50 Summilux or Summicron

[Guest joewehry]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have a chance to purchase a used Leitz Summilux-m 50/1.4 Chrome Lens *43 for under $1000. Condition E- (some dust on lens)

 

I already have a collapsible 50mm/2 Leitz Summicron (from the 50/60s?) (soft at the edges, but nice)

 

I am going to take some test shots with the Summilux to see if / what I like. But any recommendations / suggestions on if this is a good "trade up", or keep Summicron and buy the Summiliux?

 

(Or, I suppose, alternately save up for a current Summilux.)

 

Oh, and i'm using it on an M8

 

Thanks for any recommendations.

 

Happy shooting.

[Advertisement]

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

[Guest Olof]

Go for the new SummiLux 50mm its amazing.

[lars_bergquist]

Even the old v.2 ("pre-ASPH") Summilux, 1962–2004, was superior to your collapsible Summicron. The current 50mm Summilux-M ASPH is a superlens, probably the best 50mm lens ever produced. For a 35mm M camera, this is definitely a must-have optic unless your needs or wants are very specialised. With the M8, 50mm is a kind of between-and-betwixt length however, a lovely portrait lens but of limited usefulness for general photography. With the M8, the 'standard lens' is 35mm.

 

The 'lux is fully as good as or better than the current 50mm Summicron-M at all f-stops, and far superior in its resistance to flare and reflexes (a good point even of the predecessor lens). This alone was the reason why I exchanged my Summicron for it -- this was before the arrival of the M8.

 

If you buy a 50mm Summilux ASPH, new or used, mount the lens and check carefully that the focusing movement is easy and smooth. The internal mechanics is quite complex because of the floating element, and especially in the beginning some lenses had problems in that respect. Mine had. I returned it on guaranty and it came back in a satisfactory state.

 

The old man from the Age of the 5cm Elmar

[russell]

Yes, I've both lenses. If I had to keep one it'd be the Lux. Both are nice. My Cron is the LTM version which works out well giving you a wider choice of bodies.

But lars is right, the 50mm is a kind of funny focal length with the M8 crop. I love the 50mm on the film Ms, but on the M8 I tend toward my 35mm lenses.

[Guest malland]

I doubt that any lens can be called "the best " in its category, including the Summilux-50 ASPH. Like some other people I prefer the last pre-ASPH version of this lens, whose o-o-f rendering is generally more attractive as the ASPH can often have what can be considered "ugly bokeh". For pictures shot at f/1.4 the look of the o--o-f blur becomes important because it often covers a large portion of the picture area. Look at the first picture in the following thread for an example of ugly Summilux-50 bokeh that I've never seen from the pre-ASPH version:

 

Took my MP to Galapagos - Photo.net Leica and Rangefinders Forum

 

Like Lars, I find the 65mm EFOV of 50mm lenses on the M8 somewhat too long.

 

—Mitch/Potomac, MD

Scratching the Surface©

[luigi bertolotti]

My opinion is that keeping BOTH the collapsible Summicron AND the old Summilux is not the best choice you can do, unless your are planning to quietly put ensemble a good collection of 50s (which is a completely respectable strategy... personally, I have 12... ); but in user terms you'd end up with 2 50 both with "old style" rendering, and both not so good when used wide open (the old Summilux, at 1,4, generally has a certain proneness to flare) : in practical terms I would say that if you keep the Summilux only, you are at least certain that you make a step up in performances at f2 with a general rendering similar to your present Summicron at "normal" f stops, so the situations in which you will rationally decide "better to use the Summicron, today" are vague to identify; you indeed could feel sad to part from your old Summicron (I STRONGLY understand thes kind of sentiments... ) , but this would mean to join the collector's mood, as I said above, and this closes the issue (more lenses, so better, period). You must also consider that, with M8, you'll find not so easy to have an UVIR filter for old Summilux E 43...

The (obvious) alternative could be to keep the Summicron as your "oldie", ignore the old Summilux, and chase for a modern-sharp lens which could be one of the present 50s : Summilux asph (top) Summicron new (rather good price, you renounce to 1,4) or even Summarit ("cheap" and probably excellent lens, f2,5 ).

[Shootist]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I doubt that any lens can be called "the best " in its category, including the Summilux-50 ASPH. Like some other people I prefer the last pre-ASPH version of this lens, whose o-o-f rendering is generally more attractive as the ASPH can often have what can be considered "ugly bokeh". For pictures shot at f/1.4 the look of the o--o-f blur becomes important because it often covers a large portion of the picture area. Look at the first picture in the following thread for an example of ugly Summilux-50 bokeh that I've never seen from the pre-ASPH version:

 

Took my MP to Galapagos - Photo.net Leica and Rangefinders Forum

 

Like Lars, I find the 65mm EFOV of 50mm lenses on the M8 somewhat too long.

 

—Mitch/Potomac, MD

Scratching the Surface©

 

Mitch I disagree. To pick out one shot and say "See the ASPH 50 has bad/disturbing/unpleasant bokeh" is a little narrow.

I have never owned or used the Pre ASPH but why would I, I have the 50 ASPH.

As to the 50 being to long on a M8 that is just a mental block for some people. Not for me. Up until a week ago I had 3 50mm Leica lenses. I sold 2 of them because the one 50 I use all the time is the ASPH Lux and I had to force myself to use one of the other 2. The 50mm FL is the lens I use the most on film or M8. But I'm moving toward the 75 Cron as my most used lens. After that it is the 28mm.

 

To the OP if you are thinking about any 50mm lens make it the ASPH Lux.

[Guest malland]

Shootist, it's not just one picture: I've seen very many Summilux-50 ASPH pictures that I consider ugly bokeh and generally feel that I prefer the pre-ASPH — and I'm not the only one who thinks so.

 

The idea that thinking a 50mm lens on the M8 as too long is not a "mental block": it's a preference — not everyone has your shooting preferences.

 

—Mitch/Potomac, MD

Wild Beasts of Botswana - a set on Flickr

[jaapv]

With the M8, 50mm is a kind of between-and-betwixt length however, a lovely portrait lens but of limited usefulness for general photography. With the M8, the 'standard lens' is 35mm

I disagree; it depends entirely on your lens lineup. I used to carry 21-35-75 as my standard lenses , when I got the 24 Summilux, I suddenly found that the ideal set was 24-50-90 -for me-. Which indeed set me back 2000 Euro for a Summilux. Although selling the 75 helped me on my way considerably

[Fotomiguel]

I can say just good things from my dear 50mm cron. It's my main lens on the M8 and I have a special feeling with it.

I normally use the 75 cron for portrait, but my 50mm cron always surprises me.

In this picture again. 50mm cron 160 iso f2 1/125

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!

[ampguy]

The E43 lux is a good lens, so is the E46 pre-asph. I have both, as well as a collapsible cron.

 

The main thing about the later E46 is the closer focus, but as mentioned above, you will also have an easier time with filters.

 

I also much prefer the look of the pre-asph to the asph.

[Iansky]

I can only comment on my current 50mm Summicron - it is a superb lens and lends itself well to potrait and street work.

 

I tend to shoot at f4 on my M8 and love the results I get from it.

 

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!

[jaapv]

I just did a test shot with my Summilux 50 asph.(for focus - which turns out to be spot-on) I don't see anything wrong with the bokeh - it is super-creamy. The main reason for people getting harsh bokeh is user error in DNG conversion. Bokeh is highly dependent on contrast. As soon as one forgets to switch sharpening off in DNG conversion, especially with highly corrected lenses, one starts cooking the contrast and the result is a harsh file.

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!

[Guest joewehry]

Thanks everyone for the lively discussion and recommendations, esp details like filters and focus movement.

 

I did some test shots, and if I had nothing for comparison would have been quite happy to use the previous Summilux. It handled nicely and the image was sweet, but not so much different from my Summicron that I was compelled to buy.

 

But comparing images from the old with the new Summilux, I've decided to save up for the new one. Even tho' I forgot to reset the M8 and was shooting JPG (gasp), the quality in the image of the newer Summilux, especially in the details and color, clinched the deal for me.

 

Tschüss.

[doug_m]

Smart move. The 50 lux ASPH is superb!

[lars_bergquist]

I doubt that any lens can be called "the best " in its category, including the Summilux-50 ASPH. Like some other people I prefer the last pre-ASPH version of this lens, whose o-o-f rendering is generally more attractive as the ASPH can often have what can be considered "ugly bokeh".

We are speaking of different things: Quantifiable performance, and user preferences. It can be shown that technical performance, in terms of subject rendering (i.e. the transfer of subject to sensor, i.e. Modulation Transfer) at different subject distances, resistance to stray light, and absence of distortion, is very much superior in the case of the modern aspherical lenses. If you doubt that, go look at the figures. We are talking about quantifiable matters.

 

The other thing we are talking about is user preferences. For all I know, there may be people who prefer the look of pictures taken through the bottoms of Coke bottles. In that case, bottoms of Coke bottles are the 'best' lenses for them. And come to think of it, there are people who prefer pictures made with pin-hole cameras ... You can STATE tastes like these, but how do you DISCUSS them in any meaningful way? How do you refute any kind of statement of personal taste?

 

Now, 'bokeh'. If this term has any denotation at all, it must refer to the rendering of out-of-focus subject matter. And while this is not done, it can actually be measured. It is possible to build a standardised test rig to measure for instance the distribution of photons from o.o.f. point sources of light, with suitable instrumentation. Lacking that, the result can be shown visually. Then of course anybody is free to say that "I like point highlights that look like rolled-up condoms" or "the double-contour effects are delightful" and nobody can refute you, for how do refute a taste? But in most cases, people who say "bad bokeh" mean just, "nah, I don't like that lens". But saying that would be plain subjectivity, so people prefer to hide it behind a screen of sham objectivity.

 

And the embarrassing fact is that most current lenses are superior to older designs in the bokeh department. Now, they are also mostly sharper. And some people find that disconcerting. That's all right, because that is taste. But do not call it 'bokeh'.

 

The old man from the Age of the Box Camera

[epand56]

I have two 50mm lenses, the Summilux 1.4 Asph. and the Elmar 2.8 collapsible.

Have a number of other lenses as well, like 35, 28, 15 and so on, but most of the time is the 50 that is mounted on my M8. I really love the crop factor of the 50 on the M8 and love very mych how both lenses, the Lux and the Elmar renders. They are so wonderfully different. I chose depending on the kind of picture I have to take. Very often is only a matter of one step back or one ahead.

While the Elmar is beautifully sharp but delicate, the 50 Lux is super sharp and its bokeh IMO has the savour of those beautiful reporter pictures of the 80es.

 

M8 + Summilux 50mm 1.4 Asph.

[lars_bergquist]

Me, I have two 50mm lenses: The Summilux-M ASPH, and the original 1:2.8 collapsible. Mine is from 1960.

 

Here we can really speak of differences. One lens is highly corrected, super sharp. The other has lots of residual aberrations that are very visible at apertures from 2.8 to 4.0. The kind that are known in some quarters as "Leica glow" but you could have it from any Tessar or Xenar lens. I do use them both ... but not for the same pictures. And yes, the Summilux is technically vastly better, but which one is esthetically preferably depends on what I am after. Mostly, I use the 35mm Summilux ASPH.

 

The old man from the Age of the 5cm Elmar--the original one

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[lct]

At the exception of a few ones, most modern Leica lenses are sharper and more contrasty than Mandler ones, which are sharper and more contrasty than the great collapsible Summicron. The favourite lens of Cartier-Bresson BTW. Matter of tastes and humor i guess. Matter of subject matters as well. I won't take my 50/1.4 asph to shoot my mother in law you can trust me.

[Jeff S]

I know it's been said often, but whenever I browse threads like these, I'm reminded how special Leica is to have such a rich history of lenses, each of which still perform wonders today in the right hands. And, the strong differences of opinion (none right or wrong) on which focal lengths, and which particular lenses, fulfill each owner's needs.

 

The latest generation of lenses has just added to the party. I traded my 50 Summicron (used for long time on M6s and M7s) for a Lux asph on the M8.2. It's a marvelous tool. And, despite the crop factor, I find the 50 focal length has suited fine for 25 years.

 

For now, my arsenal is generally 28 (cron asph) - 50 (lux asph) - and 75 (cron asph). But, I sometimes just go lean with a 35 cron asph and leave all else behind. I'm sure I would love the 35 lux asph based on forum comments, but I think I'll save the $ and wait to see what Leica does on the camera front.

 

Jeff