Jump to content
bags27

R 50 mm f/1.4 . Version 1 or 2?

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Looking at the lens as a relatively inexpensive portrait lens for the CL. The versions are quite different in weight: 

Version 1 takes an E 55 filter and is 14 ounces

Version 2 takes an E 60 filter and is 25 ounces;

they ended the 1 and began the 2 in 1998.

There is such a dramatic difference in weight (and more often than not, when Leica redid an R lens, the second try was lighter, not heavier). Does 2 have a built-in hood that 1 does not? Or is all the extra weight in the cams? Anyone know about any difference in IQ?

thanks in advance for all thoughts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
13 minutes ago, Leicaiste said:

thanks a lot. Makes sense. I got my info here, which must be wrong: https://www.apotelyt.com/photo-lens/leica-r-catalog

A litte digging revealed, yes, built-in lens shade, and an additional element.

Edited by bags27

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Leicaiste said:

You will find Erwin Puts’ review of the V2 compared to the V1 somewhere in the middle of this page :

http://photo.imx.nl//leica/lenses/page88.html

Thanks so very much. This is terrific. And here's Puts' summary of v. 2.

The new 1,4/50 Summilux-R defines the current state of the art of large aperture standard lenses. It outclasses the previous version of the 1.4/50 Summilux-R by a clear distance. It edges ahead of the current Summicon-R and improves upon the current Summilux-M 1.4/50. Nonscientific comparison pictures with the Summicron-M show comparable performance in most picture taking situations, however. The current Summicron-M is still the high speed standard lens to beat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks.

Because I'm looking for a portrait lens (on the CL), I'm not necessarily looking for the sharpest across the entire plane possibility. So many reasonably priced  options that I'm spinning my wheels a bit here: R f/1.4, R f/2, Zeiss f/2, Voigtlander f/1.2....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since it's a portrait lens you're looking for then you might like to consider a 'kinder' lens than the most razor-sharp you can find.  Razor-sharp lenses are all well and good for the chiseled features of, say, a rustic gentleman but it will not flatter ladies beyond a certain age.  

The last pre-aspherical 50 mm Summilux-M is widely regarded as an excellent portrait lens (particularly with the CL's inherent crop factor) as it is a little gentler than its asph sister.

Another excellent portrait lens is the 80/1.4 Summilux-R, which has the same optical computation as the 75/1.4 Summilux-M.

Pete.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

V1 is a classic Mandler lens, with plasticity as the top priority, followed by sharpness.  V2 goes the opposite way. I prefer V1 for this reason, not just because it costs a lot less.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, M9reno said:

V1 is a classic Mandler lens, with plasticity as the top priority, followed by sharpness.  V2 goes the opposite way. I prefer V1 for this reason, not just because it costs a lot less.

Nailed it on the head. I have a v1 with separate hood ... One of my favorite lenses. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

feel as if I'm betraying the "R Mount Gang," but I'm starting to think that for my specific needs the Zeiss 50 f/1.5 might be just the thing. Anyone want to do a "Leica intervention" on me? 😀

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, bags27 said:

feel as if I'm betraying the "R Mount Gang," but I'm starting to think that for my specific needs the Zeiss 50 f/1.5 might be just the thing. Anyone want to do a "Leica intervention" on me? 😀

The Zeiss 50/1.5 ZM C-Sonnnar is an excellent lens and I'm fortunate to have one myself, which I like very much but I've always had a slight penchant for pictures produced by the Sonnar design compared to the Double Gauss design.  The Sonnar's pictures provide a different look to the Summiluxes because of the Leica and Zeiss ethoses (basically Leica: higher acutance and lower contrast vs Zeiss: lower acutance higher contrast) and the Sonnar's tendency for focus shift.  I'm not suggesting that one is better than the other, just that they render differently.

So: 'choose your weapon'. 😄

Pete.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Another vote for the V.3 Summilux. I bought mine because the 1999 special edition was available in LTM mount to use on my IIIg  (but it comes supplied with an LTM to M ring) It works beautifully on both the SL, CL and my M7 but to get it to work with the M adapter L, you have to use a different LTM to M ring, as the Leica one gives the "no lens detected" message. I have found the best alternative is the Rayqual matt black rings (Robert White in Poole), with no cut out, which also have a recess to hand code. Chrome plated adapter rings without the cut out also don't work as the chrome gives a false reading from the 6 bit LED's. However the Summilux V3 lenses could not be described as cheap. Whereas the Summicron-R is cheap. I got a near mint ROM version recently from forum member Thomas Merkt for just over £300. 

Wilson

Edited by wlaidlaw

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/21/2019 at 1:06 AM, M9reno said:

V1 is a classic Mandler lens, with plasticity as the top priority, followed by sharpness.  V2 goes the opposite way. I prefer V1 for this reason, not just because it costs a lot less.

According to the LeicaWiki, the Summilux-R 50 V1 was designed by Heinz Marquardt, not Walter Mandler.

I have V2 and like it very much. Although quite sharp, it has lots of depth and even a touch of "Leica glow" at wide apertures. For portraits, I much prefer it to the Summilux-M 50 ASPH. I have used the R-50 both on an SL and a CL. Of course on the latter, it is equivalent to a 75 f2.1 (35mm format).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the E60 is heavier because it has one more lens element and a correspondingly larger body. 490g is the right weight; I'm not sure why there is the figure of 790g floating around the internet.

Others have commented on the rendition styles of the E48/55 and the E60 already. I'll just say the E60 has more noticeable barrel distortion than most normal lenses, certainly more than the E48/E55 and the Summicron-R--it appears to be the beginning of Leica trading other qualities for distortion in their normal lenses. The S70mm and SL 50mm are the same, although the Summilux-M 50 asph isn't as far as I can remember.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone know why the E60 Summilux-R 50 has gotten so expensive so quickly? The asking prices on Ebay now are mostly $1000 to $2000 more than what I paid for my EX++ copy only 14 months ago. Is it just part of the general inflation in prices for Leica gear, or is there a new group of users (e.g. videographers) scooping up this somewhat scarce lens?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe it is from professional but lowish budget cine makers, who are now looking for cheaper lenses for 4K, 5K and 8K larger sensor cameras like the RED range. There are people (Duclos) who will modify the Summilux for follow focus and with a gear on the aperture ring. You then have a lens not a million miles away from the Summilux C 50 for about 1/10th of the price (Summilux C around $40K). You can buy adapters from R to T2 , R to Canon EF, R to PL etc. 

Wilson

Edited by wlaidlaw

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/17/2019 at 11:31 AM, robgo2 said:

Does anyone know why the E60 Summilux-R 50 has gotten so expensive so quickly? The asking prices on Ebay now are mostly $1000 to $2000 more than what I paid for my EX++ copy only 14 months ago. Is it just part of the general inflation in prices for Leica gear, or is there a new group of users (e.g. videographers) scooping up this somewhat scarce lens?

If you search for "sold" listings, you'll see that nobody is actually buying at those prices ($3500+).

Videographers got their hands on R lenses many years ago already. It's hardly a new thing.

Edited by alan.y

Share this post


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.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...