Summicron 50mm f2 Type 5 Sharpness

[Jon Warwick]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Thanks everyone for your comments.

 

If I decide to get my v5 checked by Leica, what is the process and typical charge for the “initial check” (ie, to get to the stage of them saying “it’s within specs”’ vs “no it needs a repair in Wetzlar”).

 

I’m in the UK with easy access to Leica Mayfair if that makes any difference?

[jrp]

They’ll look at it in Mayfair, no charge, and then advise you on whether it should be sent away.

[Advertisement]

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

[Jon Warwick]

You know there is a reason some guy didn't just pluck it out of the air when he said the path to success is 'f/8 and be there'.

 

 

I ran a whole series of tripod-mounted shots across all apertures today, comparing my two M 50mm lenses (the v5 Summicron and APO Summicron).

 

Your comment about f/8 is about right here ! .....it's only around there that the v5 Summicron is fully sharp at the sides, on my copy at least. It seems to have some highly abrupt field curvature.

That is fine for many shots (people, street scenes etc, ie, arguably creating a feeling of 3D'ness) ....but clearly means a lot of stopping down for landscapes to get the sides fully sharp too.

 

The 50 APO Summicron is very different in that respect, ie, very flat field across all apertures, with minimal stopping down to get the edges sharp at infinity. A straightforward lens for landscapes on the M!

 

In the middle, when critically looking at them both, I'd say the v5 and 50 APO are near identical sharpness on the M240. Maybe 24mp is insufficient to see any real difference?

 

I have to say though .....now that i've tried the SL 75mm Summicron on the SL, the whole of the M series lenses (even the 50 APO) don't seem to be in quite the same league anymore....the SL Summicrons are so so detailed, and yet gentle at the same time. Super high resolution, but not fakely sharp - instead, they render in an non-abrupt, somewhat "cinematic" way (for want of a better expression). Really beautiful rendering, in short.

 

Whilst M lenses are great image quality especially when you consider their very small size, maybe there’s something to be said for larger lenses when it comes to “ultimate” image quality?

Edited August 25, 2018 by Jon Warwick

[adan]

No idea why it was labeled as entry lens here. Elmarit-M 50 2.8 and Summarit-M 50 2.5(4) should ring the bell.  

 

Um, because some of us have a knowledge of history?

 

Between 1966 and 1994 - 28 years - there were no new 50 f/2.8 lenses. The entry-level (least expensive) lens for that whole 28-year span was the 50 Summicron. And just like an 18-56 zoom, it was the lens one could get in a kit at a discount, when one "entered" the M system.

 

The current 50mm Summicron was designed right in the middle of that era, with that purpose in mind.

[adan]

Whilst M lenses are great image quality especially when you consider their very small size, maybe there’s something to be said for larger lenses when it comes to “ultimate” image quality?

 

In general, yes. First, because removing size as a constraint allows the lens designer to do "whatever is necessary" to get the best quality. See, for example, the Contax Zeiss 21mm Distagon f/2.8, which is so large that one can serve tea cakes on it (82mm filter thread). And longer than many 90-105 lenses. But is arguably the best 21 f/2.8 ever made, especially given its age.

 

https://sunrise-camera.com/product/contax-carl-zeiss-t-distagon-21mm-f2-8-mmj/

 

And second, on digital sensors (at least thus far in their development), long, "telecentric" lenses that project light virtually vertically onto the silicon (light rays nearly parallel), will also improve corner sharpness. E.G. the long tubular SL lenses.

 

M lenses are "as good as possible" - within the constraints of 1) not blocking the window viewfinder, and 2) balancing well on the small bodies. ("small camera, small lens.")

 

Since the arrival of Leica M live-view/EVFs (only 6 years ago), Leica now has more leeway to design behemoths like the 75 Noctilux.

[TomB_tx]

Um, because some of us have a knowledge of history?

 

Between 1966 and 1994 - 28 years - there were no new 50 f/2.8 lenses. The entry-level (least expensive) lens for that whole 28-year span was the 50 Summicron. And just like an 18-56 zoom, it was the lens one could get in a kit at a discount, when one "entered" the M system.

 

The current 50mm Summicron was designed right in the middle of that era, with that purpose in mind.

Point taken on the gap in years, but the 50 2.8 Elmar was in the catalog into 1972, and serial numbers were still being assigned in 1971; but there is still a long gap.

However, I would suggest that Leica simply did not offer an “entry level” lens during those years, and many of us chose the Summicron over the Summilux for performance and size rather than price.

Entry level buyers bought other brands of cameras.

[lct]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Summicrons 50 have been the least expensive Leica lenses from the seventies to the nineties in the M line but remained so to the end of the R line if memory serves, hence the feeling that the Leica entry was there and that the Elmar-M 50/2.8 was somewhat a special lens that we (at least i) chose for its size and/or Tessar-like character that some of us were fond of. YMMV.

[Ko.Fe.]

Between 1966 and 1994 - 28 years - there were no new 50 f/2.8 lenses.

"Nobody is perfect."

They say between 1974 and 1994.

[13ets]

Hey guys, 

 

Sorry I havent followed up or thanked all of you for your inputs, I've been really busy this past week but I've come to realize the problem is with the lens. Initially the photos I sent were from an A6000 with an adapter so i decided to see if the image quality/sharpness would get better when i switched to the m9, sadly it didnt. Compared it as well to a 35 Lux @ f2 and the lux was sharper which I think shouldnt be the case. Decided to send the cron in, could be deviation or the need to calibrate. Hoping I get it back soon, was really excited to start shooting with it 

 

Anyway I see this post has taken off, im learning so much. Gonna continue reading up on M lenses 

 

Cheers 

[13ets]

For reference as well, I went out and took a few more shots with the m9 and cron and still got that ghost image or motion blur so really think the lens needs calibration or i dont know what term is used when the images come off that way 

 

I attached a pic again zoomed in 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Edited August 26, 2018 by 13ets

[sblutter]

For reference as well, I went out and took a few more shots with the m9 and cron and still got that ghost image or motion blur so really think the lens needs calibration or i dont know what term is used when the images come off that way 

 

I attached a pic again zoomed in 

There is something seriously off with the lens, the body or your technique

 

I'd try again on a tripod but not at the closest distance possible.  That said, I've been shooting 50 2.0 Summi's for yrs.  The older models don't perform as well with flat digital sensors as I recall they did on film.  Moving to digital my 2 Ver 4's are fantastic as close as possible (focusing with my body) - as is true both both my 2.8 Elmar-M's.  I shoot for print, have 4x6' (feet) prints from the newer lenses that are tack sharp.

 

If nothing improves your results, have a pro repair person look at the kit.

[lexontario]

here is 2 pics taken with MP 240. one with Summicron V5 @F2 the other with APO @ F2. 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

[bocaburger]

I got a IV (lighter, tabbed version with same optical cell as V) and found it was not anywhere near as sharp as my collapsible LTM+M adapter, so I felt something must be off.   Sent it off, got it back, sharp as a tack now.  Properly calibrated, the IV/V is a spectacular lens.  For the money, IMO a huge bargain when compared to the APO. 

[TomB_tx]

Sean Reid's site has an older test comparing a V5 to the APO, and is worth reading. 

[Jon Warwick]

Final question on the Summicron 50mm v5 ....just how often do you find it flares?  

 

My version seems to have a frequent "veiling flare"  ....sometimes it's subtle, but it's there in around 50% of my images, even in heavy cloud.  It is best described as a lower contrast patch (as though a small veil of fog is there), located in a broad circle shape just above the mid-point of the image.

 

I've cleaned the lens REALLY well to ensure it's not caused by a veil of grease.

 

Any idea if this is normal on the v5, and if not - what could be causing it?

[Ko.Fe.]

Final question on the Summicron 50mm v5 ....just how often do you find it flares?  

 

My version seems to have a frequent "veiling flare"  ....sometimes it's subtle, but it's there in around 50% of my images, even in heavy cloud.  It is best described as a lower contrast patch (as though a small veil of fog is there), located in a broad circle shape just above the mid-point of the image.

 

I've cleaned the lens REALLY well to ensure it's not caused by a veil of grease.

 

Any idea if this is normal on the v5, and if not - what could be causing it?

Four and five are with same optics. I received my IV in mint in and out condition.

It has this veil, it is known, but I have it only of sun is into the lens.

I'm usually not into this and using hood all the time. I could recall only one time I saw it.

[pico]

In general, yes. First, because removing size [...]

 

Also consider the 10mm CV. It is a very large lens that out-performs longer WA lenses because it does no try to be compact. It delivers without compromise. Perhaps longer focal lenses could follow in kind.

Edited August 29, 2018 by pico

[bocaburger]

Final question on the Summicron 50mm v5 ....just how often do you find it flares?  

 

My version seems to have a frequent "veiling flare"  ....sometimes it's subtle, but it's there in around 50% of my images, even in heavy cloud.  It is best described as a lower contrast patch (as though a small veil of fog is there), located in a broad circle shape just above the mid-point of the image.

 

I've cleaned the lens REALLY well to ensure it's not caused by a veil of grease.

 

Any idea if this is normal on the v5, and if not - what could be causing it?

I had that issue occasionally when I had a V.  No issue with the IV although same optics.  And I keep a MRC UV filter on it always.  Just my speculation but I attribute it to the V's short pull-out hood, vs the longer vented clip-on hood of the IV. 

[TomB_tx]

I have had the central veil a few times with the light source somewhat out of the frame, but knowing that it can happen I also can avoid it. I agree the shallower V5 hood is likely a factor.

A couple times I've had similar flare with my 50 2.5 Summarit, which is supposed to be very flare resistant.

I have never seen a flare problem with my Planar ZM 50, which would be a solution if the occasional flare bothers you.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[semi-ambivalent]

I have never seen a flare problem with my Planar ZM 50

Is that with or without its (biggish) hood?

 

thx,

s-a