Jump to content

Sell my v3 summicron 50mm and buy Voigtlander Apo Lanthar 50mm? No brainer?


jaques
 Share

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

6 hours ago, jaques said:

to me the construction feels pretty excellent. Mine is the version with the focus tab and the focus throw never bothered me that I noticed... doesn't seem to be particularly long? The only leica lens from tha era that I felt had a 'cheapish' construction feel was the so called 'bokeh king' 35mm summicron.

The v3 has no focus tab, so yours might be the v4.

Link to post
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, a.noctilux said:

With focus TAB ?

@jacquesthen your Summicron 50 would not be version III, maybe version so called ... IV/V ?

The optical cell is the same for long and many types made in various mounts and colors.

So you may find later one of those many Summicron IV/V,  quite easily if you sell it now.

I had the "same lens" so many times, in various mounts, one of the most popular Leica/Leitz lens.

 

Not the best and not the worse 50mm in my view, they do the job.

For fun after having tabbed varieties, I use the same optical cell in "not tabbed" silver "heavy" mounts

 

 

I once had the remake of the rigid that you are showing here, and damn should’ve kept it…but at the same time I do prefer the original rendering of the rigid to the v4/5…but still, a very beautiful lens that you don’t see very often! Thanks for sharing! 

Link to post
Share on other sites

This so-called version III, but "II" in our Wiki link to...

comparing with my pic above for dof scale or focus ring numbers

for focus ring "long" throw as stated @shirubadanieru

 

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 by a.noctilux
Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, jaques said:

to me the construction feels pretty excellent. Mine is the version with the focus tab and the focus throw never bothered me that I noticed... doesn't seem to be particularly long? The only leica lens from tha era that I felt had a 'cheapish' construction feel was the so called 'bokeh king' 35mm summicron.

Out of topic, concerning 35mm KOB construction

Cheapist indeed but better with "Made in Germany" later "155g" models.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I’ll add my voice to the chorus advising you to keep the Summicron 50 v3 and add the APO-Lanthar 50 if you also want modern rendering combined with excellent performance at or near wide open. But I agree with ocean2059 that the AL50’s size and weight are a definite minus. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

now I am not sure what version my summicron is?- it looks just exactly like this one (btw- I just grabbed this image off ebay where the lens is described as '3rd version'?):

 

 

 

 

 

 

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 by jaques
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Version IV as so many people consensus.

Not really official version of Summicron 50mm in any Leitz/Leica literature that I came across.

 

From Cameraquest

we can read

50/2  Summicron  Many variations, so it can get confusing.  Many consider the 50 Summicron best of all 50 mm lenses, by any manufacturer.  It's the standard that other 50's are judged by.

  • First version 1954-1957 Collapsible chrome. A good lens, but not as good as the later lenses.  EXTREMELY likely to be found with lens scratches.  It has a VERY soft front coating.    Likely to be encountered fogged from original owner, see Fogging.  Not collapsible on M5 or CL due to meter constrictions. 7 elements, focused to 40"
  • Second version 1956-68 Rigid chrome, although a few were made in black by special order. Aesthetically a very handsome lens, sought after by shooters and collectors. This lens was   tested to have the highest resolution (at the expense of some contrast) of any 50 Summicron several years ago by a Japanese photography magazine.  Again, very prone to front lens scratches.  For many years thought to be the same optical formula as the collapsible, recently it has been confirmed to be slightly different.   Likely to be encountered fogged from original owner, see Fogging.   7 elements, focused to 40"
  • Third version 1956-1968  Dual Range Summicron,  chrome.   This is a special close focusing version of # 2 above.   The 50/2 Duel Range Summicron had the highest tested resolution of any lens ever tested by the great and sadly departed American photography magazine, Modern Photography.   It has the closest RF coupled focusing of any M lens.   7 elements.   Most "experts" say the optical formula is the same as the rigid, but many   experienced DR users claim they get different results and so believe they must be different formulas.    With a flat platform for the "eyes" on the top of it's focusing barrel, the DR is not as  pleasing aesthetically as the rigid.   Nevertheless,  the DR is very sought after by shooters.   Again, very prone to front lens scratches and also fogging if bought from the original owner, see Fogging.    for Pics

The 50/2 DR will probably work fine on the M6, but you must remember to mount and dismount the lens focused at infinity.   When focused near it's closest regular focusing distance, the lens will be difficult to mount OR unmount.    I have reports of  the DR not functioning in close up range on a M6.   I am frankly unsure if these reports are due to variations with the bodies and the DR, or are the result of user error.  More research will till.   It seems prudent to try a  DR  on your  M6  before you buy it. 

Howard Cummer in Hong Kong reports difficulty using a 2nd series DR in close-up range on a M6 .85  # 2296539.   While he could mount the lens, if it was not focused at it's closest regular focusing distance, the close up range was inoperative due to some sort of internal body restrictions.   Whether this is true of all late M6's in general, or of just the .85 model is not clear at this time.   In any case, it's a good idea  to try it out  to be sure on your own body/lens combination. 

The 50/2 DR will NOT work on a Minolta CLE in my experience.  Although the lens will mount, it will bind with the body just slightly from the infinity marking.

The DR lens has two focusing ranges, thus the brilliant name "Dual Range." The DR can ONLY be mounted on the camera without it's "eyes."      The "eyes" are a detachable viewfinder which clips onto the top of the lens and in front of the camera's rangefinder/viewfinder.   They look pretty much like the viewer built into the 135/2.8 or the M3 versions of the 35/2 and 2.8.   Once mounted, the closer focusing range is attained by turning the lens to it's closest normal focusing point.     Then attach the "eyes" which clip onto the lens.    ONLY at this focus point can the eyes be attached and the closest focusing range attained.   THEN pull the focusing barrel out slightly, and the lens barrel can be swung over farther to the left, to get into the close focusing range.    It sounds more complicated than it really is in practice.

It is worth noting that many experienced used find the DR Summicron not only their favorite 50, but their favorite lens, period.    It has a combination of higher resolution and lower contrast and superb out of focus images. 

The Earlier version of the DR focuses to 19" and is marked in either feet or meters, but not both.  It is also marked in reproduction rations from 1:15 to 1:.75.   The  "eyes" for these have the "condenser" trademark, inside of which is "E.
Leitz Wetzlar."

The Later version of the DR focuses to 20" and is marked in BOTH feet and meters, without the repro ratios.  The "eyes" for this version are  marked "Leitz Wetzlar" without the condenser trademark.     The second version also has wider and deeper knurling on the focusing ring than the previous version.  I have noticed a "warmer" color of lens coating on these later DR's, but am not sure if it extends to ALL of this variety.    The lens head and glass appears to be identical to the earlier version and to the rigid version, at least from the outside.   The second version also has a smaller ball bearing mount for the eyes, which means the later eyes will not fit the earlier lenses, though the older eyes will fit the later lenses.

  • Fourth version 1969-1979 Black lens with no "50" on barrel,  No  focusing lock or lever.  Generally reputed to be a notch below either of the Summicron versions before or after it. 6 elements.  This and later versions focused to 28, the closest focusing RF coupled 50 after the DR."
  • Fifth version 1980-95  Black lens with "50" on barrel, reintroduced focusing lever, without built in hood.  In my opinion this is a better choice in terms of handling than the built in hood version which followed it.    I am a fan of both the focusing lever and the larger attachable hood.  Nice lightweight lens at only 195 grams  6 elements, recomputed.    Earlier lenses are Made in Canada, later Made in Germany.
  • Sixth version 1995-date  Black or chrome  lens with "50" on barrel and built in hood.  No focusing lever.  Same optical design as previous version. Weighs more at 240 grams in black.  The chrome version weighs much more at 333 grams, so I would avoid it.   Same optical formula as previous version.
  • In December 2001,  Leica announced  500 50/2 Titanium lenses would be made to match their newly introduced limited edition .72 M6 TTL Titanium body. 
Edited by a.noctilux
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, shirubadanieru said:

I once had the remake of the rigid that you are showing here, and damn should’ve kept it…but at the same time I do prefer the original rendering of the rigid to the v4/5…but still, a very beautiful lens that you don’t see very often! Thanks for sharing! 

you can read more about this Summicron "50th" anniversary:

Erwin Puts "50th" Summicron-M

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 3/19/2022 at 10:23 PM, jaques said:

now I am not sure what version my summicron is?- it looks just exactly like this one (btw- I just grabbed this image off ebay where the lens is described as '3rd version'?):

 

 

 

 

 

 

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!

Yeah that’s a v4 with tiger claw : ) Considered to be the best cron performance-wise (until the APO was released). I’d say it’s much better than the v3 cron due to the points mentioned previously, but it’s quite transparent in its rendering, which is why I prefer the v1 and v2 versions : ) 

Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO. 

I have tried several types of 50 Cron. By buying and selling. v3 was last 50 Cron I have tried and sold. The only reason I sold them all after trying is because I'm not 50mm user. I have couple of LTM 50mm lenses, if I want to.

I also have tried CV and ZM 50mm lenses and their color rendering was different from Crons. They had less or none of focus shift comparing to Crons I had.

If I ever get back to regular use of 50mm on Leica, it is most likely going to be not typ 3, but typ 2 rigid with same optics as DR. 

My choice would be based on where I'm able to use it. Which is M-E 220 for now. 

Non APO, ASPH Crons colors might be less correct, technically, but I'm finding Crons colors to be just right and more pleasing, alive, not just technically correct.

Sharpness was on pair as well.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, shirubadanieru said:

Yeah that’s a v4 with tiger claw : ) Considered to be the best cron performance-wise (until the APO was released). I’d say it’s much better than the v3 cron due to the points mentioned previously, but it’s quite transparent in its rendering, which is why I prefer the v1 and v2 versions : ) 

Mine was worse for focus shifts comparing to v2, v3, ZM Planar and CV 50 1.5 ASPH. Plus its common veil, never had it with any 50.  And on bw film, dr prints is was totally flat and lifeless.

Typ 3 was better lens overall, including build quality, which was odd, but still well build.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't speak to the v3, the difference between the CV 50 APO and latest 50 Cron v5 is enormous. The resolving power, microcontrast, and color of the CV APO is absolutely stunning, and the 50 Cron doesn't come close. The 50 Cron is wonderful in its own way, though: small size, subdued (elegant?) color/contrast, good sharpness across the frame at infinity, unique flare, etc. These two lenses are very different artistic tools. Add the APO and keep the Cron.

Link to post
Share on other sites

the only issue I have with all the 'get both' suggestions is that I don't have unlimited funds- and don't need an arsenal of 50mm lenses. At a guess I suppose I must have at least 7 x M or LTM 50's already, and quite a few SLR 50's... I am spoiled as it is. A few years ago I stopped adding to my collection- and stared 'upgrading' if I buy something new I have to let something else go.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 3/19/2022 at 9:23 AM, jaques said:

now I am not sure what version my summicron is?- it looks just exactly like this one (btw- I just grabbed this image off ebay where the lens is described as '3rd version'?):

 

 

 

 

 

 

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!

 

9 hours ago, shirubadanieru said:

Yeah that’s a v4 with tiger claw : ) Considered to be the best cron performance-wise (until the APO was released). I’d say it’s much better than the v3 cron due to the points mentioned previously, but it’s quite transparent in its rendering, which is why I prefer the v1 and v2 versions : ) 

Hello Shirubadanieru,

I have a question: Does that look like a tiger's CLAW? or does that look like a tiger's PAW?

A paw with more toes than some tigers have.

Best Regards,

Michael

Edited by Michael Geschlecht
Link to post
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Michael Geschlecht said:

 

Hello Shirubadanieru,

I have a question: Does that look like a tiger's CLAW? or does that look like a tiger's PAW?

A paw with more toes than some tigers have.

Best Regards,

Michael

Very good question. Unfortunately I have not seen a tiger claw or paw up close so I can’t guarantee the most appropriate answer : p that being said, the ‘official’ title for these early lenses focus tab is ‘Tiger Claw’ and I believe it’s present only on the Cron 50mm v4 and Cron 35mm V4 early models.

Link to post
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, shirubadanieru said:

Very good question. Unfortunately I have not seen a tiger claw or paw up close so I can’t guarantee the most appropriate answer : p that being said, the ‘official’ title for these early lenses focus tab is ‘Tiger Claw’ and I believe it’s present only on the Cron 50mm v4 and Cron 35mm V4 early models.

Hello Shirubadanieru,

Back when these lenses first came out, they are the first versions of the 35mm & 50mm f2 Summicrons. Both Type IV: I only know of them being referred to as the "tiger's paw" versions. Because that is what the focusing tabs looks like: A paw. Fast forward to a few years ago, when people begin worrying about Leitz/Leica minutia somewhat more than they did a while before. Even by the standards of Leitz/Leica: The term "tiger claw" appeared & has endured up to today. Even tho when you look at them: You are not looking at a CLAW: You are looking at a PAW.

And if it is part of a tiger: It is a "tiger's paw". With an apostrophe ' ' ' '. Not a "tiger paw". Which rhymes with "claw".

Many happy photos with a very nice lens.

Best Regards.

Michael

Edited by Michael Geschlecht
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.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...