Which sharp 50mm for the m10m?

[Olaf_ZG]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I am thinking of a m10m, and would love to have a crisp and sharp 50mm next to my sonnar.

the sonnar is great for portraits and dreamy stuff, however I would like to do architecture as well (buildings and staircases) in the style of Joel Tijntjelaar.

my budget will be about 3000euro. Next to crisp/sharp, it must also be good looking on the M (for that reason the Lanthar is not my preferred option as to me it is an ugly lens).

would be a non-apo summicron sharp enough? Could a planar be ok?

Thanks for feedback.

[Advertisement]

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

[Erato]

APO50.

[Olaf_ZG]

36 minutes ago, Al Brown said:

There is really just one simple answer... used Summilux 50/1.4 ASPH (which is also APO). You can get them anywhere between 2500eur - 3000eur.

Love the look of the one with the hood! Wouldn’t it be too much of an overlap with the sonnar or the non-asph 50mm?

[Olaf_ZG]

11 minutes ago, Erato said:

APO50.

Not really within my budget…

[Knipsknecht]

I would recommend the 50mm Summarit f2.5 or 2.4. Small, light, very sharp and modern rendering. Only downside: Leica has stopped producing the Summarit line, so you only can get it used (but there are a lot of reliable professional sellers and you will save some money😇.

Here is a review: https://mrleica.com/leica-summarit-m-50mm-f2-5-lens/

Another candidate would be the ZEISS Planar T* 2/50 ZM. It's a little bit faster than the Summarit and you can get it new for a very reasonable price.

Here is a review: https://jacktaka.com/zeiss-50mm-f2

As you already have the Sonnar, you probably know about the pros and cons regarding Zeiss lenses, right?

Other than that the Summicron (non-APO) would be only an alternative if you don't want another Zeiss lens. And if you're looking for corner-to-corner perfection, well, then APO is the way - either Leica or Voigtlander.

[shirubadanieru]

- Elmar-M 50mm f2.8

- Heliar 40mm f2.8 (not a 50mm but it shows the 50mm lines and is close enough)

- 50mm Planar

- Lux 50 ASPH 

- Cron 50mm V4

 

All of these as sharp as you need. If you get the Lux 50 ASPH you don’t need the Sonnar. You can use it for dreamy portraits at f1.4, and use it for architecture from f2 or f2.8 onwards. Might be a good way to simplify gear. If you want to keep the Sonnar, the Elmar and Heliar are super sharp from f2.8 and super tiny.

[maxpower]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

For what it's worth, my vote goes to the 50 Lux ASPH as well. 

[Herr Barnack]

A minty used 50/1.4 Summilux would be the best choice. 

The newer ASPH version is an outstanding lens but if you can find one, don't disregard the previous non-ASPH (called the type 3) 50 Summilux 11-868 (black) or 11-856 (silver). 

[Keith (M)]

Crisp and sharp 50mm for the M10M?  Going by my nearly three years of M10M + 50mm usage, has to be the Summilux ASPH.   (My other 50mm's are the C-Sonnar f1.5,  5cm Summicron Collapsible LTM and more recently the  Noctilux f1.2).

[sinjun]

3 hours ago, Olaf_ZG said:

it must also be good looking on the M

This is obviously a matter of taste but I would assume by this that you don't want it to be too big. Whilst the 50mm Summilux is a superlative lens (if you haven't tried one you should) it's on the large side for a 50mm. The silver chrome version is attractive in my eyes despite its size but is very dense and heavy. If large aperture is not important I'd recommend a look at the modern summarit. The non-APO summicrons are very well thought of and along with sharpness seem to have attractive character (though I wouldn't count the ver. 1 collapsible as a sharp lens). To my eyes a sliver chrome summicron verison 5 is very good looking on an M camera, black or silver, and is as crisp / sharp as most would want, with an attractive character.

[lct]

6 hours ago, Olaf_ZG said:

I am thinking of a m10m, and would love to have a crisp and sharp 50mm next to my sonnar. [...] my budget will be about 3000euro [...]

No need to spend that much. Planar 50/2. Perfect match with the Sonnar 50/1.5. 

[DadDadDaddyo]

Without prejudice toward any posters in this present thread, I confess I don't understand the substance of comments about how a particular camera or lens "looks": not how it "sees", but how it "looks".

It's not a fashion accessory! It doesn't "go" or "not go" with one's outfit, one's hair, one's ensemble. Are folks actually concerned with how they'll look using it??

This is not merely a matter of style, but of practical application. If we're thinking about how we look, we'll never be willing to let the camera dictate where it needs to be placed for a given photograph, because we'll be worried about being seen in that position. It's a stance, not a pose!

We've been given splendid tools, exquisitely suited to task!

How they look???

(Does this camera make me look fat?)

[Olaf_ZG]

5 hours ago, DadDadDaddyo said:

Without prejudice toward any posters in this present thread, I confess I don't understand the substance of comments about how a particular camera or lens "looks": not how it "sees", but how it "looks".

It's not a fashion accessory! It doesn't "go" or "not go" with one's outfit, one's hair, one's ensemble. Are folks actually concerned with how they'll look using it??

This is not merely a matter of style, but of practical application. If we're thinking about how we look, we'll never be willing to let the camera dictate where it needs to be placed for a given photograph, because we'll be worried about being seen in that position. It's a stance, not a pose!

We've been given splendid tools, exquisitely suited to task!

How they look???

(Does this camera make me look fat?)

I would agree with you, almost 😇.

on my other cameras I really couldn’t care less, however, on the M to me it matters. May be cause the M itself is so wonderful crafted, may be cause I know that on the M “beauty” can go together with function.

but may be you are right and may be it is plain stupid. But then, I don’t care, can blame it on midlife crisis 😎

[Olaf_ZG]

18 hours ago, Knipsknecht said:

I would recommend the 50mm Summarit f2.5 or 2.4. Small, light, very sharp and modern rendering. Only downside: Leica has stopped producing the Summarit line, so you only can get it used (but there are a lot of reliable professional sellers and you will save some money😇.

 

Didn’t think of this one, must try it on the camera, as it is said to be small, and somehow the way I hold a camera, too small wouldn’t fit me (fe, fuji x100 series is too small lens to my liking)

16 hours ago, Herr Barnack said:

A minty used 50/1.4 Summilux would be the best choice. 

The newer ASPH version is an outstanding lens but if you can find one, don't disregard the previous non-ASPH (called the type 3) 50 Summilux 11-868 (black) or 11-856 (silver). 

The Summilux gets most votes here, if I go for a non-asph I would like v4 as it focus up to 70cm, however, not sure if this lens is crisp and sharp. Is it even possible to have dreamy and crisp and sharp in one lens?

11 hours ago, Musky said:

Personally I think Planar it is. this is when I had it  

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!

compact like the Cron. Not smooth like it and those aperture clicks are a just a little rough. But in B&W is great  

A bonus mention can be this lens  the 50f3.5 Heliar

The planar could be a serious option. Though it will be probably less good then the contax g-series 45 planar. Loved this lens for film.

Heliar is estetic wise no option. And the Lanthar is big indeed.

[Olaf_ZG]

Next week a go to my dealer and will try some of those lenses, both on a m10m and on my current mm.

As I by mainly secondhand (or demo), it would take me a while to search and find. Happily I am not in a hurry.

Regarding 35mm, this I have with the SL. And with a Q, the need for wide is covered, so it really must be a 50mm.

Thanks to you all for your feedback. 

[hmzimelka]

25 minutes ago, Al Brown said:

If the OP wants the lens to perform AND look good, there is absolutely nobody here that should judge him or shame him. It is his money, his terms, his life. This IS prejudice.
Leica spends tons of marketing cash on its design and looks, that is what distingusihes it from other plasticky camera makers. Everybody buying Leica is sensitive to this aspect - if nothing else at the initial choice of silver vs. chrome.

Absolutely!

[Stein K S]

Hi 

Obviously fully support the ¨looks¨ thing 👍

Enclosed picture of two of the lenses being proposed: the M10 with 50 Cron V5 and M6 with 50 Elmar-M. Both do in my opinion.

In next post I make a size comparison.

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 December 3, 2022 by Stein K S

[Stein K S]

And here the size comparison.

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!

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[lct]

3 hours ago, Al Brown said:

If the OP wants the lens to perform AND look good, there is absolutely nobody here that should judge him or shame him. [...]

Indeed. I don't care much about the look of my cameras but i don't see why my personal tastes should be shared by anybody else for whatever reason. 

[DadDadDaddyo]

All fine, but the "looks" thing crops up in every camera brand forum you can find. I've run into it in Fujifilm forums, Canon forums, and Nikon forums.

To say that with Leica the concern for looks is justified because they're Leicas and they're beautiful (I think they're beautiful too) is to remain quiet in the face of the commonly applied charge that Leica photographers are merely status-conscious poseurs. (Yeah right. Say that to Robert Capa...).

Look, I've been shooting Leicas for more than 50 years. My working group (I resist the term "collection") includes a IIIc, a IIIg, two M4s, an SL601, an SL2, an M246, and an M10M, along with a whole pile of lenses. The worst part about shooting Leicas (maybe the only downside) is when you run into a photographer who smirks because you're using a Leica, assuming you're therefore not a "real photographer", or who alternately comes on to you like a long-lost brother or member of the Water Buffalo Order with some secret handshake.

I was shooting large format in Gettysburg this past summer and kept getting interrupted by folks who thought my gear looked novel and old fashioned. Several wanted to take pictures of me rather than the extraordinary setting in which we found ourselves. I guess it bothered me. Mostly, it was a pain in the neck.  

So I understand. I just feel that form follows function, that the beauty of Leica equipment is in its single-minded elevation of engineering excellence above all other concerns. Let's be judged by our output, not our tools. 

By the way, I wholeheartedly agree with the sentiments expressed for the Summilux 50 ASPH. Wonderful lens!

I apologize for taking this thread on a tangent.