Do I really need a 50mm and if so are there any out there

[kenneth]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I am very pleased with my first film results from my newly acquired M6 and 35mm Summicron asph but having used a 50mm 1.4 Nikkor for 5 years on my FM2n I think I can see a need for a 50mm Leica lens. Can you please share your thoughts, recommendations and advise. I sort of quite fancy a collapsable Summicron or Elmar. I would be interested in hearing from anyone who has surplus 50mm Leica M lenses in their collection

[Advertisement]

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

[peter_n]

If you like the look of your 35/2 ASPH then you might also like the just-discontinued Elmar-M 50/2.8. It is a collapsible lens of excellent quality. If you want another ASPH lens the current 50/1.4 ASPH is stunning although it is not collapsible.

[stunsworth]

And halfway between the two is the current Summicron. An excellent lens. Ffordes - ffordes photographic : Main Index - have a used one for £599.

[cocker]

Echoing Steves recommendation of the current Summicron David Stephen's of Manchester has a very good one at the moment for £550.00 USED EQUIP 10/06/08

 

I know its good because it was mine!

[Guest darkstar2004]

From what I have read, the collapsible Elmar does not come close to the results produced by the Summilux 50/1.4, not even the pre-ASPH version, which I have. The Elmar does fairly well at middle aperture settings compared to the pre-ASPH (so "they" say).

 

In an Elmar vs. 50 ASPH contest, the 50 ASPH would have to be light years ahead.

 

I would get the 50 ASPH, if possible; if it is too costly, a late model 50/1.4 non-ASPH would be a great choice.

 

While not as compact or as light as the Elmar, I would not consider the 50 ASPH's extra weight of 4.8 oz. or the extra length of 1.28 inches to be too onerous a burden, given the exponential increase in image quality.

 

After all, image quality is everything. That's one of the main reasons we own cameras and lenses that wear the red dot...

[bill]

From what I have read, the collapsible Elmar does not come close to the results produced by the Summilux 50/1.4, not even the pre-ASPH version, which I have. The Elmar does fairly well at middle aperture settings compared to the pre-ASPH (so "they" say).

 

In an Elmar vs. 50 ASPH contest, the 50 ASPH would have to be light years ahead.

 

I would get the 50 ASPH, if possible; if it is too costly, a late model 50/1.4 non-ASPH would be a great choice.

 

While not as compact or as light as the Elmar, I would not consider the 50 ASPH's extra weight of 4.8 oz. or the extra length of 1.28 inches to be too onerous a burden, given the exponential increase in image quality.

 

After all, image quality is everything. That's one of the main reasons we own cameras and lenses that wear the red dot...

 

 

As an Elmar-M user of long standing and also a user, both past and present, of many other 50's I'd have to say that it is inappropriate to make comments like these without actually using the lens. Instead of repeating what "they" say it makes far more sense to refer to published lens tests, such as those done by Mr Puts for the objective view.

 

The subjective view is something else again. The reason that the Elmar-M has been the lens I use most, and have had longest, is simple - it is unique in transforming the M-series Leica into a high-qualiry pocketable "compact" camera. It's collapsible predecessors can neither match it on performance nor on usability. It is the ultimate travel 50mm.

 

And that brings me to my last point. Image quality is NOT "everything". If it was, we would all be using the same, latest lenses. There would be no market in secondhand lenses. Image quality is important, but not the be all and end all of Leica ownership. I own other 50s for their unique fingerprint, or for their character. The danger of perfect sharpness and perfect resolutionj and drawing power is a sterility and sameness that stifles individuality.

 

Lenses form a palette. Each has different capabilities, strengths and unique characteristics.

 

vive la difference.

 

Regards,

 

Bill

[brianv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The collapsible Summicron is one of my all-time favorites. I prefer the "vintage look" of the older lenses, lower-contrast that preserve shadow-detail and highlights.

 

Some examples with the Collapsible and Type I Rigid here:

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/film-forum/53370-collapsible-summicron-type-i-rigid-summicron.html#post556955

 

As far as price goes, $300~$400 and a bit of patience will get a nice one.

[kenneth]

Re Summilux, I would rule that out. I do not need a lens that fast. Re Summicron collapsable and Summicron rigid I would favour the collapsable which I guess boils it down to a Summicron or Elmar collapsable. I agree with Bill about the pocketability. It is an aspect of the Leica M system which attracted me in the first place and I always found appealing in the IIIf and the Rollei 35 which I used years ago. So, Elmar or Summicron that is the question?

[stunsworth]

Personally I'd go for the Summicron. The extra stop could be useful. Just make sure the glass is in good shape.

[kenneth]

Personally I'd go for the Summicron. The extra stop could be useful. Just make sure the glass is in good shape.

 

Steve- Thank you for that. I notice on your web site that the majority of your "snaps" are taken with either a 28/35/75mm lenses. Does this mean you do not use a 50mm very often? The website for the camera shop. Is that the same shop that was in Cheetham Hill?

[stunsworth]

Steve- Thank you for that. I notice on your web site that the majority of your "snaps" are taken with either a 28/35/75mm lenses. Does this mean you do not use a 50mm very often? The website for the camera shop. Is that the same shop that was in Cheetham Hill?

 

Keneth, I've tended to use a 35mm for most of my film M shots - for some reason I can't work out I seem to use that lens a lot on the M8 as well, despite the crop factor. However I've owned a 50mm Summicron for almost as long as I've owned a Leica M. In my opinion it's a good compliment to a 35mm lens.

 

My usual 3 lens set with the M6 was 28/35/50. With the M8 I've modified that to 24/35/75, though I do use the 50 Summicron from time to time. I also have a Voigtlander 15mm that I used to carry (it's a very small lens). I used that a little on the M6, but a bit more on the M8. My personal opinion is that it's excellent value for money, but falls a little short of the Leica lenses - other people may disagree.

 

My 28mm by the way is a Voigtlander Ultron. This is a f1.9 lens (in practice this is no different to f2) and is excellent value for money, and an excellent lens to boot.

 

I assuming you are referring to Stephens, yes it's the same shop that used to be in Cheetham Hill, though now they are in the arcade just off St Anne's Square in the centre of Manchester. They can be a bit difficult to find as they're on the first floor.

[Guest darkstar2004]

Image quality is important, but not the be all and end all of Leica ownership. I own other 50s for their unique fingerprint, or for their character. The danger of perfect sharpness and perfect resolutionj and drawing power is a sterility and sameness that stifles individuality.

 

Lenses form a palette. Each has different capabilities, strengths and unique characteristics.

 

Bill,

 

Agreed.

 

What 50s do you own? Just wondering.

 

When I got my MP, I got a 50/1.4 to go with it. After that, I have always concentrated my efforts on acquiring different lenses based on their focal lengths; "Now I need a wide;" "Now I need a tele, etc."

 

Acqiring various 50s for each the fingerprint of each lens is an interesting concept - is that how you choose your lens purchases?

 

Which 50 do you prefer for B&W work?

 

Thanks,

Allan

[bill]

Bill,

 

Agreed.

 

What 50s do you own? Just wondering.

 

When I got my MP, I got a 50/1.4 to go with it. After that, I have always concentrated my efforts on acquiring different lenses based on their focal lengths; "Now I need a wide;" "Now I need a tele, etc."

 

Acqiring various 50s for each the fingerprint of each lens is an interesting concept - is that how you choose your lens purchases?

 

Which 50 do you prefer for B&W work?

 

Thanks,

Allan

 

Hello Allan,

 

Yes, that's pretty well it, but my choice is complicated by the fact that I also run M and LTM systems. The 50s I own are, in order of speed:

 

5cm Nickel Elmar 3.5 - bought to match my IID, which it does, beautifully.

 

5cm Elmar 3.5 - bought from James Earley - my first 5cm

Both of the above are only ever used on either my IID or my IIIc, and are therefore only ever used for b&w.

 

50mm Elmar-M 2.8 - the 50mm lens I have kept longest. This is my all-time favourite, the perfect balance of speed, performance and portability.

 

50mm Voigtlander 2.5 - bought to give me a faster and more "modern" (for which read "sharp") lens in LTM

 

50mm Dual Range Summicron - bought for nostalgic reasons - I had one once before, and think it has a unique look - it is lower in contrast than the most recent Summicrons and is therefore both more forgiving for portraiture and also better suited for black and white. This lens lives with, and mostly on, my M2.

 

50mm Canon 1.2 - my fastest ever 50, bought for the speed, but also for the colour rendition. This, together with the Elmar-M, gets used most on my M7.

 

So, each one is different. Over the years I have also had a 4th version Summicron, a Summitar, a Voigtlander 1.5 Nokton and a pre-asph Summilux.

 

The Summicron was very competent, but went to fund the Elmar - compactness was and generally is more important to me than the extra speed - I am one of those who believes you are more likely to get the shot if you actually have the camera with you, and I am more likely to carry it if it is compact.

 

The Summar was the predecessor to the VC 2.5. A nice lens, but very soft, and I hated the handling after my Elmar-M.

 

The Nokton left me cold - it is beautifully sharp, but almost clinical in it's results, and I found it somehow awkward in it's handling.

 

The Summilux was also excellent, but was killed for me at the time by it's bulk. If there was a lens I would get again, however, it would be this one.

 

I'm not even going to talk about the Nikkors, Planars, Zuikos and others that have taken up residence in my SLR gadget bags over the years...!

 

Hope this helps.

 

Regards,

 

Bill

[kenneth]

Bill

 

quote-50mm Elmar-M 2.8 - the 50mm lens I have kept longest. This is my all-time favourite, the perfect balance of speed, performance and portability.quote

 

I am thinking this could be the lens for me- Like you I am a big believer in the maxim that if the camera is too bulky then you leave it at home with the result that you don't get any pictures. This happened with my FM2n 50mm 1.4 Nikkor. I notice Ffordes photographic have one or two collapsables on their website. I don't know what you think?

[lct]

From what I have read, the collapsible Elmar does not come close to the results produced by the Summilux 50/1.4, not even the pre-ASPH version, which I have. The Elmar does fairly well at middle aperture settings compared to the pre-ASPH (so "they" say). In an Elmar vs. 50 ASPH contest, the 50 ASPH would have to be light years ahead....

I disagree respectfully with your readings as well.

I own those 3 lenses and IMO the 50/1.4 asph is only superior to the latest 50/2.8 from f/1.4 to f/2.8 as far as sharpness is concerned.

Both have a 'modern' signature i.e. high contrast and sharpness but the bokeh of the 50/2.8 is generally smoother.

Compared to the latest 50/1.4 pre-asph, the 50/2.8 is more contrasty, the 'lux is sharper at f/2.8 but none shows harsh OoF in any way.

All have the typical brightness and saturation of Leica lenses but the 50/2.8 adds a special look which is difficult to define otherwise than by reference to the 'Tessar' image quality.

[luigi bertolotti]

Re Summilux, I would rule that out. I do not need a lens that fast. Re Summicron collapsable and Summicron rigid I would favour the collapsable which I guess boils it down to a Summicron or Elmar collapsable. I agree with Bill about the pocketability. It is an aspect of the Leica M system which attracted me in the first place and I always found appealing in the IIIf and the Rollei 35 which I used years ago. So, Elmar or Summicron that is the question?[/quote]

 

I think you risk confusion with all there sort of advices... but is a funny speculation when one is in "buying mood"... ; so, add my feeling too: The Summicron 50 collapsible has a problem: is very difficult to find an item with REALLY good glass & coating: I'd say is a lens which is better to look at (and possibly test), before buying. Elmar is less delicate, and, given your preference for compactness, I'd even suggest you to consider the old 3,5 in SM (better a "red scale") with adapter: always a delicious lens, top compactness, not costly, easy to find.

[rosuna]

You can buy a new 50mm Summarit lens for a very interesting price. It is really small.

[lct]

You can buy a new 50mm Summarit lens for a very interesting price. It is really small.

Ah yes good idea, did you try one Ruben?

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[brianv]

At this point, The OP has some sorting to do!

 

The big question is did you like the modern, higher-contrast look that the Nikkor 50/1.4 gave you? OR are you looking for something with the older, "gentler" rendition from the 1950's classic glass.

 

Being a long-time Nikon user with almost every version of F1.4 SLR and RF lens made, the Collapsible Summicron and 5cm F1.5 Summarit give me a real alternative and are favorites. (I do not have a 1964 Olympic Nikkor, but do have the modern "Millenium Nikkor")

[peter_n]

Acqiring various 50s for each the fingerprint of each lens is an interesting concept - is that how you choose your lens purchases?

I think quite a few people operate on this premise. At 50mm, I use a current Elmar-M, rigid Summicron, Jupiter-8, pre-ASPH Summilux and ASPH Summilux (I'm deciding between the two) and a Noctilux. I've had two current Summicrons and didn't like either, to my eye they were sharp in an unpleasant sort of way, difficult to articulate but I definitely didn't like them. The lens I use most is the pre-ASPH Summilux and the lenses I like the look of most are the are the rigid Summicron and the Noctilux, with the J-8 a close third.