Which sharp 50mm for the m10m?

[6bit]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Am I the only who thinks the CV 50/1.5 II is sharp? 🙂

[hmzimelka]

21 minutes ago, 6bit said:

Am I the only who thinks the CV 50/1.5 II is sharp? 🙂

Nope, I'll vouch for the 50/1.5 II also... I think it's pretty great for B&W. For colour it has a little too much colour aberration for my liking, but I loved it on my M10M!

[lct]

3 hours ago, Almizilero said:

Most reviews state that the Planar is sharp from edge to edge even wide open.

Glad i don't read reviews of lenses i own . I must use a dozen 50mm lenses and only one can pretend to be sharp from edge to edge wide open, the Summicron 50/2 apo. And even there, corners are not as sharp as the centre TBH. At full aperture, the Planar 50/2 is sharp at the centre but significantly softer on the corners the same way as Summicron 50/2 v4 or v5 more or less. To get better results there at f/2 i would pick a Summicron 50/2 apo or a Summilux 50/1.4 asph preferably. I have no experience with the CV 50/2 apo.

Edited January 13, 2023 by lct

[lct]

44 minutes ago, 6bit said:

Am I the only who thinks the CV 50/1.5 II is sharp? 🙂

Sharp it is indeed at f/2 and on. F/1.5 looks a bit softer but my experience is limited to the SC version of this lens.

[Almizilero]

vor 50 Minuten schrieb lct:

Glad i don't read reviews of lenses i own . I must use a dozen 50mm lenses and only one can pretend to be sharp from edge to edge wide open, the Summicron 50/2 apo. And even there, corners are not as sharp as the centre TBH. At full aperture, the Planar 50/2 is sharp at the centre but significantly softer on the corners the same way as Summicron 50/2 v4 or v5 more or less. To get better results there at f/2 i would pick a Summicron 50/2 apo or a Summilux 50/1.4 asph preferably. I have no experience with the CV 50/2 apo.

Thank you! That sounds like a very good assessment. I think the Planar delivers really good value for the money and has a great look. Just got insecure because of the rave reviews. But yeah, stop reading and go shooting, I guess
 

[lct]

24 minutes ago, Almizilero said:

Thank you! That sounds like a very good assessment. I think the Planar delivers really good value for the money and has a great look. Just got insecure because of the rave reviews. But yeah, stop reading and go shooting, I guess

It is a superb lens indeed. A Zeiss lens with a somewhat different rendering as Leica ones though but it is hard not to like it with its little flare, high contrast, moderate vignetting and CA. It has a bit more distortion than Summicron 50/2 v4 or v5 but it is a classic barrel distortion easy to adjust in PP if needed.

[spydrxx]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I like the Planar, having previously owned a Summicron IV. 

[henning]

At the moment I happen to have one 50 for each (common) maximum aperture, or close to it: a 50/1 Noctilux, 50/1.4 ASPH, 50/2 Apo-Lanthar, 50/2.8 Elmar-M and 50/3.5 Nickel Elmar from 1931. I've had about 15 or 20 other 50's and used a lot of others since 1962. All have their place. And I mostly shoot an M10M right now.

Overall, the best technical performance and the most versatile lens with great technical performance is the f/1.4 ASPH. Good in so many ways, and not overly large for what it is. I've tried the 50 APO, and in practice it and the Apo-Lanthar are pretty much the same, and both are sharp from wide open and give a clarity to the files that the 1.4 ASPH never quite achieves, although from f/2.8 on it is quite close. The others are obviously out of the running in this regard, although they certainly have their place.

I also am not too happy with the size and appearance of the Apo-Lanthar, but I often use it looking past it as it were. I put a 49 to 46 step down ring on it and then an inexpensive 46mm vented hood, gluing it to the step down ring in place so the vents are in the proper alignment. This causes the least viewfinder intrusion with good protection/shading but hardly improves the looks. But again, the files are worth it, when clarity over the whole field is desired. I doubt I'll ever get the 50 APO. That kind of expenditure I'll save for the 35 APO ASPH which I'll get when they're a bit more common in the wild.

And then I go home, exchange it for the Noctilux, and I look for something completely different....

Edited January 14, 2023 by henning

[Jon Warwick]

On 1/14/2023 at 4:20 AM, henning said:

At the moment I happen to have one 50 for each (common) maximum aperture, or close to it: a 50/1 Noctilux, 50/1.4 ASPH, 50/2 Apo-Lanthar, 50/2.8 Elmar-M and 50/3.5 Nickel Elmar from 1931. I've had about 15 or 20 other 50's and used a lot of others since 1962. All have their place. And I mostly shoot an M10M right now.

Overall, the best technical performance and the most versatile lens with great technical performance is the f/1.4 ASPH. Good in so many ways, and not overly large for what it is. I've tried the 50 APO, and in practice it and the Apo-Lanthar are pretty much the same, and both are sharp from wide open and give a clarity to the files that the 1.4 ASPH never quite achieves, although from f/2.8 on it is quite close. The others are obviously out of the running in this regard, although they certainly have their place.

I also am not too happy with the size and appearance of the Apo-Lanthar, but I often use it looking past it as it were. I put a 49 to 46 step down ring on it and then an inexpensive 46mm vented hood, gluing it to the step down ring in place so the vents are in the proper alignment. This causes the least viewfinder intrusion with good protection/shading but hardly improves the looks. But again, the files are worth it, when clarity over the whole field is desired. I doubt I'll ever get the 50 APO. That kind of expenditure I'll save for the 35 APO ASPH which I'll get when they're a bit more common in the wild.

And then I go home, exchange it for the Noctilux, and I look for something completely different....

I used to have a M 50 APO, but now just use the 50 and 35 APO Lanthars, both being superb on my M10M IMHO. The main difference I find versus their Leica peers is longer length, it’s more an issue with the 35 APO Lanthar because it is longer than the Voigtlander 50mm version and framelines naturally even harder to avoid in terms of encroachment. As such I highly doubt I’d ever return to an M 50 APO, but the M 35 APO would make more sense (for me) due to its small size not hindering the framelines as much as the Voigtlander 35 APO Lanthar.

Edited January 15, 2023 by Jon Warwick

[DI1]

On 12/2/2022 at 8:20 AM, shirubadanieru said:

- 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.

This is exactly what I did. I sold my Sonnar and Planar 50’s and bought a mint Summilux Asph. It is really a phenomenal lens on the M10. I just posted some images in the 50 Summilux wide open thread, take a look. 

[panoramer]

My sharpest Leica optics are currently the 1:5.6/28mm Summaron for little money and the expensive reference glass 1:2/50mm Apo-Summicron. Every lens is sharp from f/8. A 50mm f/1.4 Summilux Asph. is the all-rounder. You can not go wrong.

 

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!

50mm Apo-Summicron

50mm Summilux pre-Asph.

50mm Summilux Asph.

1:5.6/28mm Summaron