Sharp 50mm or 35mm lens suggestion

[Pelpa78]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi all, I have 3 lens for my Leica M, Summicron 35mm and 50mm and Elmarit 90mm; but all of them are classic pre-ASPH lenses, so not so sharp as modern lenses.

 

I like them but I would like to have also a sharper 35mm or a 50mm.

 

Could you please suggest me some Leica compatible modern lenses to get more sharpness?

 

I cannot afford any Leica lens now (modern Summicron and Summilux are too much expensive), maybe the only one I could by could be a Summarit, but I think that it would be better to look at some faster Zeiss/Voigtlander alternative.

 

Thx!

[microview]

Hi all, I have 3 lens for my Leica M, Summicron 35mm and 50mm and Elmarit 90mm; but all of them are classic pre-ASPH lenses, so not so sharp as modern lenses.

 

I like them but I would like to have also a sharper 35mm or a 50mm.

 

Could you please suggest me some Leica compatible modern lenses to get more sharpness?

 

I cannot afford any Leica lens now (modern Summicron and Summilux are too much expensive), maybe the only one I could by could be a Summarit, but I think that it would be better to look at some faster Zeiss/Voigtlander alternative.

 

Thx!

 

When it coms to 'sharpness', the 35 Summaron f2.8 is just about equalled by the Zeiss Biogon 35 2.8. The Summaron has better resolution than other 35s I have owned or tried.

[earleygallery]

All of your lenses are capable of producing very 'sharp' images.

 

If you feel there's a problem I would suggest it isn't the lens.

[jcraf]

, maybe the only one I could by could be a Summarit, but I think that it would be better to look at some faster Zeiss/Voigtlander alternative.

 

Thx!

 

Not sure why you think it would (necessarily) be better to look at faster Zeiss/Voigtlander alternatives. I'd highly recommend the 35 or 50mm Summarits. Many say that the 35 is the best in the Summarit lens range, but the 50 is also excellent. They are, in my view, unfairly looked down upon by some in the Leica community.

 

They are really nice lenses, plenty sharp enough, not that slow, well made, and they do crop up regularly secondhand for prices which obviously reflect their lower list price when new. But they will hold their value better than any modern Zeiss or Voigtlander.

 

Have a look at some of the Summarit reviews online. The shot below was taken with a 35 Summarit on an M9 camera

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!

[Pelpa78]

All of your lenses are capable of producing very 'sharp' images.

 

If you feel there's a problem I would suggest it isn't the lens.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

All of your lenses are capable of producing very 'sharp' images.

 

If you feel there's a problem I would suggest it isn't the lens.

 

I made some test comparing results with my summilux for Micro Four Third and to me it seems that Panasonic lens is sharper than the Leica ones

 

 

Inviato dal mio Nexus 5 utilizzando Tapatalk

[wda]

Pelpa, you own a top of the range Leica M camera yet baulk at considering a better Leica lens! I am lost for words. Why not look for a good used older Leica lens such as the 50mm Leica Summicron or Elmarit? I doubt you will find many used modern Summarit lenses for sale because they are generally much appreciated by their owners. But a new one is among the least expensive new Leica lenses.

[wattsy]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Pelpa, you own a top of the range Leica M camera yet baulk at considering a better Leica lens! I am lost for words. Why not look for a good used older Leica lens such as the 50mm Leica Summicron or Elmarit?

 

David, the OP already has three Leica lenses, including a 50 Summicron. He/she is looking for something more "modern" and "sharper" but doesn't have the budget for an ASPH lens, hence the search for other alternatives.

[pgk]

Could you please suggest me some Leica compatible modern lenses to get more sharpness?

You already have some extremely good lenses and in order to achieve higher preformance than these, Leica had to start using aspheric designs. This has resulted in better performance wide open. Summarits are state-of-the-art none aspheric designs but my experience (of the 35mm suggests that these Summarits, which are smaller aperture lenses, have characteristics such as enhanced flare suppression rather than being substantially 'sharper' than the lenses that you already own. I haven't tried other manufacturers' lenses, but I'd suspect that unless of aspheric design they won't perform as well wide open. So unless you are prepared to afford aspheric designs I'd stick with what you have already got which are very solid performers.

[Rick in CO]

Hi all, I have 3 lens for my Leica M, Summicron 35mm and 50mm and Elmarit 90mm; but all of them are classic pre-ASPH lenses, so not so sharp as modern lenses.

 

I like them but I would like to have also a sharper 35mm or a 50mm.

 

Could you please suggest me some Leica compatible modern lenses to get more sharpness?

 

I cannot afford any Leica lens now (modern Summicron and Summilux are too much expensive), maybe the only one I could by could be a Summarit, but I think that it would be better to look at some faster Zeiss/Voigtlander alternative.

 

Thx!

Since your Summicrons are f2, and the Elmarit is f2.8, you will have to spend a lot more money for "sharpness" plus a faster aperture. The Zeiss Sonnar 50/1.5 is noted for its portraiture as opposed to sharpness and the 85/2, now discontinued, is very sharp but almost as expensive as the Apo-Summicron. The real reason to go Zeiss is for the particular rendering the lenses give - some like it more than others. The latest Leica Apo/ASPH lenses have a different rendering than do the earlier ie."Mandler" lenses. "Sharpness" is just one consideration in choosing a lens, but the Cosina-Voigtlander lenses can be very sharp. The 50/1.5 Nokton is one of the sharpest lenses I have tried, even at full aperture, but I didn't care for what I perceived as a harsh overall rendering to the photos. It might be what you are looking for, however.

[Jeff S]

'Sharpness' is a vague concept (so to speak), subject to lots of variables, not the least of which is shooting technique, which can offset any minor differences in many cases. Resolution? Contrast? Micro-contrast? Film or digital? Prints or screen? Post-processing techniques? Display conditions (size, viewing distance, magnification)? Lens calibration?

 

You own some very nice, dare I say 'sharp', lenses. But there are many others, too, if you want to go crazy.

 

Jeff

[Pelpa78]

Since your Summicrons are f2, and the Elmarit is f2.8, you will have to spend a lot more money for "sharpness" plus a faster aperture. The Zeiss Sonnar 50/1.5 is noted for its portraiture as opposed to sharpness and the 85/2, now discontinued, is very sharp but almost as expensive as the Apo-Summicron. The real reason to go Zeiss is for the particular rendering the lenses give - some like it more than others. The latest Leica Apo/ASPH lenses have a different rendering than do the earlier ie."Mandler" lenses. "Sharpness" is just one consideration in choosing a lens, but the Cosina-Voigtlander lenses can be very sharp. The 50/1.5 Nokton is one of the sharpest lenses I have tried, even at full aperture, but I didn't care for what I perceived as a harsh overall rendering to the photos. It might be what you are looking for, however.

 

This could be exactly what I am looking for. Thank you

[Pelpa78]

'Sharpness' is a vague concept (so to speak), subject to lots of variables, not the least of which is shooting technique, which can offset any minor differences in many cases. Resolution? Contrast? Micro-contrast? Film or digital? Prints or screen? Post-processing techniques? Display conditions (size, viewing distance, magnification)? Lens calibration?

 

You own some very nice, dare I say 'sharp', lenses. But there are many others, too, if you want to go crazy.

 

Jeff

 

You're right but I mean sharp as crisp, micro-contrasty rendering, really harsh and no soft at all.

 

For instance, take this review: The Voigtlander 50 1.5 Aspherical VM Lens Review | STEVE HUFF PHOTOS and go to Set #3 – B&W Portrait – wide open at 1.5.

 

In my opinion the pic taken with Zeiss Touit on the X-E1 is sharper than the Nokton one. That is what I am looking for.

[250swb]

I made some test comparing results with my summilux for Micro Four Third and to me it seems that Panasonic lens is sharper than the Leica ones

 

The Panasonic Summilux is indeed a terrific lens, I have one and the results are outstanding.

 

But to be honest the modern lenses are not that much sharper than the older ones. What they do have is more micro contrast than older lenses, and often people mistake micro contrast for sharpness because it accentuates detail with a more abrupt tonal difference. This is the difference I see between the Panasonic Summilux and my older Leica lenses. If I want an older lens to look more modern, and have the same contrasty bite as a modern one I use the 'Clarity' slider in ACR when processing my RAW file. This adds more micro contrast to the image. It doesn't make it sharper, it makes it appear more defined which is mainly the difference between older and modern.

 

Steve

[farnz]

… For instance, take this review: The Voigtlander 50 1.5 Aspherical VM Lens Review | STEVE HUFF PHOTOS and go to Set #3 – B&W Portrait – wide open at 1.5.

 

In my opinion the pic taken with Zeiss Touit on the X-E1 is sharper than the Nokton one. That is what I am looking for.

Two things stand out for me after looking closely and repeatedly at both photos:

1. The Touit has a f/1.8 maximum aperture compared to the Nokton's f/1.5 and naturally has a deeper field of focus, which makes it look like it's sharper

2. The Touit is a contrastier lens that naturally emphasises fine detail more than the Nokton.

I see the same detail evident in both photos so personally I would hesitate to say that one is sharper than the other.

 

If you're looking for 'biting' sharpness (acutance) then I'd suggest that you look to Zeiss since the 50 Summilux asph or 50 APO Summicron asph are ruled out on cost; but maximum acutance is not the final word because it may be at the cost of resolution. There's a good explanation of acutance and resolution here.

 

Remember also that the impression of sharpness is heavily influenced by image processing, the viewed size, and the viewing distance. And the health of viewers's eyes of course.

 

Pete.

 

Edit: Cross-posted with Steve.

[Jeff S]

You're right but I mean sharp as crisp, micro-contrasty rendering, really harsh and no soft at all.

 

Well, as I already suggested, one can achieve a 'harsher' look, as you put it, in a number of ways, including PP.

 

And I would never make judgments by looking at someone else's screen shots, let alone casual tests that seemingly don't account for many control factors and potential variables. I don't like Sean Reid's vegetables, but he does go to great lengths to control some of the variables involved, if one cares about such things. And even then, he doesn't have the luxury of using multiple lenses to account for sample variations, either in production or in calibration.

 

I'd rather make real photos and draw my own conclusions. Personally, I'm more distracted than attracted by current tendencies toward over- 'sharpness.' I don't recall ever seeing a marvelous photo and thinking that it could be better if it were just a bit sharper. YMMV.

 

Jeff

[wda]

David, the OP already has three Leica lenses, including a 50 Summicron. He/she is looking for something more "modern" and "sharper" but doesn't have the budget for an ASPH lens, hence the search for other alternatives.

Ian, I had assumed OP owned very old versions of those lenses. The 50mm Summicron, which was in production for a very long time up until the Aspheric was launched, and is still available new is an excellent and very sharp lens. I can't believe that he owns that version. Hence my recommendation.

[Jeff S]

Sometimes timing is everything. Here is an apropos post from TOP (re-run today from 1999) by Mike Johnston regarding lens 'sharpness.'

 

Jeff

[IWC Doppel]

I think you need to be very specific about which lenses you have, then we can help you establish if they need adjustment or you do indeed need to look for something more modern.

 

Don't forget that modern panasonic lenses with CMOS sensors on can appear 'sharp' until you appreciate this is at least in part in the PP and for me unpleasant and unrealistic on many occasions.

 

I have a GF1 with a 20mm pancake, good though it is my M9-P with a 1968 Summaron is way, way better in terms of real resolution, tonal range and realism

[Pelpa78]

I have a Summicron 35 IV Bokeh King and 50 version 1979-1994

 

Inviato dal mio Nexus 5 utilizzando Tapatalk

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[IWC Doppel]

The 35 IV is very sharp centrally from F2.8 onwards and more than passable at F2 centrally, I have used one in comparison to the ASPH which I have owned two copies of and I prefer the MkIV, the 50 is good too.

 

My 'sharpest' or most revealing 35 is probably my Summilux AA, but this is a 1988 design and unfortunately rare. I'd pop down to Leica Mayfair or the equivalent in Germany and compare your MkIV to the ASPH and Summilux FLE and then have ago with the 50 Summicorn APO.

 

It will only be the 50 APO that will give you lens envy. Whilst you there have a go with your card in another M and compare at home at least this will give you peace of mind that's all okay with your M.