Jump to content

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


bags27

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

2 hours ago, alan.y said:

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.

I agree but the Summilux sellers don't seem open to reasonable offers - I tried with a number of sellers, gave up and bought a near mint, very late, ROM 50/2 Summicron-R instead for just over £300. 

Wilson

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, wlaidlaw said:

I agree but the Summilux sellers don't seem open to reasonable offers - I tried with a number of sellers, gave up and bought a near mint, very late, ROM 50/2 Summicron-R instead for just over £300. 

Wilson

That's right. Those eBay sellers as a whole racket are holding out for the occasional buyer who desperately needs a copy and/or doesn't care about cost (or is simply fooled by the racket to believe those are reasonable prices), or perhaps one of the cine conversion companies who can make a profit above them.

Essentially there's another "reasonable" market for people who can wait for the increasingly rare copies to come up for auction or forum sales by actual users as opposed to cine-adapters and speculators. In this (shrinking) market the E60's prices have been pretty stable since 4 or 5 years ago, when I bought my first copy. Between $2200 and $3000 depending on condition.

Same with the R 35/1.4, which has a beautiful character and which I often miss, but whose eBay asking prices are likewise unreasonable.

So the idea that cine conversions have driven prices up is not untrue, but it's not the only factor and the effect is mediated.

Edited by alan.y
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The E60 is very difficult to get, but when you finally do it is worth it.  Beautiful colour and sharpness. Smooth rubberised focus ring and apertures with firm clicks.

I don't use the built-in hood, but rather have a 60-58 step-down ring and then use a 58mm standard B+W rubber hood.  Also use a 60mm Aurora PowerUV to protect the front element (heresy I know).

Alongside eBay, another possibility is to keep an eye on used dealers like BHPhoto and KEH.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...
  • 1 year later...

I had a Lux 50R E60 years ago. Got another one last year. Currently have a variety of other 50's. This Lux 50R E60 is my favorite by far and like many lenses from my past = it falls into that (rather large group) - one I should never have traded/sold. The Lux 50R E60 paired with my SL2-S is a great combination. Here are a few samples that I like:

 

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!

  • Like 9
Link to post
Share on other sites

My 50 Summilux III special edition lens, is probably the last Leica lens I would sell, out of the 45 odd Leica lenses I have (LTM, M, V, R, SL and CL). It would however have some serious competition from the 35mm APO Summicron-M. 

Wilson

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 5/21/2022 at 5:10 PM, cbass said:

I have been lurking here for a while now, but I have not posted. I apologize for resurrecting an old thread and also probably not the ideal first post.

Regarding Version 1 (7/6) vs Version 2 (8/7).

How is the Version 2 when it comes to color fringing and coma? For example, shooting at night with lights.

 

It's about the best 50mm 1.4 in existence. I wouldn't worry about any defects.

Link to post
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, cbass said:

The best 50mm can get into the weeds. There are too many optical compromises that need to be made and best for what. Portraits. Landscapes. Nightscapes. Astrophotography, etc.

My interest specifically is in coma correction and purple fringing. The original Summilux-R was not perfect, but it did really well compared to the competition with nightscapes especially with coma and purple fringing from point light sources. It also did much better at the wider apertures. My understanding is the original Summilux-R (7/6) was optimized for the wide apertures at the sacrifice of performance stopped down. The second version (8/7) improved upon the original largely stopped down making it a better general lens over the original. I have other lenses that are more than capable stopped down. Specifically, I am interested in purple fringing and coma correction. Most 50ish lenses suffer from coma even high-quality expensive more recent lenses like the Zeiss Otus 55 1.4. I have not been able to find if Version 2 does better in those areas (purple fringing and coma) than Version 1 or if some of that performance was sacrificed in order to achieve better stopped down performance.

The new version adds an element to improve flatness of field. It has higher contrast, less vignetting, and better resolution. I own one and am well pleased. There is no truth to the rumour that its wide-open performance is is any way compromised. It is supposed to achieve better image quality at f/2.8 that its predecessor did at f/5.6.

Here is Irwin Puts' description:

6.3.17 1.4/50,Summilux-R (II), 1998

This eight-element design shows a significant improvement over all previous 1.4 designs. The performance in the field is quite visibly enhanced and this is the first 1.4-Leica lens, that delivers outstanding image quality when stopping down. In this respect it is better than the current Summilux-M-version and even brings current Summicron quality and more to a 1.4 design.

Figure 103: diagram 63

At full aperture the new Summilux-R exhibits medium to close-to-high contrast that is visibly above the lower contrast of the seven element predecessor. This is quite a performance as conventional wisdom will tell you that more lens elements will degrade contrast. The additional eight element was needed for correction of field curvature. Fine detail is very clearly rendered with crisp edges with only a faint trace of astigmatism and field curvature in the centre over an image area with image height of 9mm. From there the quality very gradually drops, as compared to a drastic drop in previous designs. At 1:2 overall contrast improves and the optical performance is as good as that of the current Summicron lenses at their full aperture. In fact performance from 1:2.8 to 1:4 is almost identical to the current Summicron. Very fine detail is recorded with excellent clarity and crisp outlines from centre to well into the outer zones. In the far corner area a slight drop in performance can be noted.

Stopping down from 1:2.8 to 1:4 gradually brings in exceedingly fine details that are now recorded with that lucid clarity that characterizes modern Leica designs. At 1:5.6 the Summilux surpasses the level of image quality of the current Summicron. From f/11.0 diffraction starts to lower the contrast of very small image details. Close-up performance (+1 meter distance) is at all apertures excellent. Deliberate two stops underexposure failed to bring out strong vignetting. Veiling flare at full aperture is negligible. Suppression of light halos around small subject details is excellent and careful comparison shots with the Summilux-M 50mm showed the R version to have a slight edge. The sharpness-unsharpness gradient is quite smooth and subject shapes are very well preserved in the unsharpness zones.

The new Summilux-R 1:1,4/50 offers excellent image quality and Leica R users can now shoot in available darkness and fully exploit the capabilities of modern emulsions. For my comparison shots I use Kodachrome 25 and 64, as these films still give the best microcontrast (read edge contrast) for the definition of extremely fine image details. Stopped down one stop and the new Summilux-R has that enviable balance of lucidly rendered crisp detail and smooth gradient of colour hues within small subject areas that is Leica's current . The image recording capabilities of this lens far exceed the one offered by all current ISO400 films and are on a par with the best of the ISO100 films. Kodachrome 64 would be an excellent companion.

In comparison to the Summicron-R 2/50 the new Summilux is a better lens. Optical aberrations( especially curvature of field and astigmatism) are tightly controlled, and from 1:2 the Summilux jumps ahead of the Summicron-R. Compared to the current Summilux-M the differences at full aperture are quite visible. On axis performance is more or less equal, but the R-version wins in the field, ad significantly so! And when stopping down forges ahead with superior performance in the field Summarizing: the 1./50 Summilux-R (II) defines the current state of the art of large aperture standard lenses. It outclasses the 1.4/50 Summilux-R (I) by a comfortable length. It edges ahead of the Summicron-R (II) and visibly improves on the Summilux-M (II) 1.4/50. Non-scientific comparison pictures with the Summicron-M (IV) show comparable performance in most picture taking situations. If you need to record the finest possible details and shades in small textures, the Summilux-R (II) has to be stopped down to 1:2.8 and at medium apertures, the Summilux-R (II) has no competition.

 

Edited by Ornello
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
4 minutes ago, cbass said:

I picked up a Version 1 (7/6) variation 2 with built in hood serial starting with 323 locally. I am running the lens through a series of tests right now, but so far at f/1.4 and f/2 at close distances near MFD I am seeing disappointing results. It is a bit glowy and soft. It cleans up by f/2.8. I will have to see what happens at mid distance and infinity. 

Have you looked at the lens using a flashlight to check for haze or film? That lens was state of the art in 1970, I have owned several copies and always loved it. Most lenses are corrected for infinity.

Edited by Ornello
Link to post
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, cbass said:

but so far at f/1.4 and f/2 at close distances near MFD I am seeing disappointing results. It is a bit glowy and soft

One man's disappointment is another man's delight.

Your disappointment depends on what you were expecting in a ca. 38 year-old lens that might not have lived in ideal conditions.

Pete.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

You really have to shine a UV light through the lens to detect fungus. The fungus if any, will fluoresce in UV light. I keep a cheap Chinese UV torch, made for detecting fake banknotes, for checking any used lenses I buy. The late (1960) 50mmf1.5 LTM Summarit I bought actually looked fine with an ordinary torch but had very bad flare. On shining a UV light, no fungus was detected but quite a lot of haze, probably oil from the lubricated 18 blade diaphragm on the surfaces either side. Alan Starkie did a marvellous job of stripping and cleaning it, which transformed its abilities and it is now a very acceptable lens with wonderful swirly bokeh, IMHO almost the equal of the f1.2 Noctilux. 

Wilson

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...
50 minutes ago, cbass said:

Is there a E55 version of the 8/7 traditionally known as E60 Summilux?

50mm f/1.4 Summilux-R II - Leica Wiki (English) (l-camera-forum.com)

Looking at the Leica wiki the serials start from 3794010. However, I have come across a lens slight past 3794010 that is still E55. A rom lens. Is this a 7/6 or 8/7 optical formula?

Has it ROM contacts. That is possibly the break point. 

Wilson

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 11/13/2022 at 7:49 AM, cbass said:

Yes. It has ROM contacts.

Having ROM contacts doesn’t tell you much about the vintage or model of a lens. For many years you could pay $200 or so for Leica to retrospectively add ROM contacts to any old lens.  ROM contacts allowed the R8 / R9 cameras to control  exposure more accurately.

Im pretty sure the final version  was always only available in E60 with ROM, while the version before remained in production well into the ROM era.

Edited by cpclee
Link to post
Share on other sites

vor 3 Stunden schrieb cpclee:

Im pretty sure the final version  was always only available in E60 with ROM, while the version before remained in production well into the ROM era.

Exactly. If the lens has an E55 filter thread, it is not a v2 Summilux (8 elements). And if the lens has an E60 filter thread, it must be a v2 Summilux, as the v1 was never made with an E60 filter thread (only E55).

Edited by wizard
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure whether this helps the conversation, but the first image is taken with the pre-Aspheric Summilux M on a M240, the remaining images were all taken with the E60 v.2 and the Leica DMR 

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!

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

vor 11 Stunden schrieb robert_parker:

but the first image is taken with the pre-Aspheric Summilux M on a M240, the remaining images were all taken with the E60 v.2

Well, if you ask me, the first image is clearly the best shot of the lot. Whether that allows to draw the conclusion that the Summilux M pre asph is a better lens than the Summilux R E60 is an entirely different matter 🙂.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, robert_parker said:

I'm not sure whether this helps the conversation, but the first image is taken with the pre-Aspheric Summilux M on a M240, the remaining images were all taken with the E60 v.2 and the Leica DMR 

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!

The first shot reminds of the v4 Summicron M and v2 Summicron R I have had—slightly softer wide open and up close.  The remaining shots look decidedly modern and crisp. 
 

I’ve never had a Summilux at the 50mm focal lengths because the Summicrons are such good value and perform so well.  But admittedly I’ve fancied the E60 for that extra stop (I still shoot film when I can) from time to time.

Edited by cpclee
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Having had both, I think the 50mm E60 Summilux R is a much better lens than the Pre asph Summilux. It still has beautiful bokeh, if anything, even nicer, but it is also reasonably sharp at wider apertures, whereas the pre-asph summilux is very soft indeed. It is hard to compare the output of the DMR to the M240, as the M240 is a much more modern camera. The DMR was nice at the time, but it was still a 10mp APS-C camera. The 50mm Summilux E60 has a beautiful and painterly asthetic, but still sharp enough to work on modern cameras with modern resolution requirements. Whether it is worth the high price is a personal question.

This is a bit misfocused, but I always liked it for its bokeh.

 

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!

  • Like 1
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.

×
×
  • Create New...