What do you think about LEICA 50mm F2 SUMMICRON V5 ? Boring or Perfect?

[LocalHero1953]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

@mottykytu, you have started multiple threads about M cameras and lenses across the forum, and received many helpful and considered replies. 

How about you tell us a bit about yourself, your experience, how you take photos and what you want to get out of photography in future? Do you have any links to your own work? Meeting us half way would help the community give you better answers.

[costa43]

It’s the quintessential 50mm for Leica M in my opinion. You cannot go wrong with this lens. 

[Tux4711]

I have been using the lens for a month now and am very impressed with the image quality. It has natural rendering and pleasant sharpness, even at f/2.0. I really like the 3D effect of the glass, shooting wide open. The bokeh look depends of course on the backgroundIt; it can look harmonious, it can look slightly messy. I agree that the lens reacts badly to counterlight and contrasts can quickly become flat in these situations, but great effects can be achieved at the right angle.

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!

[TomB_tx]

6 hours ago, Tux4711 said:

I agree that the lens reacts badly to counterlight and contrasts can quickly become flat in these situations, but great effects can be achieved at the right angle.

Like any lens you just need to learn its limitations, and use it avoiding those conditions. I had the first version Summicron R 50 on my Leicaflex SL back in 1969, and quickly found it had bad veiling flare in such lighting (I think worse than the M version - Coatings?). But loved it under more normal lighting.

[lct]

The main problem with Summicron 50/2 v4 and v5 is flare when strong light sources such as the sun are outside, rather than inside, the frame. The problem is easy to avoid in LV mode, but not so much in RF mode. The nearest competitor, the Planar 50/2, is not totally immune to this type of flare, but it copes much better. Not everyone likes the Zeiss look, though...

[steve edmunds]

i sold mine because i prefer the look of the 50mm f2.8 elmar initially the older version but now the newer model 50mm f2.8 M but the version V is a fine lens.

[pippy]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 hour ago, steve edmunds said:

i sold mine because i prefer the look of the 50mm f2.8 elmar initially the older version but now the newer model 50mm f2.8 M but the version V is a fine lens.

Could you please explain your reasoning more fully?

What "look" does either of the Elmar lenses - both old and new - exhibit which you found to be wanting with your Summicron?

[lct]

The KOT? King Of Triplet

[steve edmunds]

1 hour ago, pippy said:

Could you please explain your reasoning more fully?

What "look" does either of the Elmar lenses - both old and new - exhibit which you found to be wanting with your Summicron?

i do scenic photography like landscape, waterfalls etc etc mostly at F8 approx and often on a tripod , with this type of stuff i can barely tell the difference between the 3 lenses other than older Elmar has less contrast than the other two.

i also have an ongoing project of photographing my 4 grand children over the last 13 years and in recent years have mostly used my Q2 and M262 with a 50mm lens and often at full aperture and its here that i found i liked the Elmars more.

i really like the fall off and the treatment of highlights that i get with the Elmars it just seems to render the subject in a more sympathetic way than i get with many other lenses including the version V summicrom this includes back lighting images although all 3 lenses flare quite easily i find.

i find the Summicrom much harsher compared to the Elmars , the Elmar M is almost always on my M now and i think it will be for a long time.