On a 50mm budget: Cron-Rigid // Cron-DR // Lux-Type 2

[howlback]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

New owner of a Leica M3... Looking for some advice for my first lens

 

What I know:

-Dual Range (paired w/ goggles) has the best minimum focus distance

-Summicrons are cheaper

 

What I've been told:

-Summicrons are extremely sharp

-Summilux has a very distinct bokeh

 

Looking for facts

Looking for opinions

 

Thanks!

 

-Howlback

[Advertisement]

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

[howlback]

And I am on a budget

[earleygallery]

The dual range Summicron does indeed focus more closely than standard lenses, and should come with a pair of goggles which are necessary to work in the close focus range. Without the goggles it works as any other lens.

 

If you are on a budget a Summicron will generally be less expensive than a Summilux, but I would put overall condition above anything else when buying used, i.e. a nice clean Summicron will be better than a hazy scratched Summilux.

 

However you should also consider other options - the Elmar collapsible lenses, or alternatives from Voigtlander and Zeiss for example.

[spydrxx]

Bigger question....what do you photograph and what are your particular needs. 50mm may not be the best choice for you. When I got my first Leica I found that 35mm was a much more useful focal length for most of my needs - which lasted for over 5 years before I bothered with a 50. And yes, I had a month in advance of my initial purchase to experiment with 4 different Leica focal lengths, under the tutelidge of a former Leica salesman. Lux lenses were usually too big and heavy for my tastes, and after owning several of them, I still consider them as specialty lenses, not exactly 2nd class citizens, but really having a place in certain available light situations. OTOH, Crons seemed to often much better fit the bill for somebody who was often traveling and wanted something lighter and more discreet.  If none of this matters to you, and you have the cash to burn...get a Lux and don't look back.

[oldwino]

Being on a budget implies buying just one lens.

The Summicron is nice, but honestly, for the same money you could buy a zeiss 50 planar, which has better coatings and may even be sharper.

The DR is great, but heavy. If you are going to go heavy, then you might as well get a Summilux.

The Summilux is usuable in a wide range of lighting conditions, and stopped down a bit, it's as sharp as a 'cron.

 

I tried out both a version 1 Summilux and a version 2. I ended up keeping the version 1, as the rendering was beautiful at wide apertures, and the thing is tack sharp at f8. And doesn't have all the distortion of the version 2.

 

I pretty much exclusively use the Summilux now as my 50mm.

[pop]

Is there a particular reason for restricting yourself to the Summicrons and Summilux? When running on a budget, I would have a very long and good look at the Summarit (particularly the 1:2.5 one). It's quite sharp, reasonably fast and quite flare resistant.

[Ko.Fe.]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I tried Collapsible Cron on M4-2, Rigid and on V4 now on M3. It depends what you want. BW or color. Collapsible was best for me on BW, Rigid is amazing on color. 

 

You are not going to find Lux if you are on the budget. Even worn out version one (which has less distortions and slightly heavier comparing to v2) is hard to find for 1K$.. And you will get same swirl in bokeh on large appertures as 9$ FSU lens will give you. But on f5.6-8 Lux is outstanding from all of the 50mm lenses for portraits and candid on middle distances.  

 

Honestly, if on the budget, new Planar ZM in white with OEM hood is safest bet and it has less focus shift as Leica Crons, it is sharp and bokeh is neutral. The only awkward part it has is long and harsh travel of aperture ring. But chrome version was nice on M3. If it has to me Leica, then, IMO, Rigid is next lens if one the budget, if you want BW and color. But be aware what old LTM Leitz and old M lenses are not so easy to find in good optical condition.

 

Personally, I don't recommend old LTM lenses, they have too long focus throw and on M they are often with focus tab all way up to the VF window on one meter focus position. It was not something pleasing to operate, IMO. 

 

Oh! Elmar-M 50 2.8, if you don't mind f2.8 and no focus tab, is outstanding modern lens with classic character.

[howlback]

Minimum focus distance is a concern, hence my curiosity about the DR. Had Lecia reseller give me the scoop on his M3/50 Lux set up but it's far more expensive. I like to get close to a subject and throw the background out as much as possible. Before this I was shooting an old Pentax 50 with a minimum focus distance of .5m. The Zeiss Planar looks to be a contender as it gets as close as .7m without costing what a type 3, 4 or 5 Cron or Lux does. As long as it performs and doesn't depreciate, I'm all ears.

[Tailwagger]

One possibly interesting, generally overlooked and far less expensive alternative to the Summilux is the Summarit-M 1.5, though it might take some effort to find a good example.  I was fortunate enough to pick up a truly excellent, CLA'd, example manufactured in 1959 for around $750. Stopped down it is surprisingly competent, wide open it is certainly soft by modern standards, but  OTOH has the ability to produce rather unusual bokeh best described as resembling impressionist brush strokes. Built like a tank and though compact, a bit hefty.  I cant speak to its use in a film context, but in a digital one, it has a gentler rendition, somewhat lower contrast which IMO can produce rather ethereal results.  Color rendition is equally gentle with a more pastel or watercolor sort of character.  It's no razor blade, more poetry than prose, so to speak. As such its certainly not a universal lens for everyone, but, as others have mentioned, much depends on what sort of characteristics you're looking for.   Of course, if one does go this way or with some of the others mentioned, when dealing with a lens over half a century old, its wise to buy the cleanest example possible over the cheapest. 

[farnz]

... 50mm may not be the best choice for you. When I got my first Leica I found that 35mm was a much more useful focal length for most of my needs - ...

Bear in mind that the OP has bought a M3 so using a 35 mm lens would mean using an external viewfinder.

 

 

Howlback, I agree with James above, the (collapsible) 50/3.5 Elmar is an excellent little lens and can be found very inexpensively so is ideal for a small budget.  Also consider a collapsible 50/2 Summicron, and a late-model 50/2.8 Elmar-M (the early version is quite low contrast).

 

Pete.

[TomB_tx]

I agree with most of the advice so far. The M3 is at its best with 50 & 90 lenses. I got a "goggled" 35 Summicron for mine, but much prefer an M2 with plain 35 for that focal length. I have most versions of 50 Summicron (except the latest ASPH), and also have a Planar ZM, which I highly recommend, budget or not. In some lighting conditions it is better, with less tendency to flare.

I also have a soft spot for the 50 Elmar lenses from the 50s & 60s, as the 2.8 was the first Leica lens I used, but I'd still say go with a Planar.

[TRIago]

Get the best. Get the Rigid/DR.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[farnz]

Get the best. Get the Rigid/DR.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

The best?  What's that exactly? The smallest?  The lightest?  The sharpest?  With the most contrast?  With the least contrast?  The least expensive?  Your favourite?  The 'glowiest'? The shortest focus pull?  etc ... 

 

Pete.

[pippy]

Hi and welcome.

 

It mostly comes down to your intended budget.

If you have a desire to buy low-ish cost and 'Leica' then I'd second the options of a collapsible f2.8 Elmar or, for a bit more, a '79-'94 Summicron.

 

The Elmar is a great lens very much in the vein of Barnack's original ethos. It's small; light; sharp enough (in real-world terms) wide-open and is very sharp from c. f5.6 down. It can be had for very little money (in Leica terms).

IIRC the '79-'94 Summicron optics weren't updated until 2013 so were clearly considered to be more than adequate for the job. It is slightly out-of-fashion body-style wise nowadays and so good examples can be found for very reasonable asking prices compared to the later version.

 

Going non-Leica has been covered above and is possibly a more sensible route.

 

I'm not sure if links to third-party sites is within the rules and the author of these reviews tends to polarise opinion (and that's an understatement) but assuming you have not yet read these, if you are new to these lenses and - importantly(!) can take his egoism and sense of humour they make for quite interesting reading;

 

Elmar;

http://www.kenrockwell.com/leica/50mm-f28.htm#perf

 

Summicron;

http://www.kenrockwell.com/leica/50mm-f2-m.htm

 

Good Luck in the hunt!

 

Pip.

[UliWer]

Minimum focus distance is a concern, hence my curiosity about the DR. Had Lecia reseller give me the scoop on his M3/50 Lux set up but it's far more expensive. I like to get close to a subject and throw the background out as much as possible. Before this I was shooting an old Pentax 50 with a minimum focus distance of .5m. The Zeiss Planar looks to be a contender as it gets as close as .7m without costing what a type 3, 4 or 5 Cron or Lux does. As long as it performs and doesn't depreciate, I'm all ears.

Wasn't it an M3 you wanted to use the lens for?

 

The rangefinder of the M3 doesn't support focussing closer than 1m - even if the lens goes down to 0.7m. Only the Dual-Range Summicron with ist goggles allows you to use the rangefinder for closer distances.   

[farnz]

Minimum focus distance is a concern, hence my curiosity about the DR. Had Lecia reseller give me the scoop on his M3/50 Lux set up but it's far more expensive. I like to get close to a subject and throw the background out as much as possible. Before this I was shooting an old Pentax 50 with a minimum focus distance of .5m. The Zeiss Planar looks to be a contender as it gets as close as .7m without costing what a type 3, 4 or 5 Cron or Lux does. As long as it performs and doesn't depreciate, I'm all ears.

 

A Visoflex II or III with appropriate adaptors will let you get closer than the 50/2 Dual-Range Summicron or the 90/4 Macro-Elmar-M.  Used with the Bellows II the Visoflex will offer full macrophotography too.

 

Pete.

[howlback]

Wasn't it an M3 you wanted to use the lens for?

 

The rangefinder of the M3 doesn't support focussing closer than 1m - even if the lens goes down to 0.7m. Only the Dual-Range Summicron with ist goggles allows you to use the rangefinder for closer distances.   

 

 

Zing! This is exactly why I posted here. If the M3's rangefinder won't be able to take advantage of the .7m minimum focus distance on it's own than my gut is leaning me toward the DR w/ goggles. From what I gather, there are gadgets to help with the issue (i.e. visoflex) but I don't want to get too crazy just get. I just want to keep it simple and have the ability to snap a close up shot every now and then.

 

That being said, it sounds like I'll have to save up and shell out for a DR in good condition... which might be grounds for a new thread about how to go about buying older glass and what watch out for. Also, buying one with matching goggles seems to be a word of warning on these forums. Can anyone guide me through how to ensure I'm getting a matched pair?

[enboe]

FWIW, you may wish to look at a Gen-3 Summicron from the 60's and early 70's.  They can be had for around $700.  For around $500, a vintage 50/2.8 would be a good choice, and very compact.  The new-style version of the 50/2.8 is around $800 on the used market.

 

Eric

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[RayD28]

Zing! This is exactly why I posted here. If the M3's rangefinder won't be able to take advantage of the .7m minimum focus distance on it's own than my gut is leaning me toward the DR w/ goggles. From what I gather, there are gadgets to help with the issue (i.e. visoflex) but I don't want to get too crazy just get. I just want to keep it simple and have the ability to snap a close up shot every now and then.

 

That being said, it sounds like I'll have to save up and shell out for a DR in good condition... which might be grounds for a new thread about how to go about buying older glass and what watch out for. Also, buying one with matching goggles seems to be a word of warning on these forums. Can anyone guide me through how to ensure I'm getting a matched pair?

 

Lots of good info here.  I'll add that the DR is not suitable for digital except in very restricted circumstances.  If you get the DR and later get a digital Leica you will need a different lens.  I learned this when I decided to get a digital M and I wished I'd known it sooner.  I still have the DR and occasionally think about trading it for something digital-friendly.  Good luck in your search.

 

Ray

[Ko.Fe.]

My M3 DS ELC RF arm stops following slightly before 0.8m with 50 Cron v4.