Tiny 50mm f2 lenses recommendation

[dpitt]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 10/17/2023 at 9:04 PM, horosu said:

The Summit 50/2.5 is the tiniest ....just as small as a Elmar-M collapsible, but in its collapsed state.

The LTM Ermar 50 F3.5 is even smaller. It is almost the same size as a body cap when collapsed.

It is great for outside. Very good wide open for such an oldie and tack sharp at F8.0. Makes a great traveling lens IMO.

[jaques]

if we are ditching the whole f2 thing- then the Red Scale Elmar sure is tiny. Sharp as a TACK!

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!

[Malabito]

why not look at the Zeiss f2.0 planar? Its relatively cheap and small, and has great image quality.

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 October 20, 2023 by Malabito

[dpitt]

6 hours ago, Malabito said:

why not look at the Zeiss f2.0 planar? Its relatively cheap and small, and has great image quality.

The title says TINY solution:

Zeiss 50 mm F2.0 planar = 68 mm
This is large for a M 50 lens.

Small :

Summicron 50 F2.0 v5  = 43 mm to flange

Summicron 50 F2.0 v4 = 40 mm to flange

Tiny :

Summarit 50 F2.4 = 33 mm to flange

Elmarit M 50 F2.8 = 22mm to flange

Summicron 50 F2.0 v1 = 24mm to flange (collapsed)

Elmar 50 F3.5 = 7 mm to flange (collapsed)

Summicron 40 C F2.0 = 23 mm to flange

I owned/have owned the last seven.
To me the tiny category is in a different league when mounted on my M9. It makes them completely pocketable with the lens mounted. The Summarit can be just too large depending on the coat or handbag you carry. That, together with the fact that I love the rendering of the others more, made that I sold it in favour of the Summicron 40C and the Summicron 50 v1.

I kept the Summicron 50 v4, because it is the best of this list (as good as the v5), and I want to make an extra effort when I really need/want top quality. But it makes the combo not pocketable. I take it with me when I carry a larger bag.

Edited October 20, 2023 by dpitt
Forgot to mention Elmarit M 50 F2.8

[Pyrogallol]

8 hours ago, jaques said:

if we are ditching the whole f2 thing- then the Red Scale Elmar sure is tiny. Sharp as a TACK!

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!

And then ditch the big M camera and get a tiny screw camera.

[dpitt]

4 minutes ago, Pyrogallol said:

And then ditch the big M camera and get a tiny screw camera.

You even ditched the rangefinder 😀.

Yes the barnacks feel tiny in comparison. I thought the OP was going to use it on a digital M?

Edited October 20, 2023 by dpitt

[Pyrogallol]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 minute ago, dpitt said:

You even ditched the rangefinder 😀.

Yes the barnacks feel tiny in comparison. I thought the OP was going to use it on a digital M?

Ditch digital and use film.

[Malabito]

28 minutes ago, dpitt said:

The title says TINY solution:

Zeiss 50 mm F2.0 planar = 68 mm
This is large for a M 50 lens.

Small :

Summicron 50 F2.0 v5  = 43 mm to flange

Summicron 50 F2.0 v4 = 40 mm to flange

Tiny :

Summarit 50 F2.4 = 33 mm to flange

Elmarit M 50 F2.8 = 22mm to flange

Summicron 50 F2.0 v1 = 24mm to flange (collapsed)

Elmar 50 F3.5 = 7 mm to flange (collapsed)

Summicron 40 C F2.0 = 23 mm to flange

I owned/have owned the last seven.
To me the tiny category is in a different league when mounted on my M9. It makes them completely pocketable with the lens mounted. The Summarit can be just too large depending on the coat or handbag you carry. That, together with the fact that I love the rendering of the others more, made that I sold it in favour of the Summicron 40C and the Summicron 50 v1.

I kept the Summicron 50 v4, because it is the best of this list (as good as the v5), and I want to make an extra effort when I really need/want top quality. But it makes the combo not pocketable. I take it with me when I carry a larger bag.

true, i missed the tiny part

[UliWer]

Well, why not just answer the question?

The smallest f/2 50mm lens made for the Leica was the Summar. It is collapsible - even on a digital body - and not much larger than the 50mm Elmar. Of cause the Summar is no every day lens: though the center is almost as sharp as a modern Summicron the edges show much less resolution and may look muddy. One should look closely at a Summar before buying one: they often show degeneration of the cement between lens elements which may make them almost unusable. Though there are also items around which were coated after the war which don't have these issues. There is no other lens - perhaps with the exception of the pre-asph 50mm  Summilux  - which may give you three dimensional results as the Summar. 

Another "tiny" f/2 50mm lens is the Sonnar for the Zeiss Ikon Contax. Its resolution is certainly better and more even than the Summar, though it shows some awkward distortion if you happen to have straight vertical lines on your photo. It's more reliable though perhaps also more boring than the Summar. You have to use a special adapter for Contax-to-Leica. The best one made by Amedeo Muscelli may be difficult to find now. There are some Sonnars around with Leica LTM coupling, though I shouldn't recommend them. They are either fakes, or were made during WW II with sub-standard quality. 

[dpitt]

1 hour ago, UliWer said:

Well, why not just answer the question?

The smallest f/2 50mm lens made for the Leica was the Summar. It is collapsible - even on a digital body - and not much larger than the 50mm Elmar. Of cause the Summar is no every day lens: though the center is almost as sharp as a modern Summicron the edges show much less resolution and may look muddy. One should look closely at a Summar before buying one: they often show degeneration of the cement between lens elements which may make them almost unusable. Though there are also items around which were coated after the war which don't have these issues. There is no other lens - perhaps with the exception of the pre-asph 50mm  Summilux  - which may give you three dimensional results as the Summar. 

Another "tiny" f/2 50mm lens is the Sonnar for the Zeiss Ikon Contax. Its resolution is certainly better and more even than the Summar, though it shows some awkward distortion if you happen to have straight vertical lines on your photo. It's more reliable though perhaps also more boring than the Summar. You have to use a special adapter for Contax-to-Leica. The best one made by Amedeo Muscelli may be difficult to find now. There are some Sonnars around with Leica LTM coupling, though I shouldn't recommend them. They are either fakes, or were made during WW II with sub-standard quality. 

You are right. The Summar can give pleasing results. To me it renders more like a prototype of the pre-ASPH Summilux 50. And I think it is somewhat close to the Summicron v1 in rendering, but I would not call that one a modern Summicron 50mm. The Summar is exceptional and special for its time. It also comes with its own issues. Try fitting modern filters or using modern (now standard aperture settings)... Pre-war versions might not be coated properly for color photography...

It depends what you expect from a lens. If you line up all 50 F2.0 lenses that Leica ever made and sort them by rendering characteristics, I think the Summar will be on one end and the APO Summicron 50 on the other, with the Summicron 50 v1 collapsible somewhere in the middle and the Summicron 50 v5 close to the APO Summicron 50.

[hdmesa]

On 10/14/2023 at 6:36 AM, Infantasy said:

Like to seek a tiny 50mm f2 lenses for travel and street photo. I own some other 50mm lenses including ZM50 f1.5, DR50 f2, Elmar 50 f3.5 already but want one tiny with good performance. Have considered the LLL Elcan replica but some reviews commented its resolution degraded substantially when focus from medium to far distance. Any suggestion?

Either you misinterpreted the LLL Elcan reviews or the reviews you read were wrong. The Elcan is sharp in the center at f/2 at any distance. Stopped down, it is sharp across most of the frame at any distance though there is field curvature at closer distances (plane of focus bend away from the center as you move toward the edges of the frame). The only thing to watch for with the Elcan is at close to medium distance at f/2, where anything away from center will be a bit soft even if you focus directly to the spot off center by using live view. At f/2, you will want your subject to be in the center third of the frame.

[otto.f]

There isn’t a real tiny Summicron 50. They are at leas 43,5 mm long. That’s quite long compared to a bunch of 35mm’s from Leica. I’d go for the Summarit 2.5 if I would like to put it in my pocket and still ready to shoot. I own the Elmar 50 and won’t quit it, although it’s a bit less compact in the ready to shoot state. 
BTW, there are people who shoot without a hood, I find that one of the 10 sins of a photographer. I don’t think it’s fair to call a lens tiny if the (sometimes separate) hood is not taken into account. And there quite a few candidates fall out of the selection of tiny lenses. Leica does struggle with this; I have never understood for instance the ‘upgrade’ of the Summarits from 2.5 to 2.4 with the consequence of longer and less practical hoods. 

Edited October 21, 2023 by otto.f

[Alberti]

I totally support the tiny Summar suggestion (or the other two collapsibles incl. Summicron V1). The later quality from Solms/Wetzlar washed them from our memories. But they have their high merits, albeit at more work for the photographer. Such as taking care of shooting with the light, not against it. And they are slow to use. Focussing takes more time, setting aperture ditto.

But. They have some forgotten 'magic' to them.

 

[Brilliant Observer]

summar or summitar F2

[hoolyproductions]

FWIW I wanted a smaller 50mm to complement my 50mm Summilux. Not that the Summilux is a particularly large or heavy lens but I wanted something super compact for daytime shooting and minimalistic travels.

I decided to get a Summarit f/2.4. I really like the design/aesthetic of this lens (I used to have the 35mm version) and f/2.4 is good enough for me in a secondary lens.

As they have been discontinued they are not so readily available anymore. After a few weeks of searching I ended up paying retail price for a second hand copy.

[Harpomatic]

Have you thought about the Voigtlander Nokton 50mm 1.5 II? Fantastic at F2 and tiny! 
its image quality is outstanding.

It’s my everyday lens, for both professional and personal work, and I couldn’t be more satisfied with it. 

[Ko.Fe.]

Crons with v4 formula are know for ugly flare. Not something you want on the street and travel.

Canadian V4 is with plastic aperture parts, not available anymore.

If you need Leica on it, V3 is better build and no ugly flare.

Cosina made 50/2 VM was very soft, but with super smooth bokeh .

Check CV later 50 1.5 ZM. It is something they took from Zeiss ZM, but better ergonomics and it is not big lens. 

[Infantasy]

Thank you all your comments/suggestions. I eventually bought a LLL Elcan. The quality is good at reasonable price. I like its focusing knob and short barrel all made by brass. Will take it for street photo and coming trip. Attached is the comparison amongst my other 50mm lenses. The Elcan is the shortest one with f2 aperture.

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!

[mediumformula]

The only thing preventing me from getting the Elcan is the reverse aperture ring.  Do you find that that bugs you? 

Also, wanted to chime in to mention the Hektor 50mm f 2.5.  It's only marginally bigger than the Elmar when collapsed..  

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[intangiblethings]

18 hours ago, mediumformula said:

The only thing preventing me from getting the Elcan is the reverse aperture ring.  Do you find that that bugs you? 

Also, wanted to chime in to mention the Hektor 50mm f 2.5.  It's only marginally bigger than the Elmar when collapsed..  

The trade offs are worth it with the ELCAN due to size and character, for me at least.