Summilux 50 mm f/1.4

[SteveYork]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

As Xmas points out, Voigtlander makes some very good fast lenses in an M mount that are relatively affordable (about $500 (US) and $1000 new respectively). And they come in a variety of focal lengths -- 35/1.2; 35/1.4; 50/1.1; 50/1.5. Of these CV lenses, the 35/1.2 and the 50/1.1 are considered excellent. The CV 50/1.5 matches the non-asperical 50 Summilux. I don't know anything about the 35/1.4, but it's very small.

 

When you need the extra stop of speed, then there is nothing like a fast lens. Seems to me the question you need to ask is how fast. Outdoors, at night, you'll be pushing the limits of a Summilux.

 

Here's what I currently think:

 

Summicron -- Outdoors, during the day

Summilux -- Interiror

Noctilux -- Night

 

I was just shooting in a well lit interior with a Summilux with iso 400 and 200 and it seemed I was pushing up against 1.4 with a slow shutter speed all day.

[Advertisement]

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

[thrid]

Should I get black or silver? I read that Silver is heavier since the barrel is brass? Which one is better? Adorama Sales person told me it is the same. Thanks.

 

Optically they are the same.

 

I have a black one. It's lighter and less conspicuous.

[thrid]

Not my experience as far as my lenses are concerned. My late 50/1.4 pre-asph is sharper at f/2 than my 50/2 # 11819.

 

I have a sneaking suspicion that the last incarnation of the pre-ASPH Lux with the built in collapsible hood and focuses down to 70cm, was tweaked by Leica. For years I've been hearing about people who claim that it performs better than the 1 meter version, with the clip on hood.

 

Maybe it's just tighter production tolerances, different glass type or coatings, but something seems to be going on.

[peter_n]

What's going on is "if it's more expensive then it has to be better" internet chatter. I've used both side by side and couldn't discern any optical difference. The later one focuses down to 0.7M and has a shorter focus throw so to me it was more usable but that's about it.

[Xmas]

Hi

 

I'd expect a cron to be worse then a lux at f/2, at f/5.6 the litte guy can cross the ring and & hand out a good beating in the corner.

 

Most people never bother using a lens testing chart.

 

'My dad is bigger then your dad'

 

Noel

[lct]

I have a sneaking suspicion that the last incarnation of the pre-ASPH Lux with the built in collapsible hood and focuses down to 70cm, was tweaked by Leica. For years I've been hearing about people who claim that it performs better than the 1 meter version, with the clip on hood.

Maybe it's just tighter production tolerances, different glass type or coatings, but something seems to be going on.

Would not be the first time that old optical designs are discretely updated at Leica. See the latest pre-asph Lux 35 compared to earlier versions. It is therefore possible that the current Cron 50 is sharper at f/2 than my 30 y/o 11819 copy, i don't know.

[Xmas]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi

 

It is indeed possible, and...

 

I think we can be sure the anti reflection coating has changed from '79 to date, so the later cron will have (even) higher contrast, (there should also not be should not be any fogging), so any veiling flare/glare will be reduced, the old cron hood is possibly better though.

 

The current Leica layout for the lens has not changed from '79, the (5cm) lux did change & they forgot to mention that... for a while but then '62 the glass catalogue had expanded, and they improved contrast.

 

Think the '79 glasses are still available if not they would have had to redesign but the difference might be small, they redesign Elmars '30-'58 several times. The key glass in the cron is the 1.9 refractive index glass they used in the Noctilux f/1, - which they also used in the 79 cron.

 

But mine is an early cron and it is difficult to distinguish from a ZM or late Elmar, I may try a lens test chart on mine one day, but the imperative is not there any more with Kodachrome disappearing. I do use PanF but the/my enlarger lens is not wonderful in the corners so I'd not see much difference.

 

Testing is easier with a M9, but the difference in performance may be small if they did do a redesign, so you might miss it. The primary design of the '79 cron was to make the lens cheaper to manufacture... get some one with both/the other lens and a M9... Stick a lens testing chart to the coffee shop wall with blue tack...

 

Noel

[Xmas]

Hi

 

They don't use window glass...

 

http://www.schott.com/advanced_optics/english/our_products/materials/data_tools/index.html

 

click on Excel overview

 

Noel

[roguewave]

I've just traded my very latest pre-asph 50mm Summilux for a Summilux 50mm asph.

 

My experience with the pre-asph was very disappointing and the results gave me nothing like the quality of the prior late Summicron I traded. I wanted an f1.4 for using wide open for weddings inside churches. All I wanted was an extra stop - what I gained was an extra stop that was unusable.

 

In fact, in spite of proving focus and returning it to Solms for checking, I didn't like the results at all until it got to f4. What's the point of that ??

 

Maybe it's alright for soft portraits, but so's a Holga. I like snap and then OOF, so I'm expecting that the Asph will do it. I had a 35mm Cron asph and sold that to get the extra stop, and I'm not convinced that the money was well spent.

 

Latest Summicrons are fabulous performers wide open, small, light and easy to operate quickly. Wide open with 1/8th second, you can get great images in the dim glow of a building. Lux's are expensive, so make sure that you need/like/want one.

 

Unfortunately, few of us can loan one for sufficient time. If it's to join a kit bag with a number of lenses, it can take years to realise the capability of a single lens. That could well be my problem and I don't know my lenses well enough to get the very best out of them. To rectify this, I've recently done close focus sharpness testing and infinity testing on every lens I own. Taken me 20 years to get around to it, but back focus issues with the M8 prompted me to do it.

 

The results were informative, identified which lenses I need to stop down to improve the quality. It also added the 50mm Summilux M to my disposal list, clarified Leica v Canon issues for me and also identified a major issue with a Hasselblad zoom lens caused by a loose component inside that had to be fixed. Using digital capture it only takes a few hours to do this.

 

Hope this helps.

 

Rolo

 

First, let me make clear that my esteemed mentor, Rolo, is someone I consider a fabulous artist and a master of his craft. Given that, I also think it's very important to balance an individual's aesthetic/purpose when considering a lens. In reference to all the Summilux lenses, regardless of focal length, they were designed/computed for shooting wide open. That is the optimal use, as per the words of the designers. Mandler stated this over & over. Now, worlds collide when practicality/function (MONEY) & artistic interpretaion aren't congruent.

 

I'm still in the 1960's most of the time. Love the music & vibe of that time in my life & I believe it remains the core of my own aesthetic sense (jazz, r&b, rock & roll, those Liverpool boys, rebellion...) I don't think sharper = best. In fact, the 50 Lux ASPH is way harsh. It's very cool & and an amazing lens, but I wouldn't want my portrait taken with it. It is an instrument best used for certain purposes and in the hands of someone like Rolo, it offers a divine draw. But alas, that isn't the tool for many. The earlier Summilux 50's, starting with V1 & V2 are actually my favorites for night work. I let the blackness set everything up & the gentle bokeh frames my subject in a dreamy way.

 

In the end, I think it's a mistake to consider buying a Summilux because of what it draws at anything other than 1,4. That lens is designed to shoot wide open. Everything else is a bad compromise. That said, I stand in awe of Rolo & others that are able to get the Money shot, wide open with the thinnest of DOF, but the depth of emotion is like the sea.

[damaso]

I have been shooting more and more at night with a cron 50 mm f/2. I am thinking of moving up to a Summilux 50 mm, f/1.4. The 50 mm f/1 is out of my price range. Is the difference between the Cron and the Summilux that great, and is there a difference in the black vs silver? Thanks

 

If you shoot in low light then the Summilux is a must have. If not then the Summicron is probably fine. The Pre-asph is not as sharp as the Apsh or the cron but renders very nicely in my opinion...

 

Shot on tri-x with the 50 Summ. pre-asph

[Steve Ash]

Damaso,

Nice shot. I am pretty sure the summilux had not done this one "schaerfer".

Regards

 

PS little intro to German language:

sharper=schaerfer

hotter=schaerfer

[damaso]

Thanks Steve!