Summicron 50mm Rigid - what should I expect?

If it were me, and it was just haze, I'd keep it and send it to Sherry Krauter. She told me she has some sort of solution from Wetzler that will clean up haze or fogging.

Enjoy!
 
My 1957 version had some haze and I managed to clean the rear group but i've not done the fronts. It's still a little hazey but even before cleaning I never saw anything that affected my pics. Very sharp even at f2. It's definately my keeper 50 along with a mint 1961 Elmar I have. It's definately worth using the lens hood with them however they are getting difficult to find now. All these where taken with haze in lens.

3333420076_edd6ea3121_o.jpg


3332583055_a6ec9bcff8_o.jpg


3414695778_fcde0e3c83_o.jpg
 
Paddy C said:
I paid $514, which I thought a good price for a clean specimen (the seller did describe some flaws which I was fine with, but mentioned specifically that there was no haze, fog or fungus).

Because I've seen very few that are really clean I'm having a hard time figuring out a fair price. A mint one sold in the high $800s at about the same time.
Click to expand...

Clean ones seem to go in the $500-$650 range (truly mint is rare with this lens, so $800+ is not unheard-of). So, even factoring in a cleaning ($50-$90, depending on who and how many lens groups) you're not paying an outlandish amount. But if you were told "no haze" you should ask the seller to foot the cleaning bill. If he refuses, then you just need to decide whether you would have bought the lens anyway if the price were $600; and, if yes, get it cleaned, forget about the annoyance factor and enjoy a fabulous classic lens.

::Ari
 
I've posted this one before, but I really like it, so here it is again. 🙂

526786542_KQGsd-M.jpg

Leitz Summicron 50/2 Rigid @ f/2 on Epson R-D1 @ ISO 1600

(BTW, I just sold the lens used to take this picture, having replaced it with an earlier Rigid 'cron that arrived with -- you guessed it -- haze. It's with Sherry Krauter right now getting cleaned, and the seller graciously agreed to pay for the service.)

::Ari
 
If clean and clear inside, you get a medium contrast lens. Only the very center is sharp at F2. 2.8 the corners improve a lot. By 4 it is perfect.

It is exactly the same as the DR. Mind you there were two versions of each made with small differences between early and late. The only difference between it and the DR is the exacted tested focal length of the DR was 51.9 and the DR mounts were all that configuration. The rigids were anywhere in tolerence and were mated to proper matching mounts.
The last digits of the seial need to be matched to the scribed digits on the black ring inside the focus mount which you observe by unscrewing the optical cell.
 
ferider said:
Not the best photo, but check out the bokeh:

555308816_sX45G-XL.jpg
Click to expand...


Yes, it does have a beautiful smoothness to the bokeh, much like the summilux asph, but for much less cost. I think the OOF characteristics of the summicron DR/Rigid are only surpassed by the pre-asph lux 50 and the noctilux pre-asph f1; certainly that is high praise, for it takes into account some wonderful sonnars. I will just stress that this is just my take, no offence intended to sonnar owners 😉 A really nice candid shot, Roland.
 
I have recently bought a DR.
I ran a quick test after receiving it, you know, just to check it.
I was amazed: In the center it seems to resolve more than both a Canon 1.4 (which I know resolves like my modern summicron, which is amazing by itself) and a Planar.
 
The DR and the rigid Summicron both give very high resolution in the center. See my 50mm lens comparison with Roland's assistance. The Cron can be proud.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom