FrozenInTime Posted December 27, 2014 Share #41 Posted December 27, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) I'm on the lookout for a 50mm Elmar for those reasons as well. Just waiting for an ebay auction to finish in my favor I recently reacquainted myself with a 50mm Elmar-M for my M-A. It is one of the few lenses that is slim enough to allow the camera to be carried on a shoulder under a jacket - in the classic style. I'm really enjoying it - it's great for no bag walkabout. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted December 27, 2014 Posted December 27, 2014 Hi FrozenInTime, Take a look here The perfect 50 for film. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
coupdefoudre Posted January 3, 2015 Share #42 Posted January 3, 2015 Here's another way of determining which direction to go. Compare the results of flickr searches for 'summicron tri-x' and 'summilux tri-x'. https://www.flickr.com/search?text=summicron+tri-x https://www.flickr.com/search?text=summilux+tri-x Which set of photos generally appeals to you more? Thanks for posting these URLs. They make a very interesting comparison (especially as some of the same photographers are represented on both pages.) Makes me see, all over again, why I love the Summicron look! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
alun Posted January 5, 2015 Share #43 Posted January 5, 2015 Marc/Benqui (above) said that the collapsible 50mm Elmar is one of the most under-rated Leica lenses and I agree. The one I had was about five/six years old at the time, I think, and I bought it when they were astonishingly good value -- I think I paid about GBP 300.00 or 350.00 for it. I didn't use a 50mm lens all that much but I do remember once when reviewing large quantities of pictures that I was amazed how many of my favourites were taken with a 50mm and how many of these were the Elmar. Of course the extra stop offered by the more expensive Summicrons and Summiluxes is useful, but there is something about the rendition of the Elmar which, when coupled with its convenience and speed of use, is most alluring. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve_hoffman Posted January 5, 2015 Share #44 Posted January 5, 2015 Marc/Benqui (above) said that the collapsible 50mm Elmar is one of the most under-rated Leica lenses and I agree. The one I had was about five/six years old at the time, I think, and I bought it when they were astonishingly good value -- I think I paid about GBP 300.00 or 350.00 for it. I didn't use a 50mm lens all that much but I do remember once when reviewing large quantities of pictures that I was amazed how many of my favourites were taken with a 50mm and how many of these were the Elmar. Of course the extra stop offered by the more expensive Summicrons and Summiluxes is useful, but there is something about the rendition of the Elmar which, when coupled with its convenience and speed of use, is most alluring. 50mm Elmar was Dr. Paul Wolff's favorite lens (uncoated version, of course).. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
billo101 Posted January 5, 2015 Share #45 Posted January 5, 2015 DR. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paulus Posted January 10, 2015 Share #46 Posted January 10, 2015 I'm seriously considering the move from digital to film. I already know that I want a Leica M6 from the research I've done, but I'm unsure on which lens I should go for. I know that I want my first lens to be 50mm, but I don't know how useful the extra light gathering abilities of the Summilux will be, considering that film is more limited than digital with regards to how high you can push the ISO. How valuable is that extra stop of light in lower light conditions? As I do intend to shoot indoors as well as outdoors. Also, is the creamier Bokeh/rendering of the 'lux as apparent in film? I do like taking portraits so good Bokeh is something I do appreciate. Another thing I'd like to know is whether film can take full advantage of the sharpness of these lenses. Do the modern Leica lenses out resolve the capabilities of film? Any help will be much appreciated. I have a summicron M 50 for my film MP and a summiluxasph for my M240. Never use the 50 asph anymore on the film MP regardless of light. The summicron together with the MP just makes wonderful pictures!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herr Barnack Posted January 10, 2015 Share #47 Posted January 10, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) When you are using film in an M6, the speed of the Summilux becomes more of an issue than it is in the digital realm, particularly indoors and at night. That is something to give some thought to. Don't overlook the last non-ASPH version of the 50 Summilux. I have been shooting with this lens for 11+ years now on Tri-X and with my M240; I have seen no reason to spend the money to move up to the 50 Summilux ASPH. While the Summilux ASPH wins in close focusing situations thanks to the incorporation of the floating lens elements in the design, its older brother is no slouch of a lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joachim123 Posted January 10, 2015 Share #48 Posted January 10, 2015 I have the same lens and use it on my M9 and M3 a fantastic lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
asiafish Posted February 9, 2015 Share #49 Posted February 9, 2015 I alternate between a 50mm f/2 Summicron (latest v5 non-APO) and an uncoated 1937 Zeiss Sonnar 5cm f/1.5. The Summicron is just perfect, always. Sharp and contrasty in the center from f/2, and corner to corner from f/4. The Sonnar, on the other hand, is pure charm, with perfect imperfections. It somehow manages to make whoever it is pointed at better looking. I use the Summicron most of the time, but when I know I will be shooting mostly people I go for the Sonnar. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antonio Russell Posted February 9, 2015 Share #50 Posted February 9, 2015 Probably a bit late but I would say there is no such thing as a perfect 50. They are all good. Cartier Breton and Martine Frank between them owned and used the Collapsible Summicron, Noctilux 1.2 and current version 5 Summicron and they seem to have done OK as photographers :-) Not to mention all the other lenses CB used in the 30s, 40s and 50s that are no match for todays equipment. What I would say though is that at the end of the day it often comes down to size. The smaller is the better if you are out all day with a camera on your shoulder. But if you are a Sunday driver then take the Hasselblad! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve_hoffman Posted February 10, 2015 Share #51 Posted February 10, 2015 Perfect 50? 1935 Elmar 3.5. Makes you work harder. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThePioneer Posted February 12, 2015 Share #52 Posted February 12, 2015 Elmar M 50/2.8 (1st version) or Elmar M 50/3.5. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kivis Posted February 13, 2015 Share #53 Posted February 13, 2015 Going with the last "affordable" 'Cron. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jip Posted February 13, 2015 Share #54 Posted February 13, 2015 I love the Summilux-M 50mm ASPH. it's heavy but love it so much more than my Summicron-M 50mm (latest non apo) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
McGirton Posted February 17, 2015 Share #55 Posted February 17, 2015 50mm Summicron Rigid is the best lens for B&W film hands down. Honorable mention is the 50mm Summaron because it has a great classic look and a beautiful swirly bokeh if you like nice bokeh. New (ASPH) lenses might be sharper, but have no "soul" in my opinion. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeswe Posted February 17, 2015 Share #56 Posted February 17, 2015 Honorable mention is the 50mm Summaron because it has a great classic look and a beautiful swirly bokeh if you like nice bokeh.. I assume you are referring to the Summar, as there is no 50mm Summaron (only 35mm Summaron)? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
A miller Posted February 17, 2015 Share #57 Posted February 17, 2015 (only 35mm Summaron)? ...and a 28mm summaron Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paulus Posted February 18, 2015 Share #58 Posted February 18, 2015 I recently reacquainted myself with a 50mm Elmar-M for my M-A.It is one of the few lenses that is slim enough to allow the camera to be carried on a shoulder under a jacket - in the classic style. I'm really enjoying it - it's great for no bag walkabout. I have had an 50 coll Elmar about 10 years ago. Bought it for € 350 sold it for € 250,- Very nice little lens but it had some difficulties. For me it was difficult to focus acurately with the Elmar. With the summicron and the summilux, it's more easy. Also the aperturering is very small. At least for my hands. One other disadvantage was, that it collected sand and dust very easy on its tube. When I collapsed it, you could sometimes hear the grinding of some sandparticle between the tube and other lens parts. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
McGirton Posted February 18, 2015 Share #59 Posted February 18, 2015 I assume you are referring to the Summar, as there is no 50mm Summaron (only 35mm Summaron)? Actually I meant the 5cm Summitar Sorry about that. It's the lens with the most unique character I have ever used. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted February 18, 2015 Share #60 Posted February 18, 2015 Actually I meant the 5cm Summitar Sorry about that. It's the lens with the most unique character I have ever used. The Summitar came in various inconsistent forms. Earlier versions had an octagonal iris and were not coated. After WWII there were coated versions that still had the octagonal iris. For a brief time there were coated versions with round irises. Then they fell back into octagonal iris designs. I take it as evidence that Leica was struggling through its economic recovery It took me years to find a very clean version coated with a round iris. I prefer the OOF of that combination. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.