Vintage Third Party 50mm Recommendations

[Daniel Schutte]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi everyone,

So I've recently gotten back into the M system with an M2, and am looking for some 50mm glass to go with it. I'd really like to go vintage - I used to shoot a V2 Summicron 50 (which I am a total fool for selling) on my M3 and loved the images, but am not sure whether I can spend that amount again. The qualities I love in vintage glass are flares, halation and artistic bokeh, but I'm not looking for anything too soft or glowy - this would be a general carry around lens, so I don't want its character to ever overshadow the content of pictures. In terms of use, I don't only shoot one thing - when I'm in the city I'll shoot street photos, architecture and friends/family. I also like hiking so I do a bit of nature/landscape. At the moment I'm shooting mainly on 500T but plan to get some Double-X in the future as well. For digital I'll be adapting to a Sigma FP.

I'm not a fan of lenses that are too big (heavy I don't mind). I recently bought a Canon LTM 50mm 1.4 which ticks most of my boxes, but I find it too big to take around all the time, especially in terms of front diameter (the lens contained fungus that wasn't initially mentioned, so I'm returning it anyway).

I've been considering the Nikkor LTM 50mm F2, but from what I've seen it does indeed get quite glowy and is pretty unusable wide open, despite being better than most other lenses from the 40's/50's. Most tests online don't specify the condition of the lens used or the aperture for specific shots though, so it's hard to form an opinion - if anyone has first hand experience with this model then please let me know!

For 35mm I'm probably going with the Canon LTM 35mm F2, so that is a pretty good reference of the look I'm going for. Here are some tests for the 35mm F2 that I found online:

http://ohm-image.net/opinion/photophile/review-canon-ltm-m39-35-2

http://rangefinderchronicles.blogspot.com/2012/11/leica-iiif-and-canon-35mm-f2-ltm-part-2.html

Sorry for the long post - tried to provide as much info as possible but probably ended up rambling a little bit!

Thanks in advance.

 

[Daniel Schutte]

Adding to this - I just found the Canon LTM 50mm F2.2, which looks quite interesting - compact, good wide open, interesting flares. If anyone has more information then please let me know!

[TomB_tx]

I've used the Canon 50 1.8 ltm quite a bit on a IIIf and am pleased with the size and results. I have several brands of Japanese ltm 50s from the 1950s, and nearly all needed a CLA ro reduce the glow from internal haze.

[spydrxx]

I've used Canon 50/1.9 Type 2 collapsible and Canon 50/1.8 Type 7 rigid for a couple of years on film and digital. Both have performed well for me. The Nikkor 50/2, being a different design of course exhibits a different set of characteristics depending on the shooting aperture. I've also used the Canon Serenar rigid mount Type 2 50/1.8, but haven't really bonded with it, perhaps it is my specific lens, but the other Canons seem to give overall better performance - sharpness and contrast. My favorite, though continues to be the Leica 50/3.5 Red Scale Elmar. IMHO the results are just lovely...dreamy wide open and sharp closed down. IMHO the 1950-60s Canons match or exceed the Leica Summicrons of the same era in both sharpness and contrast, rge generally well constructed, and less expensive than the Leica counterparts, probably due more to name recognition of quality than anything else. Size wise they are quite similar to their Leica counterparts. I've noticed slight hazing in all of mine, so you might factor in a cleaning to the price. Good luck in your choice.

[wda]

You mention the V2 Summicron 50. I would find it very difficult to replace this lens. Start saving.

[tommonego@gmail.com]

I got a clean copy of a Summicron V1 (1953 post radioactivity) and this is a nice lens. I have had 2 V2s and they were exceptional, I don't use 50mm that much so over the years I have sold them. V1s are also about half the price of a V2. Forgive me, this is digital but here is the V1 on an M8.

 

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 April 3, 2023 by tommonego@gmail.com

[Vanillasludge]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I second the vote for the V1 Summicron.   It was good enough for Henri Cartier Bresson so it’s plenty good for the rest of us plonkers.   
 

 

[andybarton]

Who are you calling a plonker?

[Ecar]

Forgot to link to post. See below.

Edited April 4, 2023 by Ecar

[Ecar]

On 4/3/2023 at 10:58 AM, Daniel Schutte said:

Adding to this - I just found the Canon LTM 50mm F2.2, which looks quite interesting - compact, good wide open, interesting flares. If anyone has more information then please let me know!

Haven't used mine for a while... Made for the Canonet with a simple optical formula, hence a "low-cost" reputation. Relatively rare, with a production period only a few months in 1961. Used to be hard to find, but more have surfaced recently. Optically good (much better than its reputation), but no wow factor. Build quality good but not outstanding.

A good choice if you don't like the Nikkors rendering Gauss vs. Sonnar is a matter of taste - and you seem to be in the Gauss camp.

Edited April 4, 2023 by Ecar

[Ecar]

On 4/3/2023 at 1:59 PM, TomB_tx said:

I've used the Canon 50 1.8 ltm quite a bit on a IIIf and am pleased with the size and results. I have several brands of Japanese ltm 50s from the 1950s, and nearly all needed a CLA ro reduce the glow from internal haze.

You are correct. Ditto for Leitz lenses from that period. Using any vintage lenses without having them CLA'd doesn't make much sense IMO.

The Canon 50/1.8 V1 (heavy chrome) doesn't haze more than any other lens. Only the V2 (lighter black and silver version) suffers from recurring - and virtually incurable - haze. Over the years, I tried several copies (and had them cleaned several times) before giving up.

[earleygallery]

5cm Elmar f2.8 or f3.5 (the M f3.5 is a red scale Elmar in M mount).

[Daniel Schutte]

On 4/4/2023 at 9:51 PM, Ecar said:

You are correct. Ditto for Leitz lenses from that period. Using any vintage lenses without having them CLA'd doesn't make much sense IMO.

The Canon 50/1.8 V1 (heavy chrome) doesn't haze more than any other lens. Only the V2 (lighter black and silver version) suffers from recurring - and virtually incurable - haze. Over the years, I tried several copies (and had them cleaned several times) before giving up.

It's a shame about the haze issue in the 50mm 1.8's - the rendering is really lovely and quite similar to the 50mm 1.4, but the size is so much more manegable (not sure if the focus throw is shorter, but I haven't read any complaints so I suspect it must be). Do you know if there are any differences optically between the V1 and V2?

On 4/4/2023 at 9:43 PM, Ecar said:

Haven't used mine for a while... Made for the Canonet with a simple optical formula, hence a "low-cost" reputation. Relatively rare, with a production period only a few months in 1961. Used to be hard to find, but more have surfaced recently. Optically good (much better than its reputation), but no wow factor. Build quality good but not outstanding.

A good choice if you don't like the Nikkors rendering Gauss vs. Sonnar is a matter of taste - and you seem to be in the Gauss camp.

Yeah I looked into this one a bit more and feel like there are definitely better options in LTM from the same era - the standout appearing to be the Canon 50mm 1.4, which can also be found for less money...

On 4/3/2023 at 1:39 PM, spydrxx said:

I've used Canon 50/1.9 Type 2 collapsible and Canon 50/1.8 Type 7 rigid for a couple of years on film and digital. Both have performed well for me. The Nikkor 50/2, being a different design of course exhibits a different set of characteristics depending on the shooting aperture. I've also used the Canon Serenar rigid mount Type 2 50/1.8, but haven't really bonded with it, perhaps it is my specific lens, but the other Canons seem to give overall better performance - sharpness and contrast. My favorite, though continues to be the Leica 50/3.5 Red Scale Elmar. IMHO the results are just lovely...dreamy wide open and sharp closed down. IMHO the 1950-60s Canons match or exceed the Leica Summicrons of the same era in both sharpness and contrast, rge generally well constructed, and less expensive than the Leica counterparts, probably due more to name recognition of quality than anything else. Size wise they are quite similar to their Leica counterparts. I've noticed slight hazing in all of mine, so you might factor in a cleaning to the price. Good luck in your choice.

I haven't heard a lot about the 50mm 1.9 collapsible Canon, will have to find some sample images. The 50mm 3.5 Elmar looks interesting, but TBH I don't know if I could use an f/3.5 lens as a daily driver.

On 4/4/2023 at 5:41 PM, Vanillasludge said:

I second the vote for the V1 Summicron.   It was good enough for Henri Cartier Bresson so it’s plenty good for the rest of us plonkers.   
 

 

Yeah the V1 cron is one that keeps coming up - I'm wondering if anyone can link me to a direct comparison between the V1 and V2? I've owned the former and have looked at sample images of the latter - the V1 seems pretty comparable in my assessment, perhaps less contrasty but still quite sharp and with pleasing bokeh.

[Ecar]

4 hours ago, Daniel Schutte said:

It's a shame about the haze issue in the 50mm 1.8's - the rendering is really lovely and quite similar to the 50mm 1.4, but the size is so much more manegable (not sure if the focus throw is shorter, but I haven't read any complaints so I suspect it must be). Do you know if there are any differences optically between the V1 and V2?

The 50/1.8 V1 doesn't haze, only the V2 does. But the V1 is all brass and therefore noticeably heavier than the aluminium V2. Peter Kitchingman actually lists 8 types of Canon 50/1.8 variations - 4 types for each of the V1 and V2 versions. Mostly cosmetic differences, except for the fact that the V2 went from 11 to 8 aperture blades at some point. I don't think there are any optical design differences between V1 and V2, although coating technologies were improving fast at the time, so some differences in rendering are to be expected. FWIW, the V1's that I have used over the years rendered a bit more "vintage" than the V2's (at least before the latter started to haze again...)

4 hours ago, Daniel Schutte said:

Yeah I looked into this one a bit more and feel like there are definitely better options in LTM from the same era - the standout appearing to be the Canon 50mm 1.4, which can also be found for less money...

Indeed. Plenty of 50/1.4 out there. Not too difficult to find in good condition and at a reasonable price. Perhaps worth a 2nd try?

If you like the 50/1.4, you'll probably find that the Serenar 50/1.9 (and the earlier 50/2, also collapsible) render too "vintage" for your taste. 

[cboy]

I'd suggest the LLL elcan 50mm f2. Has the character you would want from a street sweeper lens along with the compactness to go perfectly with the fp.

https://www.japancamerahunter.com/2021/11/camera-geekery-light-lens-lab-elcan-50mm-f-2-replica/

 

Edited April 6, 2023 by cboy