Anyone Use Both 50mm Lux and Cron

[lm_user]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Repeated the same pic with current 1.4 and Summicron, indoor portrait. Bokek was smoother , much smoother, with the ASPH 1.4

 

I will add that this is true even with both lenses at f2.

[Mr_Jones]

I was wresting with the same question for a couple of years. I regret not buying the lux sooner, it has become my all round favourite lens. However it didn't make as big a difference to indoor low light portraits as the SF58 flash in combination with the HSS facility on the M240. Available light won't always deliver results regardless of lens speed.

[tobey bilek]

A test was done with Current 50 summicron (borrowed) and 50 Lux asph . The out of focus backgrounds were way different, the lux being much better.

 

It also images the same as my 75 APO which is the same general optics.

 

My other 50 is a version 2 Collapsible 2.8. Very handy indeed.

 

Also have a mint rigid and the version 1 collapsible and version 3 from 1969 to 79.

 

Can`t really find a lot of fault with any except weight and cost.

 

And I could never find a version 2 Lux from 1962/200x that I liked. I never bought one of those.

[sblutter]

Am a big time 50's guy for years.

 

I adore both my Summi 2.0 v4 'crons (M9P & M-E). So usable and consistently gorgeous results.

 

One day, brought in a new 'lux when $ was no longer an issue. Not impressed at all. DOF too tight, weight cumbersome for all day shooting. Made the rig cumbersome, out of balance.

 

Sold it at a gain, upgraded both 28 & 35 instead to ASPH's

 

No regrets

 

To each his own - my 2 cents only.

[trickness]

I'm a new M-P user, have a Nikon D4 too and only shoot 1.4 primes on that body.

 

Bought a 50 Cron as my first lens from B&H. Nice lens, but after trying the Lux, and realized I liked the focus tab a lot. I also felt the bokeh and 2.0 DOF was lacking vs 1.4, so I returned the Cron to B&H and upgraded to the Lux.

 

Wow, what a brilliant lens. It's the best 50 I've ever shot with, OK 1.4 is tough to nail focus consistently on a rangefinder, but wow, does this lens just suck light in compared to the Cron. And at 1.4 the images just have a dreamy quality, the Cron cannot compete. If you have the cash, and you shoot wide open or in low light a lot, get the Lux. The Cron does handle slightly better due to the reduced weight.

 

I think it's really down to how you shoot and how deep your pockets are. To me, I can't think of an instance when I'd prefer to have the Cron over the Lux.

[bocaburger]

I have the tabbed version 11819 Cron and the e43 pre-ASPH Lux. Both are user cosmetics, both I've had since before the prices of Leica lenses went out of control, so basically I paid less for both lenses than a used current-version Cron in mint shape sells for these days. The Cron is the 50 I travel with, it's sharper out to the corners, very light, focuses closer, and takes the same e39 filters as my other travel lenses (21 CV, 35/2-IV, 90 and 135 T-E's). I use the Lux when I know I'll the extra stop will be more important than the weight savings and filter redundancy. Likewise my 21 Elmarit and 90 Summicron.

[John Z. Goriup]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

When my father gave me my first Leica M, a very well used M4 in 1960 when I turned 21, it had a Summilux with it. Many years later I purchased a 50mm F2.0 Summicron and for various reasons found myself using it almost exclusively,with the Summilux gathering dust. Over time since then I have owned almost every Leica M lens ever made and have kept quite a few of them, yet I have always upgraded to the latest versions of those two 50mm lenses, which have become the mainstay of my rangefinder Leica "system".

 

It has come to the point where I hardly need to think about which 50 to use . The subject, the time of day, the light ( overcast or sunny ) type of image ( landscape, portrait, automotive architectural, etc. ) almost automatically determine my choice of Summicron or Summilux.

 

I love the crisp, eerily neutral, and clinically sharp images the latest Summilux f1:4 Asph. produces.Plase don't think I've been inhaling something illegal, but to my eyes the Lux has a fragile, extremely delicate way of rendering images in overcast morning light ( my favorite time ) that reminds me of extremely thin, hand-blown glass X-mas ornaments, which, if you even look at them crossways might break into a million sharp shards. The Summilux is a triumph of the lensmaker's art and in my opinion is one of, if not the finest lens Leica has ever produced.

 

The Summicrom on the other hand may lack a tiny bit of the Lux's ultimate sharpness, but has a solid, noticably smoother and "rounder" rendering of details with a barely noticeable increase in warmth that I perceive as Kodachrome-like, and is my go-to lens in bright, sunny conditions.

 

At the end of the day, these really are two fundamentally different lenses, "horses for courses" as it were and represent a solid, reliably predictable performer when you want/need a good "keeper" shot ( the Cron) vs. the occasionally more "nervous", less predictable, demanding an absolutly accurate - no leeway style of photography, but invariably produce that sublime-when-you-get-it-right rendering of the latest Summilux.

 

Incidentally, I feel the same applies to the 35mm Summicron vs. the incredible new Summilux f1.4 Asph. FLE lens…….the same factors as described above are at work with those two lenses, they share the same focal lengths, yet deliver different renderings all together when operating in the areas of their respective individual optical strengths.

 

If you're considering one or the other, you'll not rest until you own both and are able to experience the sense of fulfillment they bring to your work.

 

respectfully,

 

JZG

[John Z. Goriup]

Please allow me to correct an error in the above post - it was an M3 I received.

 

JZG