Recommend a 50 for my R4M

J

jpa66

Jan as in "Jan and Dean"
Local time
7:58 PM
Joined
Mar 1, 2009
Messages
804
Location
Chicago
View My Gallery
Alright, I want a 50mm for my Bessa. I missed this focal length while shooting extensively a couple of weeks ago.

I don't care if it's M mount or ltm, old or modern ( but of course it needs to work on the Bessa 🙂 ). I'd prefer something on the fast side, but that's not a deal-breaker. Coupled would be very nice, as I've never used an uncoupled lens on the Bessa before. I'd also like something with nice ( read: creamy ) bokeh, and it doesn't have to be razor-sharp. Nor does it have to be super-contrasty. Basically, I just want to try out a good 50. The less expensive, the better ( under 500 USD, maybe? ).

I know that this doesn't say a whole lot, but I'm in the investigating phase, and am looking for informed opinions. I'm especially interested in what signature you feel the lens has. The few candidates that have caught my eye are:

Canon ltm, either the 1.5 or 1.8;
Summitar
Summaron

Let me know what you think of them, and feel free to add any others.

Thanks,
Jan
 
My first ever 50 in Leica mount was the Collapsible Summicron. It's still my favorite in spite of the DR I bought as an upgrade. I think a good one would go for about
$350. That's in M mount. A bit more in LTM i'd bet. This is the lens that taught me about optical image quality. One of the greats!
Vic
 
I just placed an order for a Zeiss ZM 50mm f/2 today. Took a look at one and it was nice, bright RF patch and easy to focus. Sharp and cost: $781. A bit more than you're wanting but wow, what a lens.
 
I'd be cautious about getting anything too fast. I recently used a 50mm f1.5 on my R4A and the results were kind of patchy regarding focus wide open and close!
 
Keith said:
I'd be cautious about getting anything too fast. I recently used a 50mm f1.5 on my R4A and the results were kind of patchy regarding focus wide open and close!
Click to expand...


Oops! I forgot about that. I love the R4 for it's wide angle finders, but I know it isn't the greatest when it comes to longer lenses.

Regardless, I don't have to use it wide open, and I'm leaning towards a Canon P as my next rangefinder ( in maybe a year or two... ) so the speed would eventually be utilized. Or at least that's the grand plan...
 
Since you want something fast, get it from the get-go, otherwise you're dead in the water at night or indoors.

J3's are very inexpensive. You might have to go through a few to get a good one.

The 50/1.4 lux is faster. There's really very slim pickens' in-between for fast.
 
What about the 50/3.5 Heliar?

voigt_5035n_02.jpg

Its amazingly sharp, small and compact, and will safely collapse into the body. Its slow speed also means its usable on the R4* at all apertures and distances.

As a bonus its a screw mount lens, usable on Barnack Leicas and Canon rangefinders.

Stephen
 
Yes, being the R4M, the Heliar 3.5 is the best option for compactness and the highest sharpness... And except for real dark churches, f/3.5 is more than enough... It's a better solution to carry a 3200 roll film just in case (instead of a faster lens), but with the Heliar ALL your images will benefit from an outstanding lens: maybe the best 50 in the world? Ultrasharp even at 3.5, and you'll never miss focus on your R4M...

Cheers,

Juan
 
Juan Valdenebro said:
Yes, being the R4M, the Heliar 3.5 is the best option for compactness and the highest sharpness... And except for real dark churches, f/3.5 is more than enough... It's a better solution to carry a 3200 roll film just in case (instead of a faster lens), but with the Heliar ALL your images will benefit from an outstanding lens: maybe the best 50 in the world? Ultrasharp even at 3.5, and you'll never miss focus on your R4M...

Cheers,

Juan
Click to expand...

Hmmm, best 50 in the world? I wouldnt go that far. Also, based on Roland's post about the Hexanon 50/2.4 - it seems to be a better lens for the money than Heliar.
As far as keeping it under $500 - either M-Hexanon 50/2 or even CV 50/1.5 will be very good choices IMO.
 
Actually the lens that Krosya just mentioned, the Hexanon 50mm f2, is probably the best value for money around and should come in at $400.00-$500.00

Very high build quality and probably the most flare resistant lens I've ever used ... and it has a built in hood. I've thought about selling mine occasionally but can't quite bring myself to do it even though it rarely gets used. If I had to go somewhere where I could only use a rangefinder and a 50mm lens for an extended period I think I'd choose the Hex because it just simply does absolutely nothing wrong!
 
Keith said:
Actually the lens that Krosya just mentioned, the Hexanon 50mm f2, is probably the best value for money around and should come in at $400.00-$500.00

Very high build quality and probably the most flare resistant lens I've ever used ... and it has a built in hood. I've thought about selling mine occasionally but can't quite bring myself to do it even though it rarely gets used. If I had to go somewhere where I could only use a rangefinder and a 50mm lens for an extended period I think I'd choose the Hex because it just simply does absolutely nothing wrong!
Click to expand...

why then don't you use it more than you do?
 
back alley said:
why then don't you use it more than you do?
Click to expand...


It's completely pedictable!

My new C Sonnar by comparison has all sorts of issues to deal with ... focus shift, a slight tendency to flare, and not amazingly sharp at f1.5 ... I love it to bits because of these things as it makes me think! 😛
 
I had the Hexanon 50f2.4 for several years. It was on par with my Elmar 50f2.8 II - good, but not spectacular. The Heliar 50f3.5 is better, particularly wide open.
I would second the recommendation of the Color Skopar 50f2.5. If you at some time is picking up a Canon P/L/7 as a 2nd body - it works very well on those too. Very small and compact.
Your budget would include a Canon 50f1.4 too - difficult to find in clean shape, but one of the best. Also, dont knock the Nikkor 50f1.4's in LTM or even the 50f2 Nikkor in LTM. These are older lenses and condition is paramount. They are not cheap to recondition, so go for the best you can find within the budget.
 
Tom A said:
I had the Hexanon 50f2.4 for several years. It was on par with my Elmar 50f2.8 II - good, but not spectacular. The Heliar 50f3.5 is better, particularly wide open.
.
Click to expand...

Tom,
Since I never used Heliar 50/3.5 - can you tell why you think its better? Do you mean that it's sharper? Better handling? Better built? Better flare control? I never used Hexanon 50/2.4 either, but based on photos I have seen online from both lenses, Hexanon's (Rolands test in the other thread in Konica section) seem to be more impressive IMO. So, could you explain, please, what makes you think that Heliar is better?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom