Is the latest 50mm non-APO Summicron still flare prone?

[Stein K S]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

14 hours ago, m410 said:

Leica has built an awful lot of 50mm f2 Summicrons over the years and if they were a problematic lens, well they won't have built them right?  

 

1+ 

[Advertisement]

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

[logan2z]

I've been reading quite a bit more about the v5 Summicron and reviews comparing it to other lenses.  I have no doubt that the lens has great IQ and is built well, but the flare tendency is really pushing me in another direction - perhaps to a Zeiss 50mm/f2 Planar. 

Despite it's relatively low price, the Zeiss seems to be highly regarded and many compare it favorably to the Summicron.  Although I'm a Leica brand loyalist, I may give the Zeiss a try. 

The one slight knock I've heard against the Zeiss in comparison to the Summicron is build quality, which is apparently very good but not quite up to Leica levels.  Does anyone have any personal experience with both lenses and can comment on this? Where exactly does the Zeiss fall short?

Edited July 28, 2020 by logan2z

[TomB_tx]

I have Zeiss 35 & 50 ZM models and have used them for several years along with my Leica lenses - so the Zeiss are lightly used. The”feel” is different, but I have no complaints on build quality. Images are also excellent, if different than Leica. I can see where some may prefer either brand.

The 35 f2.0 is larger than I like, so on the M10 I generally use the 35 & 50 f2.5 Summarit lenses.

Edited July 28, 2020 by TomB_tx

[adan]

I've used both in the past 9 months.

The focusing movement of the Zeiss ZM 50 f/2 Planar is a bit lighter touch (less damping, more freely turning) than the v.5 Summicron. The separate chrome front ring, with bayonet flanges for a lens hood, also adds to the different feel (and the hood itself can be slightly loose and rattley, as can be the clip-in lens cap (both being of the Cosina/Voigtlander type - same factory)). And of course having 1/3rd-stop clicks on the aperture ring feels a bit different.

And the whole (ZM) lens is larger - 43mm filter size. It bulks up a bit more, like the pre-1995 50 Summiluxes. And being larger and 10g lighter at the same time, feels a bit less "dense" than the Summicron v.5 - density sometimes being mistaken for build-quality.

OTOH, the Zeiss Planar avoids the "Summicron valley" in the MTF charts, and has, to my eye, slightly smoother, softer bokeh. I can't swear that the ZM flares less, although I did not notice any in a similar outdoor nightime situation as my previous 'cron examples. The ZM has 2% barrel distortion, compared to virtually zero in the Summicron, which makes the ZM "feel" slightly wider (plus, it is a true 50mm, while the Summicron v.4/5 is usually around 52mm actual focal length).

In the end I have neither any more, since that 9 months of experimentation confirmed that 50mm is simply not my focal length. Forced at gunpoint to use a 50, I'd pick the ZM from that pair.

Maybe.

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 July 28, 2020 by adan

[logan2z]

29 minutes ago, adan said:

I've used both in the past 9 months.

The focusing movement of the Zeiss ZM 50 f/2 Planar is a bit lighter touch (less damping, more freely turning) than the v.5 Summicron. The separate chrome front ring, with bayonet flanges for a lens hood, also adds to the different feel (and the hood itself can be slightly loose and rattley, as can be the clip-in lens cap (both being of the Cosina/Voigtlander type - same factory)). And of course having 1/3rd-stop clicks on the aperture ring feels a bit different.

And the whole (ZM) lens is larger - 43mm filter size. It bulks up a bit more, like the pre-1995 50 Summiluxes. And being larger and 10g lighter at the same time, feels a bit less "dense" than the Summicron v.5 - density sometimes being mistaken for build-quality.

OTOH, the Zeiss Planar avoids the "Summicron valley" in the MTF charts, and has, to my eye, slightly smoother, softer bokeh. I can't swear that the ZM flares less, although I did not notice any in a similar outdoor nightime situation as my previous 'cron examples. The ZM has 2% barrel distortion, compared to virtually zero in the Summicron, which makes the ZM "feel" slightly wider (plus, it is a true 50mm, while the Summicron v.4/5 is usually around 52mm actual focal length).

In the end I have neither any more, since that 9 months of experimentation confirmed that 50mm is simply not my focal length. Forced at gunpoint to use a 50, I'd pick the ZM from that pair.

Maybe.

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!

Ironically, I'm not sure I'm in love with the 50mm focal length either, but sometimes I'd like something a little longer than the 35 I usually shoot with.  

Tough decision on a 50 given the pros/cons of both the Zeiss and the Summicron.  My gut is telling me to spring for the Leica, but there's a nagging voice in my head that says the propensity to flare is going to make me regret my decision.

I'm probably overthinking it as I tend to do with most things

[pedaes]

I have a number of 50's including the Zeiss. The build quality is excellent, and personally I like the subtle little focusing tab. It has better resolution than the Summicron, but is slightly more 'contrasty'. This can be tuned with digital processing but you may want to check the stronger colours on the film of your choice if using colour film.The Zeiss is excellent value, especially if it is not going to be your go-to lens. 

[logan2z]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 minute ago, pedaes said:

I have a number of 50's including the Zeiss. The build quality is excellent, and personally I like the subtle little focusing tab. It has better resolution than the Summicron, but is slightly more 'contrasty'. This can be tuned with digital processing but you may want to check the stronger colours on the film of your choice if using colour film.The Zeiss is excellent value, especially if it is not going to be your go-to lens. 

Thanks for sharing your opinion.  I shoot B&W film only so it's color rendering isn't of much importance to me. 

[mmx_2]

On 7/15/2020 at 10:37 PM, Runkel said:

I had a v5 probably from the 1990s that "flared" unpredictably (likely not actually flare but the result of internal reflections),  not commonly,  sometimes veiling and sometimes more.  There was lore that in a certain batch,  Leica had used a too-reflective black paint for metalwork after the last element.  I sent the lens to Leica New Jersey to have the suspect area repainted matte black.  This improved the performance but the unpredictable flare still occurred rarely.  Since I could not trust the lens, I got rid of it.  I have used many Leica lenses, older and modern, and the "flare" issues I had with the v5 were unique.  It was not a "bright light source just outside the frame" sort of thing.

I assume a current production model would not have any issues with the type of paint applied internally, and would probably perform substantially better than the one I had.

 

Of possible interest:

https://www.photo.net/discuss/threads/signature-flare-with-current-50mm-summicron-m.159746/

https://www.photo.net/discuss/threads/is-summicron-m-50-prone-to-flare.79529/

I had the exact same behauviour on my summicron 50 also dating from the 90s. I sold it because I was quite dissappointed, but I never thought about that it was actually a "serial flaw". I bought a Summilux asph instead and I couldn't be happier. Very flare resistant and beatiful rendering.

[logan2z]

1 hour ago, mmx_2 said:

I had the exact same behauviour on my summicron 50 also dating from the 90s. I sold it because I was quite dissappointed, but I never thought about that it was actually a "serial flaw". I bought a Summilux asph instead and I couldn't be happier. Very flare resistant and beatiful rendering.

The Summilux is another option, although I don't really need the speed and it comes at some significant cost. 

[mmx_2]

5 hours ago, logan2z said:

The Summilux is another option, although I don't really need the speed and it comes at some significant cost. 

Yeah, I was able to buy it used at about 1800eur (mines from 2004), but yes, it’s an expensive lens.

[carbon_dragon]

I've recently seen a video which shows the APO shooting pictures with bright light sources and absolutely ignoring flare. That was pretty impressive. I have the generation just previous and I shot into the sun a lot (as an amateur shooting the sun through trees) and I've felt pretty good about flare performance (I always extend the hood). But it does flare.

Here is one that created a flare. But I don't always get flare.

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!

[mujk]

I have the Summicron 50 v5 as well and it definitely flares,  both when there is a brighter area in the background and when there is a really bright light outside the frame. I used it first on the M6 TTL and then on the M9, but didn't pay very much attention to the flare on those. However, for some reason I feel the flare is much more noticeable on the M10, at least in comparison with the Summicron 35 asph.

[adan]

1 hour ago, mujk said:

I used it first on the M6 TTL and then on the M9, but didn't pay very much attention to the flare on those. However, for some reason I feel the flare is much more noticeable on the M10

My experience with several lenses is that the M10 promotes more flare.

The sides of the M10 "shutter chamber" have been squeezed in a bit to allow more space for shrinking the external dimensions while packing in all the electronics. It's not "lens flare" as such - it is mostly reflections off the inside of the camera - but I have noticed that lenses charted with a bit more vignetting tend to show less flare of this type (smaller image circle = less spill light inside the camera.)

I now check every lens I am considering for such flare on the M10. it is a pet peeve, and I hope Leica looks into improving the blackness of the interior camera paint, or adding baffling of some kind, as used in the film Ms since the M6.

Edited October 11, 2020 by adan

[M9reno]

3 minutes ago, adan said:

My experience with several lenses is that the M10 promotes more flare.

Thank you.  This is interesting.  Could you please say which do, as well as which others, in your experience, do not encounter this issue with the M10 innards?

[logan2z]

Quick follow-up:  I just developed the first two rolls of film that I shot with the Summicron 50mm v5 on my M-A and not a single frame showed any flare issues. 

I've been really enjoying the lens so far.  It feels beautifully made, it's compact, lightweight and the focus and aperture rings have a nice feel.  No complaints about the rendering either.  No regrets.

[adan]

On 10/11/2020 at 2:47 PM, M9reno said:

Thank you.  This is interesting.  Could you please say which do, as well as which others, in your experience, do not encounter this issue with the M10 innards?

Sorry to take so long responding to this.

Obviously I have not tried out every possible lens in the Leica M stable.

Lenses where I have encountered predictable flare from the M10 body: 50 Summicron v.4/5, 90 Elmarit-M, 135 APO-Telyt, and the 90mm Tele-Elmarit-M (which always has potential flare problems, but even more with the M10).

Lenses where I have encountered less or no significant camera body flare: most wide-angles (>50mm), 50mm Summilux non-ASPH, 75 Nokton f/1.5, 75 APO-Summicron, 75 Summarit f/2.4, 90 Summarit f/2.5.

One working theory - lenses with more vignetting tend to flare less off the inside of the camera, because they are already darkening the corners of the picture itself, and thus anything outside the picture area is darkened even more so. Less light to reflect off the camera box. The lens tube itself is acting as a "too-long" lens hood (but with a blurrier edge).

Leica M wide-angles tend to have more vignetting, not only from optical vignetting but also the "cosine 4th law" (the lens (or exit pupil) is closer to the center of the picture than it is to the corners, and light falls off as the square of the distance). Long fast lenses also tend to have more vignetting (the same cropping of the aperture by the lens barrel that produces "cat's-eye" bokeh circles closer to the image edges).

[M9reno]

Thank you very much, Andy. I will experiment as well with this, as it looks likely that an M10 is the pipeline fairly soon.

[BradS]

On 7/28/2020 at 2:45 PM, logan2z said:

Ironically, I'm not sure I'm in love with the 50mm focal length either, but sometimes I'd like something a little longer than the 35 I usually shoot with.  

Tough decision on a 50 given the pros/cons of both the Zeiss and the Summicron.  My gut is telling me to spring for the Leica, but there's a nagging voice in my head that says the propensity to flare is going to make me regret my decision.

I'm probably overthinking it as I tend to do with most things

 

You're not over thinking it in this case.

The flare is totally unacceptable in my opinion.  I find it appalling that a modern normal lens that costs this much has to be "learned".  It should just work without the user having to think about its character defects.

Thanks for this thread. It is an eye opener.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[logan2z]

5 minutes ago, BradS said:

 

You're not over thinking it in this case.

The flare is totally unacceptable in my opinion.  I find it appalling that a modern normal lens that costs this much has to be "learned".  It should just work without the user having to think about its character defects.

Thanks for this thread. It is an eye opener.

I did end up buying the Summicron v5.  I've only shot a couple of rolls of film with it but I wasn't explicitly trying to avoid flare and I haven't experienced any yet.  Granted I rarely shoot straight into the sun but it seems like others have experienced flare under other conditions as well. 

I fully agree with you that one shouldn't need to work around a lens's defects at this price point.  If flare ever does become a persistent problem for me I'll most certainly sell the lens and replace it with something that doesn't exhibit this flaw. 

[a.noctilux]

My experiences of Summicron I to IV/V can tell that the last optical cell in IV/V is the less "flarey" , mainly used on film.

Some observations from decades of using 50 Summicron (applicable to other lenses as well):

- clean front and rear lens elements can reduce flare if used in tricky light

- using filter can give some flare

- using hood can help

- in most case, if other conditions are observed, with the sun in frame is not the "most" flare prone situation

- film M less flare than digital M ( shiny surfaces ? )

- with some experiences, compose with flare 😇