Leica Summicron 50mm Rigid

[Anthony MD]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Would anyone like to give advice on the look of a Leica Summicron 50mm Rigid compared to a type 4 Summicron 50mm and what would you buy…?

[105012]

I have both and prefer the Rigid for my own reasons by a significant margin. Others will feel the opposite, it depends on how you personally prioritise what is important. Here are my reasons for preferring the earlier versions of the Summicron Rigid:

1. the longer focus throw allows for faster and more reliable focus by feel, later lenses have shorter focus throw which makes it more difficult to quickly and reliably hit focus distance without using the rangefinder (I see people going back and forth trying to hit focus with the rangefinder, meanwhile, picture has gone...);
2. focus button supports rapid focussing (interesting that HCB had a focus button fitted to a later Summicron that came with a focus tab, he knew a thing or two about getting the picture);
3. the single scale is simpler to read and has very handy focus index marks, missing on the dual scale and newer lenses;
4. the build quality and haptics are significantly ahead of any other 50, old or new;
5. f2.0 fast enough for film and the lens compact enough;
6. image quality? Yes, beautiful in both B&W and colour, but for me that's not the most important criteria, it's the content that matters. Many here will chase image quality (some sort of notion of technical perfection and 'transparency') over all other criteria, which is fine, just not important to me.

[Advertisement]

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

[farnz]

I completely agree with 105012.

I have had the Rigid for over 10 years now and it's still one of my favourite 'day' lenses.  I had the 50/2 Summicron v4 for around 5 years but let it 'return to the wild' since it wouldn't make it out the door ahead of the Rigid.

To my eye the Rigid's pictures have a subtle lower-contrast 'gentle' vintage look that appeals to me whereas the v4 has a contrastier, harsher look (which might equally appeal to others).

Pete.

[spydrxx]

I own a type 4 as well as a type 1, have thought about getting a type 2 ever since a friend loaned me his way back when. The rendering of both the type 2 and 4 have been widely discussed, each has their fans depending on what they like to/plan to shoot. Suggest you look thru some of the posts on each so you can come to your own conclusions. Of course you could get the best of both worlds and get both, or save some money and get a 50/2 Zeiss Planar and type 2.

[lct]

I use Summicrons 50/2 v1 and v4 too. The lesser contrast of v1 allows for easier tweaking in PP but its long focus throw is a pain for me. Matter of tastes as usual so better try the things in person to make your own idea.

[105012]

Just a note on nomenclature, at least how I refer to the Summicrons (5cm)...

If we go purely by optical formulation (skipping the thorium version and ignoring changes to coatings), then there are five Summicrons of (approximately) 5cm focal length:

1. Collapsible, 7 elements
2. Rigid, 7 elements reformulated (changes to curvatures and air 'lenses')
3. 1969-1979, 6 elements, 5 groups
4. 1979+, 6 elements, 4 groups
5. APO, 8 elements, 5 groups

So in this scheme the above discussion is with reference to type 2 versus type 4 optical formulation Summicrons. Historically, a more complex division of Summicrons is employed (with a type 5 being used to refer to fourth optical formulation in a revised body), so endless amusement can be had as we all refer to the range of Summicrons in different ways 😀

[lct]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The apo model has never been a v5 to me. Just apo or apo v1 if another apo version happens to follow. V4 and v5 are the usual non-apo variants following v3 with 6 elements. If a non-apo Summicron asph is launched, it won't be a v6 but an asph v1 in that sense. YMMV.

[105012]

1 hour ago, lct said:

The apo model has never been a v5 to me. Just apo or apo v1 if another apo version happens to follow. V4 and v5 are the usual non-apo variants following v3 with 6 elements. If a non-apo Summicron asph is launched, it won't be a v6 but an asph v1 in that sense. YMMV.

Yes, indeed. The categorisation in my previous post is based on optical formulations. One could also bring in body/barrel designs and/or coatings, then we could have 15 or more types 😀 Current use is sort of a 'sometimes' basis: sometimes optical formula, sometimes not; sometimes body, sometimes not; sort of as 'we feel like it', but certainly not in a logical way, good heavens, why use logic?! 😀

[lct]

The optical logic is Leica's calling the current v5 v4 but they don't call the apo v5 AFAIK.

[adan]

12 hours ago, 105012 said:

1. Collapsible, 7 elements
2. Rigid, 7 elements reformulated (changes to curvatures and air 'lenses')
3. 1969-1979, 6 elements, 5 groups
4. 1979+, 6 elements, 4 groups
5. APO, 8 elements, 5 groups

A lot of people call(ed) both 2) and 3) a "rigid" lens - as opposed to the collapsible 1). Which was still "within recent memory" and a common option when the v.3 was introduced in 1969.

I do find that a bit - awkward - these days, however, and just refer to it as v.3 or III. Apparently in the Far East, the v.3 is also sometimes called the "high-leg" - due to the thicker, "taller," silver mounting-flange. About which, more discussion can be found here:

As far as I'm concerned, the 50mm APO-Summicron is really a whole new lineage, given that it did not replace the (entry-level) v.5, and has significantly different capabilities (and price).

[lct]

I don't recall the Summicron 50/2 collapsible being available in 1969. Left the Leitz catalog in 1961 AFAIK but maybe it remained in some stocks later on, i have no idea.

[Anthony MD]

23 hours ago, 105012 said:

I have both and prefer the Rigid for my own reasons by a significant margin. Others will feel the opposite, it depends on how you personally prioritise what is important. Here are my reasons for preferring the earlier versions of the Summicron Rigid:

1. the longer focus throw allows for faster and more reliable focus by feel, later lenses have shorter focus throw which makes it more difficult to quickly and reliably hit focus distance without using the rangefinder (I see people going back and forth trying to hit focus with the rangefinder, meanwhile, picture has gone...);
2. focus button supports rapid focussing (interesting that HCB had a focus button fitted to a later Summicron that came with a focus tab, he knew a thing or two about getting the picture);
3. the single scale is simpler to read and has very handy focus index marks, missing on the dual scale and newer lenses;
4. the build quality and haptics are significantly ahead of any other 50, old or new;
5. f2.0 fast enough for film and the lens compact enough;
6. image quality? Yes, beautiful in both B&W and colour, but for me that's not the most important criteria, it's the content that matters. Many here will chase image quality (some sort of notion of technical perfection and 'transparency') over all other criteria, which is fine, just not important to me.

I’ve been shooting with the Zeiss 50mm Planar with the MD262.  It was too sharp and clinical…!

[Anthony MD]

5 hours ago, adan said:

A lot of people call(ed) both 2) and 3) a "rigid" lens - as opposed to the collapsible 1). Which was still "within recent memory" and a common option when the v.3 was introduced in 1969.

I do find that a bit - awkward - these days, however, and just refer to it as v.3 or III. Apparently in the Far East, the v.3 is also sometimes called the "high-leg" - due to the thicker, "taller," silver mounting-flange. About which, more discussion can be found here:

As far as I'm concerned, the 50mm APO-Summicron is really a whole new lineage, given that it did not replace the (entry-level) v.5, and has significantly different capabilities (and price).

The APO might be too sharp like the Zeiss 50mm Planar not to mention how costly it is…!

[Anthony MD]

21 hours ago, farnz said:

I completely agree with 105012.

I have had the Rigid for over 10 years now and it's still one of my favourite 'day' lenses.  I had the 50/2 Summicron v4 for around 5 years but let it 'return to the wild' since it wouldn't make it out the door ahead of the Rigid.

To my eye the Rigid's pictures have a subtle lower-contrast 'gentle' vintage look that appeals to me whereas the v4 has a contrastier, harsher look (which might equally appeal to others).

Pete.

I’m glad they have a vintage look.  The Zeiss Planar 50mm f2 is too sharp for me.  That’s the reason I picked the Leica Summicron Rigid, which is the opposite in its rendering…!

[Anthony MD]

21 hours ago, spydrxx said:

I own a type 4 as well as a type 1, have thought about getting a type 2 ever since a friend loaned me his way back when. The rendering of both the type 2 and 4 have been widely discussed, each has their fans depending on what they like to/plan to shoot. Suggest you look thru some of the posts on each so you can come to your own conclusions. Of course you could get the best of both worlds and get both, or save some money and get a 50/2 Zeiss Planar and type 2.

I picked the Summicron Rigid since the Zeiss Planar rendered a scene too sharp …!

[farnz]

2 minutes ago, Anthony MD said:

I’m glad they have a vintage look.  The Zeiss Planar 50mm f2 is too sharp for me.  That’s the reason I picked the Leica Summicron Rigid, which is the opposite in its rendering…!

Yes, the way I view it is that Ludwig Bertele's Planar design was intended to be as precise as possible in describing the object whereas Bertele's Sonnar design preferred speed at the cost of precision and hence has aberrations.  The Summicron is a Double-Gauss design that offers a pleasant balance between precision, contrast, and speed.

Pete.

[spydrxx]

Given your preference for a more "classic" look, have you thought about the 50/3.5 Elmar instead of the extra 1/2-3/4 stop Summicron? It is dirt cheap, can be used on both  Barnacks  and M bodies (with an inexpensive adapter). At f/3.5-4 it has a somewhat soft/glowy rendition and beyond that is sharp in the more classic sense.

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!

[Anthony MD]

17 minutes ago, spydrxx said:

Given your preference for a more "classic" look, have you thought about the 50/3.5 Elmar instead of the extra 1/2-3/4 stop Summicron? It is dirt cheap, can be used on both  Barnacks  and M bodies (with an inexpensive adapter). At f/3.5-4 it has a somewhat soft/glowy rendition and beyond that is sharp in the more classic sense.

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!

Actually, I just ordered the Rigid from KEH yesterday…!

Edited July 20 by Anthony MD

[adan]

11 hours ago, lct said:

I don't recall the Summicron 50/2 collapsible being available in 1969. Left the Leitz catalog in 1961 AFAIK but maybe it remained in some stocks later on, i have no idea.

Hmmm - why would you not consider used Leica lenses as "available?"

 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[lct]

2 hours ago, adan said:

Hmmm - why would you not consider used Leica lenses as "available?"

 

You mean used lenses sold by Leica? Or if you mean whatever used lens, i have a superb one from 2024. Hard to unstick it from my M11 BTW.