with him. I went to Leica in 1968 after using most other brands while in college, working part time at the local Leica dealer. Yes I got good results with other cameras, but there was something about Leica, and rather than continue jumping brands to try and find something as good, I decided to go to the real thing. Both the dealer and the Leica rep. advised going with the 35 and 50 Summicrons instead of Summilux, saying I'd appreciate them more as I used them. I still have that M4 and the Summicrons.

Likewise with the M9 I wanted to see what the other M-mount brands could do, but after getting and liking several CV and Zeiss, I ended up getting a new Summicron also.

So if you can afford it, start off with one. Although it has its quirks, it has remained the standard for comparison since the 1950s.

[TomB_tx]

Even staying with Summicron there are a lot of choices, since the used market offers lots of fine lenses, and Summicrons have been around since before the M3. Just to confuse things here are the "fringing crops" of the different Summicrons:

First a Summicron collapsible M mount. (This sample has good glass, but some haze and, and needs focus calibration yet), at f2:

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!

 

Next a Summicron Rigid (v2) at f2:

 

Then a Summicron V3 that I bought new in 1969 at f2:

 

And the 2012 (V4 optical) at f2:

 

And for comparison a 1960 Summilux (v1) at f2:

 

And for the really weird, the v1 Summilux at f1.4:

Notice on this last the fine details look decently sharp, but the light sources show strong coma.

[Jakobben]

Thanks again for all the great input! I’m not sure it directly moves me closer to a decision, but I’m definitely getting smarter :-) (which I guess in turn will help me decide!).

 

CaptZoom – From what I’ve seen the Plannar has excellent IQ. However, if I wanted to go with a non-Leica lens, I’d probably still chose the Nokton f1.5 simply due to its rendering of the bokeh. I’ll just have to educate the ladies on good bokeh ;-)

 

Marc G. – Thank you for the insight into the Summarit lenses. I have been looking at some shots from it lately, and it seems to be quite interesting. Very sharp and microcontrasty in the in-focus areas, but still has a softer, slightly “classic” bokeh. As mentioned I like the Nokton f1.5 bokeh, mainly due to the “twirley” lines it produces in certain scenes (I believe it is what people call a “classic” rendering, correct?). I’m still looking for more photos with it on a Leica body (most I find are from a NEX camera)… The f2.5 is however a drawback… I only shoot with available light…

 

vertekijker – I’ve been searching for that article by Erwin Puts that everyone keep referring too, but as far as I can see it is no longer up – I keep getting a 404 error when I follow the various links I find…

 

250swb – Knowing how I tend to get a crazy level of GAS sometimes I think you are probably right in stating that I’ll always be wondering about what the Leica class would be like. The reason I became so set on getting a Leica in the first place was because of some pictures I saw in the Washington D.C. Leica store. They had this really cool twirley bokeh, amazing colors and a lot of detail. I don’t know which lens they used, but it probably was a Leica… (Btw. Amazing stuff you have on flickr!)

 

TomB-tx – again, thank you for the comparison shots! The collapsible Summicron seems to be really doing well in terms of croma. The v4 looks pretty good as well in terms of croma combined with sharpness.

 

Looking at the most interesting choices: the Summicron, the Nokton or the Summarit. Based on your comments the Nokton might be on hold for now. Choosing between the Summarit and the Summicron is difficult. The ‘rit has a bit better bokeh from what I’ve seen so far (and a focusing tab), but the ‘cron is f2. Both are sufficiently small, so the difference won’t matter that much to me.

[Guest Marc G.]

The difference between f/2.5 and f/2 is negligible. f/1.4 does make a difference though.

 

The Nokton is fine but definitely choose the black version if you do buy one as the chrome one has inferior handling due to the black one with the black coating being smoother.

[Jakobben]

I wouldn't be buying the chrome one as I don't want to pay extra for a different color lens, but thanks the advise anyway :-)

 

f2 to f2.5 is 2/3 of a stop, whereas f2 to f1.4 is a full stop. So I'd expect that there would be a difference, just not as big as going for the f1.4 obviously...

[Guest Marc G.]

I wouldn't be buying the chrome one as I don't want to pay extra for a different color lens, but thanks the advise anyway :-)

 

f2 to f2.5 is 2/3 of a stop, whereas f2 to f1.4 is a full stop. So I'd expect that there would be a difference, just not as big as going for the f1.4 obviously...

 

The Summarits have some advantages to their Summicron counterparts (35/50mm). If you are only shooting low light you might as well just skip the Summicrons and go Summilux. Judging from my test between the 35 Summarit and 35 Summicron asph the difference is only visible (if at all) in the image center, as the Summicron asph has strong vignetting, only partialy corrected by coding. And off goes the whole advantage when it comes to the corners... Other than that the Summarits have advantages when it comes to daytime shooting (far better corrected against flare).

 

There is also the 35 Nokton f/1.2 alternative which is highly regarded amongst many other forum members and probably the best alternative regarding 35mm focal length.

 

I think you can't go wrong with either the 50 Nokton or 50 Summarit (or even the Summicron). Be sure to keep us updated which lens made its way into your bag

[vertekijker]

Thanks again for all the great input! I’m not sure it directly moves me closer to a decision, but I’m definitely getting smarter :-) (which I guess in turn will help me decide!).

 

CaptZoom – From what I’ve seen the Plannar has excellent IQ. However, if I wanted to go with a non-Leica lens, I’d probably still chose the Nokton f1.5 simply due to its rendering of the bokeh. I’ll just have to educate the ladies on good bokeh ;-)

 

Marc G. – Thank you for the insight into the Summarit lenses. I have been looking at some shots from it lately, and it seems to be quite interesting. Very sharp and microcontrasty in the in-focus areas, but still has a softer, slightly “classic” bokeh. As mentioned I like the Nokton f1.5 bokeh, mainly due to the “twirley” lines it produces in certain scenes (I believe it is what people call a “classic” rendering, correct?). I’m still looking for more photos with it on a Leica body (most I find are from a NEX camera)… The f2.5 is however a drawback… I only shoot with available light…

 

vertekijker – I’ve been searching for that article by Erwin Puts that everyone keep referring too, but as far as I can see it is no longer up – I keep getting a 404 error when I follow the various links I find…

 

250swb – Knowing how I tend to get a crazy level of GAS sometimes I think you are probably right in stating that I’ll always be wondering about what the Leica class would be like. The reason I became so set on getting a Leica in the first place was because of some pictures I saw in the Washington D.C. Leica store. They had this really cool twirley bokeh, amazing colors and a lot of detail. I don’t know which lens they used, but it probably was a Leica… (Btw. Amazing stuff you have on flickr!)

 

TomB-tx – again, thank you for the comparison shots! The collapsible Summicron seems to be really doing well in terms of croma. The v4 looks pretty good as well in terms of croma combined with sharpness.

 

Looking at the most interesting choices: the Summicron, the Nokton or the Summarit. Based on your comments the Nokton might be on hold for now. Choosing between the Summarit and the Summicron is difficult. The ‘rit has a bit better bokeh from what I’ve seen so far (and a focusing tab), but the ‘cron is f2. Both are sufficiently small, so the difference won’t matter that much to me.

 

You are right, the article by Erwin Puts on the Summarits is no longer on his website. Why don't you write to him? I have done so and found him to be most helpful. I believe that there is an e-book version of his compendium, or you may want to get it in print from him - great book to have as a Leica owner.

--------------------

Frans

[algrove]

PS. I agree - 2195 USD for an f2.8 28mm lens is not cheap. But the small size makes it really tempting (does not block the viewfinder like the 28mm Ultron from Voightlander). Don't know about the 28mm zeiss Biogon...

 

I took his comment to mean in Leica terms the lens is a good buy. Also the 50 Cron is a good buy in Leica terms.

 

My first lenses were Zeiss. Slowly I wanted Leica and then parted with the Zeiss. This comment will get some reaction, but manual coding of the Zeiss eventually kept rubbing off just too much for me as I rely on EIF data.

[BerndReini]

Dude, fixing purple fringing takes one click (occasionally the use of a slider).

 

Be my guest with all the post processing. If you think for a second that the post correction of purple fringing won't impact your final image quality. I own a Noctilux f1 and a summilux aspherical and I know what I'm talking about. And I don't go by people's descriptions but by what I see with my own eyes and if you look at Steve Huff's sample photos, you will clearly see the barrel distortion and purple fringing of the Nokton.

 

So, if the Nokton is all you can afford, then click away in post and be happy, it is by no means a bad lens. But if you are asking about the shortcomings of this lens, then I stand by my answer. And if you ever want to use the lens on an MM, then understand that chromatic aberrations will be "baked" in as soft lines.

[CaptZoom]

*****

[CaptZoom]

If the f/1 Noctilux is all you can afford, click away at the shutter release and be happy; it is by no means a bad lens. But if you think for a second that the focus shift of the f/1 Noctilux won't impact your final image quality...

 

 

Be my guest with all the post processing. If you think for a second that the post correction of purple fringing won't impact your final image quality. I own a Noctilux f1 and a summilux aspherical and I know what I'm talking about. And I don't go by people's descriptions but by what I see with my own eyes and if you look at Steve Huff's sample photos, you will clearly see the barrel distortion and purple fringing of the Nokton.

 

So, if the Nokton is all you can afford, then click away in post and be happy, it is by no means a bad lens. But if you are asking about the shortcomings of this lens, then I stand by my answer. And if you ever want to use the lens on an MM, then understand that chromatic aberrations will be "baked" in as soft lines.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[BerndReini]

My point is that the Noctilux has terrible purple fringing but a very special way of rendering, not unlike the Nokton, but as a general purpose lens, I want a lens that is well corrected and gives me predictable results. I would never recommend the Noctilux as an all-purpose lens. I also didn't mean "if the Nokton is all you can afford" in any way derogatory. I guess this is where the Internet causes misunderstandings. The same way, I get slightly edgy when someone calls me "Dude" even though in person, I probably wouldn't give it a second thought.

 

So let's put this to rest once and for all. I don't like purple fringing, both the Nokton and Noctilux show lots of it. I have seen it. The OP already said that it doesn't bother him, so he will be happy with the Nokton. I have also seen a lot of barrel distortion with the Nokton at close distances, also something I don't like because I shoot a lot with view cameras. I know that the Zeiss Planar is a very good lens, the Zeiss Sonar is a beautiful specialty lens with focus shift issues, and pretty much all Voigtlaender lenses are good and very good value for the money. I really wasn't trying to insults anyone.