50 2.8 Elmar M vs 50 Summicron

[peter_n]

Same here. I tried two Summicrons but stayed with the Elmar-M and sold both. I don't understand why Leica discontinued the Elmar-M.

 

[Dan States]

It was replaced by the very un-sexy Summarit 2.5. In my opinion that was a bad move as there is no meaningful performance improvement and at least the Elmar had the collapsable body to make it special.

 

[ableforensics]

Dan

A bit off subject but I am curious, aside from physical appearance compared with Elmar, what you thought about the Summarit. I recently debated whether to get an ELmar or Summarit and decided on the Summarit. I got the Summarit (not received it yet) as I got it for far less than a used mint Elmar.

Thanks

 

[peter_n]

It was replaced by the very un-sexy Summarit 2.5. In my opinion that was a bad move as there is no meaningful performance improvement and at least the Elmar had the collapsable body to make it special.

What also makes it special is that the history of the lens goes back to the beginnings of Leica.

 

[WoolenMammoth]

out of all the lenses you can put on an M body, for me, the last version elmar-m has an instantly recognizable fingerprint that stands out as just super bold. That look is also really consistent through all the stops on the lens. Its somewhat of a one trick pony, but its amazing if you are into the look it provides. I wish there was a way to implement that design in a faster lens. would also add to the original poster, Ive brought it as my only lens on many extended trips. Shoot more TMZ as a result, but love the thing to death.

 

[richard_l]

I have seven Leica/Leitz lenses, ranging from 35mm to 90mm. My favorite is the 'new' Elmar-M 50/2.8. It has that clear, contrasty Tessar look (with a vengeance). My Summicron 50mm is a real gem, but I rarely use it for anything but low-light shots.

Richard

 

[Dralowid]

My kit has been gradually whittled down.

I use the Elmar M as a standard. The newish Summicron has been sold. I have an 'old' 1.5 Summarit for those rare moments.

The rest consists of 2.8 Summaron, CV 21 mm (which I don't really like) and 90 Elmarit M (last one not sure if I have the name quite right) plus 135 Tele Elmar.

Putting the Summarit and the CV to one side, the Elmar M sits very well in a Summaron, Elmarit M, Tele Elmar line up. All have their 'signatures' and all are great perfomers.

Also worth noting that these are not the most expensive lenses around...

...and yes, you have to get used to the Elmar, but if you were brought up with 'proper' Leicas, you'd be used to collapsible lenses by the time you got to your 50s.

Michael

 

[zleica]

I have owned and used both. They have very different optical signatures to my eyes. I prefer using the Elmar-50 with good lighting and the subject is about 3-5 meters. For low light, the Summicron-50 is a better choice.

Cheers,

 

[edodo]

well, when I hear with great interest about the beauty of the shots taken with the new elmar (never shot with one) I can say that I use a tabbed summicron (year 92) and a red elmar 50mm 3.5, I have the ultraportability with the collapsible and the low light option too. The red elmar can produce lovely image with that recognisable clear look life like quality.

 

[jalLee2001]

YOu can buy a Elmar right now at B&H for around $800 new.

 

[colker]

... Stopped down its also totally 3-d which rarely gets commented upon.

that's a rare quality. Usually, stopped down lens ends up in flat images. I see it happen on Nikons.

 

[J J Kapsberger]

You get a BLACK from this lens... Stopped down its also totally 3-d which rarely gets commented upon.

Agree 100% with both observations.