Summicron-m 50 v5 and Summicron-r 50 v2 on SL2

[Leicaboy Norway]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Aren't these two lenses the same design?

Can't seem to figure out why I'm getting so different results on my Sl2.

And it's the opposite of what I would have guessed. Because for me the summicron r is very average on my sl2. Images are really flat and it is generally not delivering good images at f2. 

The m version somehow looks to be a lot better. Sharp images at f2 and amazing landscape shots at around f8. 

What are you guys' results?

[Advertisement]

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

[dpitt]

It does not sound like the Summicron 50 II that I know. I would not say that it is the same as the Summicron 50 M v5 but it should be closer than you describe.
It is not the same design, because the R version was released 3 years before the M v4 and even 8 years before the M v5 (1984),   but it was designed with the same goals and by the best designer namely Walter Mandler.
I did not do a direct comparison on the SL yet, but from memory, I would say that it should have a little bit less contrast maybe wide open, but smoother bokeh than my M v4.

Minimum focus distance is shorter on the R version, it had to be designed differently to accomodate for the longer flange distance, but the glass is bigger so that should help. Using more glass makes everything a bit easier if you want to achieve top results. (hence the size of the current SL and other mirrorless primes) I have several samples of the 50 Summicron II, and never did notice much variance over the 30 years it was produced. I think the difference between my youngest and oldest is easily 20 years.

Did you do a flash light test on your lens? Maybe it has some haze or other issues?

Edited May 5, 2024 by dpitt

[Stuart Richardson]

Sample variation is a very real phenomenon, especially for older lenses. It could also be that someone messed with the R lens mount (lots of people were remounting them with Leitax Nikon mounts back in the day, or trying to use them for cine purposes), or it could just be that it got dropped or mishandled over the years. When in good working order, it should still be a very capable lens, but it is hard to say anything consistent when comparing just one copy of each lens.

[AZN]

4 hours ago, Stuart Richardson said:

It could also be that someone messed with the R lens mount

This.  

A common thing to do with used lenses is to clean them out before resale.  Somethings things go awry, which is what I discovered with my weirdly performing Summilux-R 35mm a few years ago. Bought it 2nd hand off eBay and it looked pristine, but after I sent it in for servicing (image corners looked really bad) DAG told me he got a surprise when he opened it up and saw how misaligned the lens elements were.

I have a Summicron-R 50mm (ROM) and the results are indistinguishable from a V4 Summicron-M.  If anything the M 50mm yeilds slightly yellow results on my digital cameras, which luckily is an easy fix in post.

[Leicaboy Norway]

The lack of contrast from the R is very visible, yes. It also slightly overexposes. It's a  3 cam version. When I bought it, it had on a non destructive R-EF adapter, which i just took of like any adapter. Glass looks fine, only sign of wear is the bit slow aperture adjustment and paint on the numbers of aperture.

 

I'll try and test more!

 

Thanks guys!

[dpitt]

Try this to see what really is in your lens. What you see might frighten you. Do the same with your M lens and compare...

Flashlight test Ken Rockwell

Edited May 6, 2024 by dpitt

[Leicaboy Norway]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

hey dpitt. Thank you, I will try.

 

And maybe I'll do some side by side photos for you guys to see in case it's useful

[Leicaboy Norway]

Also the size difference and focus throw makes the Summicron-M better in my opinion.

The focus throw on the Summicron-R is quite large

[dpitt]

2 hours ago, Leicaboy Norway said:

Also the size difference and focus throw makes the Summicron-M better in my opinion.

The focus throw on the Summicron-R is quite large

This is mostly an impression.
Yes, the total focus throw of the R lens is much longer, but most of the added throw comes from the range the M lens does not have (i.e. 0,7 to 0.35m)

If you compare the lens with a clock dial both set at infinity (12h), the 0,7 mark is at 4h on the M lens and at that position the R lens is only at 0,9m.
In both cases I consider this the most useful range, the long "short distance" range is just a bonus of the R from 0,9m to 0,35m, very useful for flowers and stuff but not much use in most situations.

It is a best practice to focus from infinity closer (not the other way around), then you hardly notice the difference.

Edited May 7, 2024 by dpitt