What is the best (most reliable) performing lightweight reasonably fast 50 mm M-mount lens?

[rramesh]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I would suggest the Voigtlander 50mm f/1.5 Nokton Vintage Line II Aspherical. It's small, < 200gm and a decent performer. It would be my choice if and when I sell my Summilux 50.

Edited August 31, 2022 by rramesh

[Advertisement]

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

[Olaf_ZG]

Please note that the sonnar has 46mm filtersize, not 43mm.

[lct]

3 hours ago, lct said:

Focus shift is less of a problem on film so i would say Sonnar 50/1.5 if you don't dislike its focus knob and 43mm filters. Otherwise Summicron 50/2 v4 for reasons stated above or Planar 50/2 if you shoot often into the light.

I meant to say 46mm filters, sorry for the typo.

[Stein K S]

11 hours ago, roelandinho said:

Indeed, I already have an excellent slow 50 mm. 

Hi

Just curious about which slow excellent 50 that is? 😃

[yanidel]

Another vote for the 50mm Summicron v4. Light, optically great, distinctive look at F2 and razor sharp at smaller apertures. Got these great colors too. And very cheap, in terms of Leica of course.

[grahamc]

48 minutes ago, yanidel said:

Another vote for the 50mm Summicron v4. Light, optically great, distinctive look at F2 and razor sharp at smaller apertures. Got these great colors too. And very cheap, in terms of Leica of course.

+ 1 here.   I think that’s the “best” Summicron meeting all of your criteria. 
 

If you could compromise to 2.8 max aperture then I think you would find the 50:2.8 Elmar-M (collapsible) sharper though, which seems to be a priority for you.  It’s the modern reissue from around 1994 onward. 

Edited August 31, 2022 by grahamc

[grahamc]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 hour ago, Stein K S said:

Hi

Just curious about which slow excellent 50 that is? 😃

I was wondering the same although I think the OP mentions a slower lens in his first post - maybe that one ? A 3.5 I think  

[Jeff S]

1 hour ago, Stein K S said:

Hi

Just curious about which slow excellent 50 that is? 😃

First post.

Jeff

[RayD28]

Phillip above mentions the attributes the v4 Summicron.  I'll add that you can get one in good condition for about $1,400 so any price differences between other brands should be relatively small.

[a.noctilux]

Having my note book (weighting them over time),

I forgot the 50Th. anniversary Summicron 50mm "11615" only 260g, no hood.

M-Hexanon 2/50 , only 256g

surprise is big with Summilux-M 1.4/50 "III" in black only 275g, I know why it is my goto 1.4 lens.

the same in titanium coated is far heavier at 368g.

 

Anyway my winner, as I wrote many times Summarit-M 2.5/50mm at 180g, my most (now) use lens.

 

Edited September 1, 2022 by a.noctilux

[shirubadanieru]

No one mentioned the rigid summicron? Not as light as the V4 cron but has better signature & offers a more unique rendering than the V4. it's also less than 250g & the body design is much cooler. Only downside is 1m min focus.

[roelandinho]

Thank you to everyone who shared their recommendations so far! I'm adding the V4 Summicron to my list as I like the fact that it's so light and apparently has the same optics as the most recent (non-APO) version. I do hope to avoid old-lens issues (haze, separation and other stuff) though... 

I also want to clarify a bit more what exactly I'm looking for (I have the feeling I didn't explain enough in the original post).

I currently have the Zeiss 50 f/1.5 Sonnar as my fast 50. I like the rendering of this lens a lot, BUT it takes a lot of care to use it to its fullest potential. What I mean is that I cannot just trust the rangefinder and expect perfectly sharp images. Instead, with this lens I often have to (slightly) override the rangefinder by focusing a bit closer or a bit further. The optimal compensation depends on the aperture selected, the position of the subject in the picture (center, midfield or edge) and also the distance of the subject to the camera. Focus shift + field curvature + general softness in the periphery. 

Sometimes however I want a lens that "just works" and where I can "blindly" trust the rangefinder (and focus all my attention on composition and timing of my pictures). I have a few lenses like this: the CV 28 mm f/2 Ultron asph ii, the ZM 35 mm f/2.8 C-Biogon and the CV 50 mm f/3.5 Heliar. These lenses are sharp at every aperture and every distance, from center to edge. Focusing closer or further than indicated by the rangefinder never results in a visible improvement with these lenses (i.e. focus shift and field curvature issues are undetectable). They also never flare and deliver very sharp (especially the 35 mm f/2.8 C-Biogon is amazing) negatives. 

I would like a faster (f/2 or better) version of this kind of lens to replace the slow Heliar. In terms of image quality the APO-Lanthar would be perfect (or the APO-Summicron if it doesn't flare) but I realise that is impossible to get in the size/weight class I want. I'm looking for the second-best option in a small and light (< 250 grams) lens. Which one of the lenses discussed so far is closest to what I describe? 

I don't care much about filter threads (the 50 Heliar is E27 (!), 35 C-Biogon is E43 and 28 Ultron is E39) or focus tab styles. 

Edit: I will add the 50 mm Summarit (f/2.4 or f/2.5 have the same optics apparently?) to the options as it is a modern lens, compact and light and it is said to be flare resistant. Not an f/2 but maybe close enough if the image quality fits what I'm looking for better than the other options. 

Edit 2: the options I am still considering are (all 50 mm)

• Summicron V4
• Summicron V5 (heavier than V4 but newer --> less issues?)
• Summarit f/2.4 or f/2.5 (I would like a faster lens though)
• ZM Planar f/2
• CV Nokton f/1.5 asph ii
• Konica Hexanon f/2 (but not if it needs some kind of calibration...)

Which of these lenses is closest to what I want? Ideally: no detectable focus shift, reasonably flat field, sharp at every setting, and flare-free. 

 

Edited September 1, 2022 by roelandinho

[lct]

33 minutes ago, roelandinho said:

[...] I currently have the Zeiss 50 f/1.5 Sonnar as my fast 50. I like the rendering of this lens a lot, BUT it takes a lot of care to use it to its fullest potential. What I mean is that I cannot just trust the rangefinder and expect perfectly sharp images. [...] I want a lens that "just works" and where I can "blindly" trust the rangefinder (and focus all my attention on composition and timing of my pictures). I have a few lenses like this: the CV 28 mm f/2 Ultron asph ii, the ZM 35 mm f/2.8 C-Biogon and the CV 50 mm f/3.5 Heliar. [...] I would like a faster (f/2 or better) version of this kind of lens to replace the slow Heliar. [...]

You're pretty well describing the Planar 50/2 here but i have no experience with it. If you like the IQ of Summicron 50/2 v4 or v5, you will find more or less the same on the M-Hexanon 50/2 with a bit less flare and focus shift. Beware that some copies of the Hexanon need some calibration on M bodies though. At least mine did so on the M240 but it works fine as is on my M11 i don't know why. Only cons it needs 40.5mm flters and has a screw head on the way of the 6-bit sensor. Cannot be repaired by Leica of course but the lens looks solid as a tank and clean copies can be had for significantly less than EUR 1,000 on e**y.

[a.noctilux]

5 hours ago, shirubadanieru said:

No one mentioned the rigid summicron?

Rigid or "II" in my post #5

mine Rigid is out 🤒 with 1g too much (251g no hood ! ).

 

As side note, I never have enough 50mm or 5cm lenses.

I buy/sold so many already, but number still keep growing.

[roelandinho]

26 minutes ago, a.noctilux said:

Rigid or "II" in my post #5

mine Rigid is out 🤒 with 1g too much (251g no hood ! ).

I didn’t leave out the Rigid Summicron because of the excess 1 g, but rather because I assumed the performance would not be better than the newest optical design (versions 4 and 5), with version 4 being more desirable because it’s significantly lighter. Also, I want to avoid potential issues related to the age of the lens (deterioration of coatings, separation, haze etc). 
 

Are these assumptions wrong? Is this older Summicron optically superior in some way (considering what I’m looking for, see above)?

Edited September 1, 2022 by roelandinho

[a.noctilux]

5 minutes ago, roelandinho said:

Is this older Summicron optically superior in some way (considering what I’m looking for, see above)?

Of course no.

No lens is superior to the other, only different.

 

I have many lenses that were made in 1930's so almost one century old, and they are still good for the job, nothing as haze, separation or else (internet myths, or abusive users/bad condition of conservation).

They (some) are not coated but as they were designed with bare glass, they can do wonder considering their age.

[BradS]

The Zeiss 50mm f/2 Planar ZM is the obvious choice.  The Nokton might also be good. I don't know as I've never useed one.

[roelandinho]

22 minutes ago, a.noctilux said:

Of course no.

No lens is superior to the other, only different.

I agree that no lens is superior to another if one does not define what “superior” means. That’s why I added the “considering what I’m looking for, see above” part.

I stated that I (ideally) want minimal focus shift, minimal field curvature, max resolution at every aperture and distance from center to edge, and minimal flare. So in this case, when I ask if a lens is “superior” than another, what I mean is “is it noticeably better in one or more of these aspects than the other lens?”. 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[a.noctilux]

Good luck then 🤞.

Searching for many decades the ideal lens, always found almost "ideal" lenses in each I do accept and learn to know their flaws.

 

I can cite their flaws (in 50mm only, some "flaws" in one lens I like to use as such) : heavy, too big, flare prone, weird filter size, too short focus range, aperture difficult to set, too loose setting, too stiff, not wide enough focus ring,

and many more without even citing optical "flaws" ...

[roelandinho]

11 minutes ago, a.noctilux said:

Good luck then 🤞.

Searching for many decades the ideal lens, always found almost "ideal" lenses in each I do accept and learn to know their flaws.

 

I can cite their flaws (in 50mm only, some "flaws" in one lens I like to use as such) : heavy, too big, flare prone, weird filter size, too short focus range, aperture difficult to set, too loose setting, too stiff, not wide enough focus ring,

and many more without even citing optical "flaws" ...

I am still hopeful though 🙂