Jump to content

50mm Summicron: Rigid vs V5

TRIago

By TRIago
in Leica M Lenses

 Share

Recommended Posts

TRIago

TRIago

Posted
Posted

Advertisement (gone after registration)

So, I was just playing around with my two 50's. These are just quick tests and I will upload more later on.

 

Rigid @ F2:

50mm_Cron_Rigid_01.jpg

 

V5 @ F2:

50mm_Cron_V5_01.jpg

 

Rigid @ F4:

50mm_Cron_Rigid_02.jpg

 

V5 @ F4:

50mm_Cron_V5_02.jpg

 

Rigid @ F8:

50mm_Cron_Rigid_03.jpg

 

V5 @ F8:

50mm_Cron_V5_03.jpg

 

 

To my eyes, the Rigid is sharper wide open in the center. While the V5 does a better job on the edges.

The Rigid is just amazing.

 

I'm no pro in doing comparisons, I just kept all the same settings in the camera (M9), tripod and cable release.

These are raw converted to Jpgs with zero post in Lightroom.

 

Will post more later.

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
rpittal

rpittal

Posted
Posted

All I see is vignetting from Rigid even at f8.  

 

I always liked a touch of vignetting; I suppose from the old days under an enlarger when blocking corners with a waving card was standard practice. However, it has its place and not appropriate for all pics (I especially like even soft tones with no vignetting, while harsher light seems to go better with darker corners).

Regards,

Bob

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Ko.Fe.

Ko.Fe.

Posted
Posted

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I always liked a touch of vignetting; I suppose from the old days under an enlarger when blocking corners with a waving card was standard practice. However, it has its place and not appropriate for all pics (I especially like even soft tones with no vignetting, while harsher light seems to go better with darker corners).

Regards,

Bob

I still print under enlarger, BTW. :)  Just yesterday.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
TRIago

TRIago

Posted
  • Author
Posted

This is the ugliest city I have ever seen. Your pictures are ok though. Where is it?

São Paulo. Not pretty but full of life, that is for sure. Pics are just for the sake of testing. But thanks, tho.
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4X5B&W

4X5B&W

Posted
Posted (edited)

What amazes me is the amount of lens flare (at all of the tested apertures) of the V5, from the moon in the first series.

 

The Rigid has much less flare.....kinda surprising given the more up to date coatings of the V5.

 

Re-purchased a Rigid recently to go with my MM1 Monochrom, an excellent combination!

As you can see demonstrated in these images, the lower contrast of the rigid works better for the tonal range of B&W. 

Edited by 4X5B&W
  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
TRIago

TRIago

Posted
  • Author
Posted

What amazes me is the amount of lens flare (at all of the tested apertures) of the V5, from the moon in the first series.

 

The Rigid has much less flare.....kinda surprising given the more up to date coatings of the V5.

 

Re-purchased a Rigid recently to go with my MM1 Monochrom, an excellent combination!

As you can see demonstrated in these images, the lower contrast of the rigid works better for the tonal range of B&W.

I love the low contrast even for color. Rigid <3

Link to post
Share on other sites
bocaburger

bocaburger

Posted
Posted (edited)

What amazes me is the amount of lens flare (at all of the tested apertures) of the V5, from the moon in the first series.

 

The Rigid has much less flare.....kinda surprising given the more up to date coatings of the V5.

 

 

I had the same amazement.  Especially since my v4 doesn't do that, and although it's the same optical formula as a v5, the coatings are from a decade earlier.  And I always have a B+W MRC UVa filter on it to boot.  I was thinking it might be the v5's short little pull-out hood vs the larger clip-on hood of the earlier lenses, but the moon is in the frame not outside it, so seems like the hood wouldn't make any difference.  Typically flare is the big issue with the rigid and collapsible, due to cleaning marks in the soft coating used in those days. 

Edited by bocaburger
Link to post
Share on other sites
semi-ambivalent

semi-ambivalent

Posted
Posted

I had the same amazement.  Especially since my v4 doesn't do that, and although it's the same optical formula as a v5, the coatings are from a decade earlier.  And I always have a B+W MRC UVa filter on it to boot.  I was thinking it might be the v5's short little pull-out hood vs the larger clip-on hood of the earlier lenses, but the moon is in the frame not outside it, so seems like the hood wouldn't make any difference.  Typically flare is the big issue with the rigid and collapsible, due to cleaning marks in the soft coating used in those days. 

Why nobody mentions the clouds in front of the moon in the V5 images? Uncontrolled variable. Better just to take pictures.

 

s-a

Link to post
Share on other sites
semi-ambivalent

semi-ambivalent

Posted
Posted

They were both taken with no hood, again for the sake of testing only.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

A hood would have had no effect on the clouds. The clouds, on the other hand, have a veiling, flaring effect on the light passing through them. That is why I mentioned them, not as a visual element but an optical one. They're both superlative lenses for the needs of most.

 

s-a

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...