1982 Leitz 50mm f1.4

[Chris W]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Somehow I have never gelled with this lens. It is a made in Germany 50mm f1.4, 7 figure serial number starting with 325 (1982?).

I also have a 35 mm f2 that I love and use all the time.

I decided to futz with my 50 yesterday, including adjusting the rangefinder on my M240. The test images still didn't excite me (a bit soft at f5.6).

Unfortunately my eyes have been polluted by 20 years of sharp digital photography, but I do still enjoy using my 35mm.

Am I missing something. Is this lens notoriously soft (dreamy?)?

 

[dpitt]

it is softer wide open but should be very sharp at F4- F5.6. Softness at F1.4 is less than the 35mm Summilux v1 at F1.4.

Which version of the Summicron 35 are you comparing with?

Edited February 21, 2023 by dpitt

[Chris W]

Non ASPH, 7 figure serial starting 345. I imagine 1980's again (fourth version 35 Summicron)?

[lct]

My 1986 copy is a bit soft at f/1.4, reason why i like it for portraits, but otherwise it is a sharp lens at f/2 and on. I mean in the centre of the frame as edges and corners are significantly softer below f/5.6.

[Chris W]

I'll try again. I did recalibrate my rangefinder. I'll compare to my Leica 35 and 90mm lenses.

[84bravo]

You might need a corrective diopter on you viewfinder. Especially if you're over 40. The 50 f1.4 is not very forgiving if you miss precise focus.

Check with your other lenses wide open. The RF calibration may be off after your adjustments.

[Gregm61]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Applying 2022 expectations to a 1982 lens is the primary issue, more than thinking that user-tinkering (makes me shudder just thinking about that) with the rangefinder will cause time and design to change, any more than me thinking my mid 80’s Canadian 90mm Summicron would be as sharp at f2 as a 90mm APO made last year.

Edited February 22, 2023 by Gregm61

[Chris W]

Thanks. I'm comparing the 1982 50mm to a 1980's 35mm, which I've always enjoyed using and enjoyed the images from. It's true it's hard to divorce myself from being acclimated to the uber sharp modern lens, but I am generally happy with my 35mm f2 images. I hardly ever shoot 'wide open', usually one or two stops above.

After my rangefinder adjustment all my M lenses focus accurately on a distant wind turbine.

[dpitt]

On 2/21/2023 at 10:49 AM, Chris W said:

Non ASPH, 7 figure serial starting 345. I imagine 1980's again (fourth version 35 Summicron)?

You have a  Summilux 50 v2 from 1982. You can look it up here. There are links to other posts about it:
https://wiki.l-camera-forum.com/leica-wiki.en/index.php/50mm_f/1.4_Summilux-M_II

The Summicron is this one
https://wiki.l-camera-forum.com/leica-wiki.en/index.php/35mm_f/2_Summicron-M_IV

The famous v4 35 bokeh king! No wonder you like that one!

These pre-ASPH Summiluxes have different character wide open. I have the same type (341xxxx). It is dreamy wide open and needs a few stops to become very sharp. That is what most vintage Summilux fan's like. I think it is fun to use, but if I have enough light I prefer even the oldest Summicron (collapsible) at F2 unless you are looking for a more 'artistic' or portrait lens look.

If you do not like this 50 Summilux, the 35 Summilux will be even worse on that point IMO. That one is even too soft for me wide open. And why buy a F1.4 lens if you only like it beyond F2.8? So I sold it and bought a Summicron 35 with money to spare.

Edited February 23, 2023 by dpitt

[Chris W]

Thanks.

Yeah, I'm testing them at f4 or f5.6.

The light was changing a lot yesterday but I shot the same scene with my 35, 50 and 90. Both the 35 and 90 exhibited sharp edges on objects at infinity. The 50 was more fuzzy. It may be contrast? Maybe the 35 and 90 have a bit more contrast that makes the images look crisper.

The 35 has always been my go to lens. I love the quality. I have struggled to love the 50mm for general out and about photography. Maybe being less contrasty it is great for portraiture?

[Stuart Richardson]

I inherited this lens from my dad. I think there probably is not something wrong with the lens per se. It is a lens design from 1964, if I remember correctly. It is definitely soft wide open, but in my experience it does not get particularly sharp stopped down either. Contrast is lower than, for example, a 50mm Summicron from the same era. But given that it is a forty year old lens, it may well need a CLA. But my guess is just that you are looking at the performance a bit too closely compared to what this lens was really designed to do. The lens is capable of nice images, but I do think it is better suited to ethereal images than sharp ones. Personally I never got on with it all that well. I started shooting Leica on a 50mm Summicron version IV, and frankly I think that is a better and more versatile lens. These days, any Voigtlander 50mm would outperform the 50mm 1.4 pre asph.

Edited February 23, 2023 by Stuart Richardson

[Chris W]

Thanks Stuart - that is my conclusion so far.

[Chris W]

I might try the Voigtlander 50MM f2 Apo

[wizard]

Am 23.2.2023 um 10:10 schrieb Chris W:

that is my conclusion so far.

I second most of what has been said above about the Summilux 1.4/50 pre-asph, in particular regarding image quality wide open and towards the edges, but at least my own copy, which is one of the limited LTM lenses (same optical formula though) Leica made a number of years ago for the Japanese market, is exceedingly sharp in the center from f4 onwards, and is very, very sharp over the entire frame at f8. Center sharpness (from f4 onwards) of my copy is as good as that of a Summicron 50 v5, which I also own.