On the look for yet a 50mm - but what to go for?

[Tragardh]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

What's next ?

I am asking here for some experienced inputs, as I am planning to buy a new lense, any time soon.

I am indeed very happy shooting with my Summilux-M 50mm f1.4 V3 pre ASPH. 11 856 (silver). A wonderful lense, it really is. On my M10, it makes the world look so awsome.
Since I really enjoy 50mm format, I might just get an additional one. Something different, better for open landskabes, architecture, something much sharper.

I think to my self - is the later Lux ASPH really not that much of a jump from my v3 pre-ASPH? - Or is it? Would a 50mm APO be a more interesting choice, being in the other end of the scale and very different as such. APO is a tempting choice, but, then again, is it perhaps to fare from the pre-ASPH lux, with that delicious look?

Then there is also that talk about the finnish - The consumer version VS: the "Black or Silver chrome" special heavy and solid Brass edition. It makes it almost sound as the normal version, ain't going to last very long in comparison? Is it really so, or is it just the load of hype about the Special editions?

I'd appreciate any comments based on experience and if possible, I'd very much like to see a comparing of images. Also if anyone is selling a LUX or APO, please, feel free to drop me a note.

Thank you for your time.

Edited June 3, 2020 by Tragardh

[evikne]

I combine the 50 Summilux pre-ASPH v.3 (black) with a 50 Summilux ASPH Black Chrome edition. I think they complement each other very nicely, and I love both equally. Sometimes I want a "classic" look, and sometimes I want something more modern, or more "controlled", for example in challenging lighting conditions. 

I have also had the standard ASPH version, but I prefer the Black Chrome edition, mostly because of the very nice scalloped focus ring. 

[mediumformula]

If you're doing landscape and architecture and don't need super wide aperture, maybe look into a Summarit. 

[lct]

58 minutes ago, Tragardh said:

I really enjoy 50mm format, I might just get an additional one [...] something much sharper. [...] - is the later Lux ASPH really not that much of a jump from my v3 pre-ASPH? - Or is it? [...] APO is a tempting choice, but, then again, is it perhaps to fare from the pre-ASPH lux, with that delicious look? [...]

I have those three lenses and would not depart from either. Both 50/1.4 asph and 50/2 apo have more acutance than your 50/1.4 v3 and will look more "clinical" hence less "delicious" i fear. As far as edge to edge sharpness and OoF rendition are concerned, the better compromise would be the 50/2 apo, at least for me. This is a subjective matter though and you cannot go wrong with either lens.

[Schittra]

I love 50mm focal length too.

I started with cron in 2003, then replace with lux ASPH in 2009. I keep shooting 50mm on M10 and I have Elmar/2.8 on M10.

I am a happy owner of Noct50/1.0 on SL. Thinking about APO from time to time but I want imperfect. 

[Tragardh]

To whom that know my lens ( Summilux-M 50mm f1.4 V3 pre ASPH. 11 856 (silver), who also know the later ASPH version,

may I ask you to write something in comparison about those to version, Pre-ASPH vs. ASPH?

Thank you

Edited June 4, 2020 by Tragardh

[lct]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

59 minutes ago, Tragardh said:

may I ask you to write something in comparison about those to version, Pre-ASPH vs. ASPH?

You will find many comparos on the LUF. See for instance this one. I find the v3 softer at large apertures with smoother bokeh especially around f/2.8. Better lens for portraits when i don't want to show the skin imperfections of my models too much. Main flaws are softness at edges and corners below f/5.6. and CA. Asph is more or less the opposite but both are almost free from flare.

[Tragardh]

22 minutes ago, lct said:

You will find many comparos on the LUF. See for instance this one. I find the v3 softer at large apertures with smoother bokeh especially around f/2.8. Better lens for portraits when i don't want to show the skin imperfections of my models too much. Main flaws are softness at edges and corners below f/5.6. and CA. Asph is more or less the opposite but both are almost free from flare.

 

Not really sharp, ... then again, it creates a good live feeling. Impeccable color balance.

August at 02:52:28 pm, on a clody / otherwise bright sunny day.

• 1/250 - f/8.0 - ISO 100

 

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 June 4, 2020 by Tragardh

[lct]

Nice pic but it could have been taken with either lens or a good Chinese one i guess . Differences, if any, will be more visible at wider apertures on larger pic files.

[Tragardh]

17 minutes ago, lct said:

Nice pic but it could have been taken with either lens or a good Chinese one i guess . Differences, if any, will be more visible at wider apertures on larger pic files.

 

The way she pops out og the image, is perhaps showing more of the classic Leica signature. And again soft, not really sharp, but very alive.

August at 03:40:45 pm. Bright sunne day.

• 50 mm
• 1/4000
• f/4.0
• ISO 100

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 June 4, 2020 by Tragardh

[evikne]

1 hour ago, Tragardh said:

To whom that know my lens ( Summilux-M 50mm f1.4 V3 pre ASPH. 11 856 (silver), who also know the later ASPH version,

may I ask you to write something in comparison about those to version, Pre-ASPH vs. ASPH?

Thank you

Maybe not your style of photos, but in my blog linked to in my signature you can see hundreds of photos from both lenses (and others), separated into different categories.

The ASPH photos from the past year are taken with the Black Crome edition, the rest with the standard version. I think the BC has a little more pleasant rendering, but that's probably just my imagination. 

[J.Nordvik]

I have four 50mm in M-mount or LTM. One universal (Zeiss Planar ZM), One Sonnar (Jupiter 8), One fast (Voitländer Nokton 1,1) and one small (Leitz 3,5/5cm). In addition I have a 55mm Micro-Nikkor (for macro) and a Ricoh (my first 50mm)

I would choose something that is different from what you have now, either in size or performance.

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!

[Kwesi]

39 minutes ago, evikne said:

Maybe not your style of photos, but in my blog linked to in my signature you can see hundreds of photos from both lenses (and others), separated into different categories.

The ASPH photos from the past year are taken with the Black Crome edition, the rest with the standard version. I think the BC has a little more pleasant rendering, but that's probably just my imagination. 

Interesting...I wasn't aware that the was a difference in rendering between the standard and the chrome versions.

[evikne]

1 minute ago, Kwesi said:

Interesting...I wasn't aware that the was a difference in rendering between the standard and the chrome versions.

As I mentioned, it's probably just my imagination. But I think the BC renders a tiny bit more gentle. And because of the 43mm filter size, I think it also has slightly more vignetting. 

[farnz]

On 6/3/2020 at 6:12 PM, Tragardh said:

I'd appreciate any comments based on experience and if possible, ...

I can only reiterate what I wrote in the thread that LCT linked to:

"I am fortunate to own both the last pre-asph 50 Summilux (v3?) and its asph sister and to me the difference is simply Walter Mandler vs Peter Karbe.  Personally I prefer the look of pictures produced with Mandler-designed lenses but I also deeply respect the skill and expertise that underpin Karbe-designed lenses.  The Karbe-designed lenses push the boundaries of physics to produce lenses with as close to optical perfection as possible, which means high contrast, faithful colour reproduction, sharpness in the corners and minimal vignetting. The Mandler-designed 50 Summiluxes produce more character (which is not used here as a synonym for poor performance) and deliberately have lower contrast, which allows pictures to capture more detail in shadow and highlight areas, and the colours are slightly warmer.

Both lenses are exceptional and produce out of focus areas that are very appealing to me.  The asph is 'almost' too sharp for some subjects such as portraits of elderly ladies and to my mind is a razor blade to the pre-asph's carving knife; both sharp but you wouldn't use one for the other's job.  I haven't yet decided which of the two I shall keep.  I may still be deciding in 10 year's time."

 

Since I wrote the above I have replaced my 50/1.4 Summilux asph with a 50/1.4 'Retro' Summilux asph Black Chrome edition, which was mostly for ergonomic reasons because, from new, the focus ring on my standard asph Summilux had always been a little stiff and jerky but the focus ring on the 'Retro' Black Chrome is buttery smooth and much more pleasant to use.  The Black Chrome has a smaller filter thread (43 mm) than the standard (46 mm) which, to my eye, when shot wide open produces a gorgeous, subtle vignette that's similar in character to the 50/1 Noctilux.  The Black Chrome has the same high contrast, faithful colour reproduction etc as the standard Summilux asph.  I still have the pre-asph as well, so I must be still deciding.😄

Pete.

[Kwesi]

Im a big fan of the 50 lux ASPH - would love to see a side by side comparison of the standard and chrome versions so we can explore the claims you and evikne are making. Anyone here have both? 

Edited June 5, 2020 by Kwesi

[ardbeg]

I own 9 50mm lenses and would agree with earlier comments about getting a lens with a different rendering intent if you add a second 50mm. I used to own a 50 pre-ASPH and now own the 50mm ASPH black chrome (I don't like focus tabs thus why I didn't get the standard version ASPH). They do indeed render very differently especially wide open with the ASPH being sharper, higher contrast, and having a different (more dramatic) out of focus fall off than the pre-ASPH. Like a Noctilux 50/1, the 50 pre-ASPH is lower contrast than the ASPH and the bokeh can be a bit swirly in comparison to the ASPH in certain circumstances (some really like that others don't). Also as mentioned above, another 50mm with a different rendering style from either the pre-ASPH or ASPH would be a Sonnar, either the newer Zeiss Sonnar C, or a Russian Jupiter 3 (finding a good, clean copy on eBay is like playing a bit of roulette however), or a Zenit / Lomo Jupiter 3+ (although they are overpriced at $650 in my view, $500 or lower would be more appropriate). 

[flipsa00]

I currently have a 50 apo and previously had a 50 lux asph. My biggest regret was selling the 50 lux asph. The APO can have pretty stunning sharpness, but comparing photos from the two over the years, I much prefer the lux asph. Images (particularly portraits) from the 50 Lux Asph seemed to have this other-worldly sparkle (weird choice of adjectives, I know...) that the APO didn't. 

My vote is for the 50 Lux Asph.