50

[augustwest100]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm looking for a 50mm to pair with the M10 Monochrom. I would actually prefer something with a little character. I have the 35 Lux M and it is so good that it is almost too good, if that makes any sense at all  It seems to render with lots of contrast and sharpness.

I think what I am really wondering is this: is there a relatively inexpensive lens that would be a poor choice with a color sensor due to chromatic aberration or color fringing, but that would be a good mate for the Monochrom. Not looking to use for architecture or landscape or anything like that. Looking for a more "classic" look to pair with the somewhat modern look of the Lux. 

Any ideas? 

I will post some samples with my 35lux when I have some time...

Thanks!

[Advertisement]

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

[Ken Abrahams]

I have an old Contax/Yashica -  Zeiss Planar 1.4. Its a great lens in black and white. One can pick up relatively cheaply from various sources. The only trouble with non Leica (M design Lenses) is they are not rangefinder coupled. One needs to use the live view function and with the Visoflex.

 

[jaapv]

• My absolute favorite is a  Canon (Serenar) 50/1.8 LTM.  Rangefinder coupled. Prices are in the 100$-200$ range. It is considered a better lens than the Summicron 50 of the period.

[a.noctilux]

When I get bored,

I use one of those for "fun" (choices out of my other 50mm "mountable on Leica M" ...)

never got short of choice for 50mm for me

(side note, I took out the Anastigmat from O Replica to put on M with LV/EVF, funny little lens much better than some 50mm I used)

side note bis, as I've seen the incredible FTM figures in my Pocket Book 8th Edition, page 155

 

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!

 

then again

...

How about one of those 1.2/1.4

for fun

 

Edited June 23, 2021 by a.noctilux

[augustwest100]

17 hours ago, jaapv said:

• My absolute favorite is a  Canon (Serenar) 50/1.8 LTM.  Rangefinder coupled. Prices are in the 100$-200$ range. It is considered a better lens than the Summicron 50 of the period.

This looks great - I remember seeing an article on this lens a while back. I would prefer rangefinder coupled since I am trying to keep things simple on the monochrom. I’ve got the SL2S for EVF work!

[jaapv]

 A bonus is that the coating is far more stable than the Leica one of the time, mostly the glass is very good on these lenses. Wipe out the haze and they shine.

[pippy]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

2 hours ago, augustwest100 said:

This looks great - I remember seeing an article on this lens a while back...

I second Jaap's nomination of the 50mm f1.8 Canon Serenar (or the slightly later but optically and mechanically identical 'Canon' branded version). They are superb performers which can go from showing a nice vintage feel at or near the widest aperture but then become quite 'modern' from around f4 down. They are also superbly made. The only (slight) downside is that they take a rather odd filter size and cinch-clip-on lens hoods are not as 'ubiquitous' as are the lenses (if you want a hood).

I use mine quite a bit with my own M Monochrom and cannot find fault with it.

One other 'left-field' choice would be the 1949-60 Leica 50mm f1.5 Summarit. Available in M-mount from 1953. Even more unusual filter thread and a hood which is priced in 'collector's territory' but as unique a lens ever made by Leica this side of a Thambar. Crazy rendering when used wide-open but - like the Serenar - becomes sane from around f4 / f5.6. If you are going to consider this lens it is vitally important to ensure the example you acquire, optically speaking, is as clear as you can find.

Some folks are asking insane amounts for the Summarit but good ones can usually be found for around the £450 - £500 range. Much more expensive than the Serenar, of course, but a bit of a bargain in LeicaWorld...

Good luck in your hunt!

Philip.

Edited June 23, 2021 by pippy

[augustwest100]

Two questions

With the Cannon lens, I would need a  thread to M adapter, right?

Anyone have experience with Voigtlander or know which of the Voigtlander 50’s has a more classic look?

Should I worry about focus shift if only planning to use rangefinder?

Edited June 24, 2021 by augustwest100

[Jeff S]

7 hours ago, pippy said:

The only (slight) downside is that they take a rather odd filter size and cinch-clip-on lens hoods are not as 'ubiquitous' as are the lenses (if you want a hood).

 

Some might care about 1m minimum focus distance.

Jeff

[pippy]

6 hours ago, Jeff S said:

Some might care about 1m minimum focus distance...

True. Personally with a 50mm lens I usually find that if my 'subject' is less than 1m away they are too close for comfort!.....

6 hours ago, augustwest100 said:

Two questions

With the Cannon lens, I would need a  thread to M adapter, right?

Anyone have experience with Voigtlander or know which of the Voigtlander 50’s has a more classic look?

Should I worry about focus shift if only planning to use rangefinder?

That's three questions............

Yes. Readily available from any number of manufacturers. Probably best to avoid the very cheap stuff; I've read that some aren't machined accurately enough. The adapters come in three versions each of which bring up the correct frame-lines in the viewfinder. You will need the one for the 50mm / 75mm pairing.

The answers to your second and third questions are, up to a point, connected and also rather complex. As far as focus-shift is concerned (mainly due to spherical aberration) you should be aware that before the days of ASPH / APO / FLE elements this has always been part and parcel of lens design. The issue is usually greater as maximum apertures increase so that, for example, a lens with a max. aperture of f2 will tend to have a bit less focus shift than an f1.4 max. ap. lens. Introducing more modern lens designs reduces the problem but in doing so these lenses start to diverge from the 'classic look' that you seem to desire.

Voigtlander currently offer three different types of 50mm lenses in what they call their 'Vintage Line'. These are the f2 ASPH; the (original) f1.5 and the f1.5 Version II. The first of these features not only aspherical elements; it utilises a pair of abnormally dispersal glass elements and also a floating element group. The 'original' f1.5 has many fans and possibly has more of the 'classic look' that you are after but there have been reports of focus-shift being an issue.....hence the recently-introduced Version II f1.5 which addressed this aspect of the original design. Which of these is 'right' for you? No idea. You really should try them out for yourself as only you can judge whether you like their respective styles of rendering.

One last point regarding focus-shift. Depending on how you shoot it might be a constant worry or, alternatively, a total non-issue. As it happens my #1 lens is a Voigtlander 40mm f1.4 Nokton and this is a lens which is notorious for exhibiting terrible focus-shift. Strangely I had never once been aware of any issues whatsoever so endeavoured to find out why it had earned such apoor reputation for itself. Undergoing studio-based tests it transpired that the lens only suffers from shift under certain conditions (which I had never encountered in actual shooting). This is when the subject matter is between approx. 1m - 2m away and (IIRC) when the lens is used at - or a half-stop either side of - f4. Wide-open there is no focus-shift at any aperture and beyond 2m there is no shift as by this distance depth-of-field takes care of the situation.

Incidentally once I had finished my experiments with the Nokton I put a dozen or so other lenses through the same process. The result was that ALL of the older optical designs showed focus-shift. The only lenses where f-s wasn't an issue were my three modern (Karbe-era) lenses but none of these lenses could be described as producing images with a 'Classic Look'.

Philip.

Edited June 24, 2021 by pippy

[jaapv]

On 6/23/2021 at 9:17 PM, pippy said:

I use mine quite a bit with my own M Monochrom and cannot find fault with it.

well, the focus throw is a bit on the long side - but it makes for precision in focusing.

 

On 6/23/2021 at 9:17 PM, pippy said:

The only (slight) downside is that they take a rather odd filter size and cinch-clip-on lens hoods are not as 'ubiquitous' as are the lenses (if you want a hood).

The later Canon version which I have takes a screw-in hood which also serves as a 39 filter adapter. It comes in a nice leather case too  .

[a.noctilux]

Out of topic,

I discovered Canon Camera Museum, recently

https://global.canon/en/c-museum/series_search.html?t=lens&s=s

where we can find

Serenar 1.8/50 pic

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!

very close to

Summarit 1.5/50,

[pedaes]

2 hours ago, pippy said:

The adapters

The adapters must alter the focal length - any idea by how much approximately? Does it turn a 50 into equivalent of, say, a sixty, or more?  My M42/LM adds about 17mm as an extension tube.

[a.noctilux]

10 minutes ago, pedaes said:

The adapters must alter the focal length - any idea by how much approximately? Does it turn a 50 into equivalent of, say, a sixty, or more?  My M42/LM adds about 17mm as an extension tube.

Not for LTM to M adapter,

precise 1.0mm thick released from the launch of M3 in 1954 to use older screw lenses

in Wiki

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!

 

For 50mm screw mount 39mm lenses, we need IRZOO/14097

Edited June 24, 2021 by a.noctilux

[pippy]

39 minutes ago, a.noctilux said:

Out of topic, I discovered Canon Camera Museum, recently......where we can find...Serenar 1.8/50...very close to Summarit 1.5/50...

Funnily enough quite often - if I'm in a '50mm Mood' - I'll take the Summarit on the Monochrom and the 'Serenar' on the M-D. I use them that way around because I'm reluctant to use the Summarit without a filter and the only filter I own for it is a Yellow.

Philip.

[pedaes]

33 minutes ago, a.noctilux said:

Not for LTM to M adapter,

I know - I am not talking about Leica LTM/LM. Widening it to others, as I said M42/LM.

[pippy]

2 hours ago, pedaes said:

The adapters must alter the focal length - any idea by how much approximately? Does it turn a 50 into equivalent of, say, a sixty, or more?  My M42/LM adds about 17mm as an extension tube.

No; the adapters don't alter the focal length at all.

My understanding is that when the M3 was being designed the engineers took into consideration the notion that users of existing LTM bodies would probably like to use their existing lenses with the new M bayonet-mount camera and, to this end, designed the M3's lens-flange-to-film-plane dimension 1mm narrower than that found on the 'Barnacks'. They also introduced the LTM adapter which - as Arnaud mentioned in post #14 - is 1mm thick which means that when the adapter is fitted to an LTM lens the correct flange-(etc) distance is maintained.

Philip.

Edited June 24, 2021 by pippy

[augustwest100]

4 hours ago, pippy said:

That's three questions............

Ha! Too late in the evening for me - I should have added a fourth question: “How come I can’t add?!” 🤣

Thanks for the detailed information though.  

I will try to find that Canon - seem to be some online…

Thanks for all the suggestions!

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[pippy]

1 hour ago, pedaes said:

I know - I am not talking about Leica LTM/LM. Widening it to others, as I said M42/LM.

The Canon Serenar lens (which is what I think we're all talking about?) is in LTM mount therefore the usual LTM-M adapter is what would be used and there would be no problems but I've absolutely no experience of using any other adapters with an M so can't answer that question I'm afraid.

As far as altering the focal-length of a lens goes it shouldn't make the slightest difference. Even if the M42 - M adapter is, as you say, 17mm thick the adapter is only putting the lens back to the correct position for the lens' rear-projection distance to be correct such as it would be were it screwed onto, say, a Pentax Spotmatic body which, at a guess, must have a lens-flange-to-focal-plane-distance some 17mm greater (due mainly for the need to have the instant-return mirror-box) than that found on an M body. Otherwise the lens wouldn't be able to focus at infinity accurately.

Philip.

Edited June 24, 2021 by pippy

[jaapv]

26 minutes ago, pippy said:

My understanding is that when the M3 was being designed the engineers took into consideration the notion that users of existing LTM bodies would probably like to use their existing lenses with the new M bayonet-mount camera and, to this end, designed the M3's lens-flange-to-film-plane dimension 1mm narrower than that found on the 'Barnacks'. They also introduced the LTM adapter which - as Arnaud mentioned in post #14 - is 1mm thick which means that when the adapter is fitted to an LTM lens the correct flange-(etc) distance is maintained

This is completely correct. Nore does any adapter alter a focal length, that is a property of the lens alone.
To be clear, we are talking about the  LTM (Leica  Thread Mount) variant of the lens, not about lenses that would need the L-M adapter. Those can be used as well, but without rangefinder coupling i.e. EVF camera only.

Use an M-LTM ring that covers the six-bit reader and make sure to use the 50-75 variant. They can be found all over the place and need not be expensive.