50mm Summilux vs Summicron

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I've not mastered highlight recovery either; dunno if it's possible.

Nature and landscape are usually a long way off so he's not talking about close focusing. I'm the wrong person to talk about sharpness.

Some folk can cope with the EC dial on the M 240 being always live but I find I roll it when picking the camera up. Hence my use is as Rockwell says, front button held in while rolling EC.

Why would one even want to recover "extreme highlights"? In digital highlights that must be detailed should be exposed correctly - like on slide film. If he gets muddy results the problem is not with the camera but with the exposure and postprocessing technique. With all digital cameras the highlights are a brick wall exposurewise. Dynamic range extends into the shadows. So: expose correctly for your relevant highlights and recover shadows as needed. Something apparently unknown to Mr. Rockwell.

[TRIago]

I have the Rigid Cron and compared it to the Lux Asph. Much prefer the Cron.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Jeff S]

 It makes it easier to retrieve the posts in search engines too.)

 

Wishful thinking....or we wouldn't need 20 threads on the Summilux vs Summicron(s).  

 

Jeff

[Per P.]

I'm with Jaap on his choice for First Three. But I do agree the 50 Summicron is incredibly classic. I made some lovely photos with mine.

[Lord Lucan]

Do not ever listen to ken Rockwell. I doubt that he even knows how to turn on a camera.

I think thats too much. Google proves his popularity,that if you search popular lens--ie Leica,Zeiss etc.His site usually comes up among top 5 and sometimes at the very top.

[Universalb50]

..all joking about Rockwell aside, is it true that the Summicron is "sharper" than the Summilux, or perhaps more relevant, sharper at f2.0?..

[lct]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

..all joking about Rockwell aside, is it true that the Summicron is "sharper" than the Summilux, or perhaps more relevant, sharper at f2.0?..

 

I can only confirm my post #7 above as an amateur user of 50/2 v4 since 1981, 50/2 v5 since 2012 and 50/1.4 asph since 2005.

[NB23]

I like my 50 summer luck asph bp as much as my summer luck V1. I was always a summer luck guy. But then I purchased a summer crown 50 bp that came with the Classic MP set. Wow! I haven't touched my Summer luck lenses since then. Been over a year.

Edited December 26, 2016 by NB23

[Stealth3kpl]

I like my 50 summer luck asph bp as much as my summer luck V1. I was always a summer luck guy. But then I purchased a summer crown 50 bp that came with the Classic MP set. Wow! I haven't touched my Summer luck lenses since then. Been over a year.

Which version 50 Summicron would your BP Summicron be equivalent to?

Pete

[bocaburger]

If I shot landscapes or detailed planar subjects like wall mosaics at maximum aperture, the corner performance of the Summilux ASPH and Summicron APO would be a mitigating factor for me.  As it is however, my priorites are weight, size, and reasonable cost for both purchase and insurance.  I have an older Summilux which I use on specific occasions when I feel the extra stop will be used extensively.  On those occasions, high micro contrast and ultimate corner sharpness are not essential to those types of shots.   Otherwise I use a 11819 Summicron, which has the same optics as the V5 but is lighter and smaller and focuses quicker due to the tab.   I have owned several other versions of the Summicron, and frankly there isn't a bad one in the bunch. 

[NB23]

Which version 50 Summicron would your BP Summicron be equivalent to?

Pete

That's a question I've always asked myself ever since it came out.

 

By its marketing year it should be a version 5(I think) but it looks like a version 4 body.

 

I'd like to know the definitive answer!

[aristotle]

I'm new to the forum, so please forgive a question that may have been asked a bunch before...

 

But stopped down, is it really being suggested that the Summilux is going to be noticeably less "sharp" than the Summicron in any real-world situation?

 

I can buy that the Summilux might suffer in the corners in comparison at f2, but at f2, it's not likely that anything in the corners will be in focus anyway.    Maybe I'm compositionally challenged, but I can't think of many occasions where I'm putting the subject in one of the corners at f2, and even if I did, any lack of sharpness would be much more likely caused by a small focus error than by some lens limitation.

 

As stated above, the decision would be all about the extra stop for me. 

Edited December 26, 2016 by aristotle

[Stealth3kpl]

 

 

But stopped down, is it really being suggested that the Summilux is going to be noticeably less "sharp" than the Summicron in any real-world situation?

 

 

I wouldn't think so.

Pete

[Ando]

http://www.photozone.de/leicam/678-summicron50

 

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2416453,00.asp

 

http://uk.pcmag.com/lenses/73006/guide/the-best-leica-m-lenses-of-2015

Edited December 26, 2016 by A. W.

[jaapv]

I'm new to the forum, so please forgive a question that may have been asked a bunch before...

 

But stopped down, is it really being suggested that the Summilux is going to be noticeably less "sharp" than the Summicron in any real-world situation?

 

No. This is an angels-on-a-pin type argument. Which does not prevent it from being trotted out and discussed -vehemently- regularly. That is just in the nature of a Leica forum.

[aristotle]

No. This is an angels-on-a-pin type argument. Which does not prevent it from being trotted out and discussed -vehemently- regularly. That is just in the nature of a Leica forum.

Gotcha!  Sounds like a fun place to hang around anyway. 

 

In full disclosure, I actually like my cheapy Voigtlander 35 f1.4, so I admittedly don't have "sharpness" as my top priority.  It's just that sharpness is typically limited by me, and not my lenses.  Character on the other hand is a different story.  I love the character of my Leica 35mm Summicron (beats the Voigtlander hands-down for me, and I can tell in an instant which photo was taken by which.)  Be that as it may,  better lenses push me to have better technique, so I suppose it isn't entirely lost on me.

[01af]

... the Summilux-M 50 mm Asph is often called "the best fast 50 in the world".

 

The M system's Summicron 50 mm  used to be the reference among the 35-mm-format standard lenses for decades. The Summarit and later the Summilux were faster, but the Summicron was better ... until the Summilux-M 50 mm Asph came along. Unlike its predecessors, it was not just faster but faster and better—the new reference 50 mm lens. Until the Apo-Summicron-M 50 mm Asph came along which restored the previous situation: Summilux is faster; Apo-Summicron is better.

 

But then, one thing being 'better' doesn't mean the other thing was bad. It's more like a choice between best, bester, and bestest; the differences between them are a playground for hobbyist lens testers but hardly significant for actual photographers. Well, umm ... with the possible exception of the Apo-Summicron-M 50 mm Asph. This one really is an outstanding lens even by Leica standards, and it shows not only in shots of test charts or brick walls but in actual photography as well.

 

But then, it's awfully expensive. If it is out of the budget then don't worry too much about Summicron or Summilux. Both are fine, and their differences in performance are insignificant. The Summilux is just one stop faster, slightly heavier, and costs more accordingly. That's it, basically.

 

There's only one thing I don't like about the Summicron-M 50 mm: its inclination to flare. That's why I'd avoid this one; I'd rather choose between flare-resistant Summarit-M 50 mm and fast Summilux-M 50 mm Asph and leave the Summicron out of consideration.

[tpf1952]

For me, Summilux over Summicron. Started with the latter, stayed with the former. Rationale: Sometimes that extra f-stop is vital just for light gathering. Also, the OOF (or bokeh) on the Summilux is quite fetching. Then there's the focus tab: I just can't live without it. (Tried the rubber TAAB thing.) The difference in size and weight between the two lenses just isn't an issue for me. Finally, the Summilux lens shade locks in place. It's a little thing, but it counts too.

[russell]

I've owned 1 summar, 2 elmars, 4 crons, 2 luxes and 1 noct.  Most of those for over a decade.  If you're shooting on a digital M, I would say the lens to chose is the one that nails the focus most consistently.  Lens and body can be slightly out of sync.  Also you have to decide if focus shift when stopping down is an issue for you and your style of focusing.

Once you find a pair that work well together, then stick with it.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Lord Lucan]

The M system's Summicron 50 mm  used to be the reference among the 35-mm-format standard lenses for decades. ....

The British Amateur Photographer magazine's bench mark reference lens was Contax CY 50 f1.7.

Does anybody recall late Dr Bell?