Acekerman Posted August 20, 2015 Share #1  Posted August 20, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) I currently have a 50 Summicron V and have toyed with the idea on getting the new 50 Summarit 2.4 instead. Some prefer it to the Summicron for Digital work. Any thoughts or folks who have both? Need advice. I shoot mostly 50mm on a Monochrom. I have also toyed with the idea of getting an M240 and 50 summarit in place of the monochrome and 50 Summicron. Help.  Cheers Brian   Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted August 20, 2015 Posted August 20, 2015 Hi Acekerman, Take a look here New Leica 50mm Summarit 2.4 vs 50mm Summicron V. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
james.liam Posted August 20, 2015 Share #2  Posted August 20, 2015 Stick with the MM and go for the 50 Summilux. Or go for a 50 Rigid. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herr Barnack Posted August 20, 2015 Share #3  Posted August 20, 2015 I would spend the extra money and get the Summilux 50 ASPH if doing so were at all possible. Otherwise just use the 50 Summicron that you already own. JMHO, though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomB_tx Posted August 20, 2015 Share #4 Â Posted August 20, 2015 I found the Summicron V an improvement over the v3 I'd used for 40 years, but now I use the 2.5 Summarit more. I have both the 35 and 50 and prefer their size and handling, and the IQ is very nice. I prefer small lenses, and although the differences in sizes between the Summarits, Summicrons, and Summiluxs may seem insignificant to most, I find quite a tactile difference. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bocaburger Posted August 20, 2015 Share #5  Posted August 20, 2015 I currently have a 50 Summicron V and have toyed with the idea on getting the new 50 Summarit 2.4 instead. Some prefer it to the Summicron for Digital work. Any thoughts or folks who have both? Need advice. I shoot mostly 50mm on a Monochrom. I have also toyed with the idea of getting an M240 and 50 summarit in place of the monochrome and 50 Summicron. Help.  Cheers Brian Might help if you said what things about your current kit are you looking to improve. For example, are you wanting to shoot color? If so then I can see where replacing the Monochrom with an M240 would offer a real-world advantage. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wpm Posted August 20, 2015 Share #6 Â Posted August 20, 2015 Tom, in what way do you think the V.5 is an improvement over the v3? Also, what do you see in the Summarit 2.5? I have the v3 and the Summarit and can see the obvious difference between the two. I'm playing with the 50 AA at the moment, which blows them both out of the water but wonder if it isn't overkill in terms of average use. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomB_tx Posted August 20, 2015 Share #7 Â Posted August 20, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) Tom, in what way do you think the V.5 is an improvement over the v3? Also, what do you see in the Summarit 2.5? I have the v3 and the Summarit and can see the obvious difference between the two. I'm playing with the 50 AA at the moment, which blows them both out of the water but wonder if it isn't overkill in terms of average use. My v5 (or v4 as many call it by optical formula) has more contrast in fine detail at large apertures, so the images have a bit more "snap." Not that the v3 is bad - I was happy with it for 40 years! Some of the difference could be a tiny bit of internal haze in my v3, which hasn't had a CLA since I bought it in 1968. (I've cleaned and relubed the focus mount, but never the internal optics.) I find the Summarit very close to the v5 in images, and a good match to my 35 Summarit in handling and image. I think it has less tendency for veiling flare - but it could be that the hood is more effective. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tobey bilek Posted August 21, 2015 Share #8  Posted August 21, 2015 Tested the 50 `lux and the 50 cron current for bokeh.   both lenses at F2, same subject,time, place.   The Lux bokeh is unquestionably better.  Also sharper at 1.4,  2,  and perhaps 2.8.  If you are not a bokeh fan,  you will be pleased with any 50 Cron after 1979.    Even my old Rigid furnished outstanding  images, although at wide stops it is not sharp across the whole field like the newest.  I have had it since 1985 and is mint condition.  Can on a M2R.  If you do not care about 2.0,  the 2.8 Elmar collapsible recently discontinued,  makes wonderful images.   It has the modern rendering sharpness.  Summarit are are a good buy for the Leica money,  but they are not Summicrons,  but close enough that all but the most discerning eye will be pleased. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted August 21, 2015 Share #9 Â Posted August 21, 2015 Matter of tastes i guess. I read here and there than the 50/1.4 asph's bokeh is smooth... It is true at f/1.4 but not around f/2.8 where i find it so sharp that i ordered a 50/2 apo for this main reason. Now to answer the OP's question, from f/4 to f/16 i see little difference between 50/2 v5 and 50/2.5 (no experience with 50/2.4) but the 50/2 has a bit more focus shift around f/4-f/5.6. Nothing terrible though, you won't notice it on 3D subjects unless you spend your time shooting brick walls and rulers. From f/2.5 to f/4, the 50/2.5 is sharper in borders and corners and both lenses are sharp in the center. All in all the 50/2.5 has a bit less flare and less CA and is both smaller and lighter so if you don't need f/2, the Summarit is the way to go. Beware that it has a 0.8m minimum focus distance vs 0.7 for the 50/2 though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdlaing Posted August 21, 2015 Share #10 Â Posted August 21, 2015 I would only differ in saying 5.6 to 16. Agree on all the rest. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.