50 Lux v3 (11868) vs ASPH vs Sonnar 50 1.5 (or other for "character")

[Guest]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi, 

I'm looking to add a second 50mm. I first got a Lux ASPH but something was wrong with it so I decided to return it and get an APO-50 the very next day. Now I'm looking for a second "character" 50mm to add. I'm wondering how you guys find the v3 Lux (11868) compares to the contemporary ASPH, as well as to the ZM Sonnar 50 1.5. I'm really torn as to which Lux to go with since each has certain aspects unique to it which I can appreciate. Even after just a few weeks researching Leica, I can already spot the difference (wide open) between the earlier Mandler Lux's and the Karbe- I like both, but can only get one for the time being. What are some other character 50's worth checking out? The Nocti is a cool piece to have, but for me would serve no purpose other than showing off lol I just never would shoot at such an aperture- I know people become addicted to it, but I don't like that soft glow (I don't think). 

[Advertisement]

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

[evikne]

I've had the 50mm Summilux ASPH, but I have now traded it for the pre-ASPH v.3 as you mention. I won't call the ASPH version harsh or clinical, but especially the OOF areas were too smooth and boring for my taste in the long term. The pre-ASPH version is a little shorter and lighter, and I think it has a much more exciting, unpredictable OOF rendering, which is typical for the Mandler lenses. The gentle contrasts is another hallmark. You can clearly see it belongs to the same family as the legendary 75mm Summilux and Noctilux f/1.0, but in a much smaller and lighter package. It can of course not match the resolution of the modern ASPH version, but it's good enough for all my needs, and I love the very fast focusing and the lack of focus tab. So this lens has become my new favorite.

Edited September 13, 2019 by evikne

[Ecar]

ASPH vs pre-ASPH v3 (aka E46): what evikne says.

Sonnar ZM 50/1.5: more character than the E46, but focus shift possibly frustrating. More interesting for BW than colour IMO.

Other character alternatives: plenty of them if you are willing to explore older lenses. Most won't focus as close as the E46 and will require an LTM to M adapter.

[lct]

Same as above except that i don't find the M 50/1.4 asph's OoF smooth enough around f/2.8 and i don't find the ZM 50/1.5 less exciting for color. Great lens on mirrorless cameras but i cannot advise it on rangefinders if one doesn't want to struggle with focus shift. If i were in this case, i would just hesitate between M 50/1.4 v2 (left) and v3 (right). 

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!

[Guest]

Yes, I think I've decided to track down a clean v3 Lux 11868 (what's the silver v3's reference number?). 

[Ecar]

4 minutes ago, White Buffalo said:

Yes, I think I've decided to track down a clean v3 Lux 11868 (what's the silver v3's reference number?). 

https://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-wiki.en/index.php/50mm_f/1.4_Summilux-M_III

[vanGeist]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

vor 17 Stunden schrieb White Buffalo:

What are some other character 50's worth checking out?

You may take a look at the Leica Summarit 50 1.5 and the Canon 50 0.95/1.2/1.4 LTM.

[Guest]

Any thoughts re: CV 50 1.2 Nokton? Reading great things. I wonder if it said Leica if it'd be more loved on this forum. 

[Boojay]

6 hours ago, White Buffalo said:

Any thoughts re: CV 50 1.2 Nokton? Reading great things. I wonder if it said Leica if it'd be more loved on this forum. 

Not so .... most on this forum say it how it is.  I have many times seen advice given to go the Voigtlander route.

If you look there is plenty of praise given for many of the CV lenses,  lots of references to relative values, but more importantly their different renderings.

 I can't offer thoughts on the 50 1.2 but do have the 40 1.2 and think it is excellent, lots of reviews, images to see on here and other sites.

 

[jaapv]

16 hours ago, vanGeist said:

You may take a look at the Leica Summarit 50 1.5 and the Canon 50 0.95/1.2/1.4 LTM.

Actually my favourite Canon LTM is the 1.8 . The Summarit is also a good choice but the  background bokeh is quite nervous.

[farnz]

On 9/12/2019 at 11:18 PM, White Buffalo said:

What are some other character 50's worth checking out?

50/1.4 Nikkor Kogaku.  Can be found in LTM mount or used with an Amadeus adaptor.  Huge amount of character and little focus shift that I've found.

Pete.

[tgray]

On 9/13/2019 at 5:11 PM, White Buffalo said:

Yes, I think I've decided to track down a clean v3 Lux 11868 (what's the silver v3's reference number?). 

10 years ago when I tried to track one of those down I ended up with a ASPH for a few hundred dollars more. I’m glad that I did.

I also have a Nikkor 50/1.4. Interesting lens and great for its time, but I like the ASPH more in every way. Still, your Tatar’s might vary. 

Lastly, I recently got a ZM 50/1.5. I haven’t seen any of the film from it yet, but it’s a pretty neat lens on my Sony. Might be worth renting or buying used and seeing how you like it. 

[a5m]

I'll just add my $0.02.

Since this wasn't brought up I'll share my experience in regards to sharpness. I've had the opportunity to try multiple copies of both the Pre-ASPH E46 and ASPH. As much as I wanted to like the Pre-ASPH for being a Mandler design, smaller, lighter, better build quality and aesthetics (IMO), it didn't cut it for me wide open. It's not soft, but it doesn't have the bite of the ASPH either. It's a soft sharp look, if that makes any sense. When you're at the 0.7m closest focus distance though it is actually soft and glowy.

For what I planned to use this lens for which was mainly indoors and family portraits in tight settings where I'd be shooting at MFD a lot, this wasn't going to work for me. As much as I'd like to hope there are sharp Pre-ASPH copies out there, the lens just wasn't designed that way. All this isn't news, it's been mentioned before and I found it consistent with my findings. You just have to decide in the long run which one you'd prefer to have.

[lct]

31 minutes ago, a5m said:

It's not soft, but it doesn't have the bite of the ASPH either. It's a soft sharp look, if that makes any sense. When you're at the 0.7m closest focus distance though it is actually soft and glowy. [...]

Of course it has not the bite of the asph, it does not pretend to do so. It has just a "soft sharp look" at f/1.4 as you pointed it in the centre of the frame, and a soft soft  look at edges and corners. This is why it is a great lens for forgiving portraits and a great substitute to the Sonnar 50/1.5 from this standpoint. Unless one considers that the Sonnar is a great substitute to the Summilux of course, it is not a Zeiss forum here .

 

Edited September 15, 2019 by lct

[Guest]

13 hours ago, tgray said:

10 years ago when I tried to track one of those down I ended up with a ASPH for a few hundred dollars more. I’m glad that I did.

I also have a Nikkor 50/1.4. Interesting lens and great for its time, but I like the ASPH more in every way. Still, your Tatar’s might vary. 

Lastly, I recently got a ZM 50/1.5. I haven’t seen any of the film from it yet, but it’s a pretty neat lens on my Sony. Might be worth renting or buying used and seeing how you like it. 

My considering the pre-ASPH E46 has nothing to do with the economics- I just am curious about the rendering it offers over the ASPH, which I've heard can be too sharp/clinical (and I've already got that covered with my APO-50). And yes, the M 50 1.5 is a lens I've been curious about for a while now. How do you find it compares/differs to your Lux ASPH? 

[tgray]

I’ve only had the ZM for a few weeks, and have not had a chance to use it much on my M, only my Sony. So for now, I have no feedback on its look on film or on the focus shift. Focus shift is there (I can see it in the Sony), but I don't know where the lens is optimized nor how much it will really affect me on the films I like to shoot. I suspect f/2 and not very much, respectively. 

The lens definitely generates some interesting backgrounds wide open. It's also definitely not very sharp wide open either.  I think it works better in B&W personally, and the bokeh gives it an older look. I was always intrigued by the lens and decided to buy it because of a sale Zeiss was running and because I think it is very cool that Zeiss decided to release an updated version of such an old and classic design.  I will probably enjoy this lens but I doubt if it will replace the 50 ASPH. 

The ASPH Summilux is pretty much amazing though. I have never found it clinically sharp or to have harsh bokeh. It is a bit larger but focuses down to 0.7m and looks wonderful wide open or stopped down. The cats eye highlights can provide a bit of character in my opinion.  If one can afford it, I think this is THE 50mm lens to own for M.  I think the handling is also better than the Sonnar: closer focus distance, focus tab, 1/2 stop aperture ring, and built in hood. I think I prefer the focusing feel too; I've never had the stiff focus issues of some people with the ASPH. 

While the 50 APO and 50/1  have a few appealing characteristics, I've never actually considering buying either due to the price (and size for the 50/1) and that, for me, what they add over the 50 ASPH, I really don't need. 

[Mark T]

Agree with a lot of what has been said. I have the ZM 1,5/50 and it is a lens that takes a long time to get the best out of it. For me at least. I don't, and would not, worry about focus shift. Yes it's there but in practice it has little effect. As stated above, it can produce a great vintage look. It loses contrast at maximum aperture and at close focusing distances. It doesn't handle a wide range of brightness in the one scene and I am typically disappointed with shots in bright sun with areas of hard shadow. It does really well in uniformly lit scenes, overcast conditions, indoors etc. When you get it right, it's wonderful but it can break your heart too when things don't come out quite how you imagined they would (I just use film). For what it's worth, the pictures I enjoy the most are generally at mid aperture (f4-5.6) and mid distances where the corners can still show a little blurring and darkening. It's a nice size and handles well. There is also something to be said for buying a new lens with warranty in preference to buying an older lens that is at least 15 years old and likely more. All that said, I don't think you need another lens when you have only just bought a seriously expensive 50 mm. Why not use it and discover its limitations? Why did you buy such a lens if it doesn't do what you want it to do? If you are unhappy with the results is that the fault of the lens or the photographer? Also you say you don't like " soft glow", so why look at any of these lenses? None of this makes any sense to me. 

[lct]

Never got any problem with color on the ZM 50/1.5 but i shoot only digital with it. Couple of snaps linked below with my Sony A7s mod but the lens works fine with the digital CL as well. Only serious con is focus shift on rangefinders, which is mainly a digital issue due to the lack of thickness of the sensor. Otherwise i see little point in comparing the ZM 50/1.5 to the current Summilux 50/1.4 asph that has not the same character at all. In Leica land i would rather compare it to the Summilux-M 50/1.4 pre-asph as suggested above or the Summilux-R 50/1.4 eventually. YMMV.
https://lctphot.smugmug.com/Diverse/A7s-mod-ZM-5015/n-5gmXfT

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[ianman]

On 9/13/2019 at 12:05 AM, evikne said:

I've had the 50mm Summilux ASPH, but I have now traded it for the pre-ASPH v.3 as you mention. I won't call the ASPH version harsh or clinical, but especially the OOF areas were too smooth and boring for my taste in the long term. The pre-ASPH version is a little shorter and lighter, and I think it has a much more exciting, unpredictable OOF rendering, which is typical for the Mandler lenses.

Just for out of interest.... is the 50mm pre-asph Summilux III a Mandler design as mentioned here or Karbe as written in the wiki?

[lct]

13 minutes ago, ianman said:

Just for out of interest.... is the 50mm pre-asph Summilux III a Mandler design as mentioned here or Karbe as written in the wiki?

Good question indeed . The 50/1.4 v3 was launched in 1994/1995 i.e. ten years after W. Mander retired (links) so it is well possible that its designer is P. Karbe but i have no evidence of that besides Wikipedia. Now while being totally redesigned, the optical design and the image quality of the lens are very close to those of the Summilux 50/1.4 v2 which was a Mandler lens certainly. 
https://lhsa.org/2018/08/why-are-leica-lenses-the-best-in-the-world/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Mandler