Best Corner Sharpness at f/2 for around $500

[ChrisP]

Alright,
I'm starting to love film and and am pushing more and more towards getting something M-mount (maybe a user M6 .72) and would like one lens for it.

I would use it for alot of night time shooting, I'm not a huge fan of using anything less than f/2 because DOF is just too thin, and stopped down more than that I'm wasting too much light.

My main concern is getting everything I focus on sharp, no matter where in the scene I put an object, so my question is which M-mount lens around 40mm (35mm-50mm) has the best corner sharpness at f/2 and costs under $500 used.

My list so far would be
Summicron-c 40/2 or Rokkor 40/2
CV 40/1.4 SC
CV 40/1.4 MC
CV Heliar 50/2
Hexanon 50mm/2
Maybe a Zeiss 50/2 (but I doubt it)

Anything else you can think of?
My order of importance would be:
corner sharpness at f/2
Bokeh
Size
Flare and CA resistance

Hopefully min focus distance would be something like 70cm, is this reasonable? Whats min focus distance for most rangefinders (especially the M6).

I assume everything (centre sharpness, sharpness stopped down, etc) would be pretty darn good anyways, especially compared to my pentax-m 50/1.7, which I find very acceptable, so I'm not that worried about other things.

P.s. hope this is the right place to post this, the warning at the top of this forum is very intimidating

Thanks in advance,
Chris

 

[Sonnar Brian]

With some patience, you might be able to get a type 2 Rigid Summicron, the 1970s lens.

The corner sharpness was best in its class. Summicrons tend to have very good edge-to-edge sharpness.

The DOT in the plot is the performance of the individual lens shown versus the lenses from the other manufacturers in that class.

(also, as the OP wants the lens for a Leica- moved to Leica M forum.)

 

[Benjamin Marks]

50/1.5 Nokton; great lens. Not exactly inexpensive ($550 - completed listings on e-bay), but 30 years newer than a Summicron of the same price. Use it at f:2 if you want to.

 

[mfogiel]

If flare resistance is also high on your list, just be patient and look for the Planar - it is as sharp as the current Summicron, but it does not flare. Another excellent candidate would be the converted G 45/2 Planar from Contax.

 

[Perfect Imposter]

I have a CV 40mm 1.4 MC and a Rokkor 40mm. The CV is sharper at f/2, but is a very different lens. I prefer the Rokkor's rendering. If I only wanted f/2 I would certainly pick the Rokkor. If I was forced to keep one 40mm I would go for the CV for the extra stop.

 

[ferider]

Except for the CV Heliar 50/2 (that I consider special purpose) all lenses in your list are comparable performers (at f2, in the corners, and wrt bokeh and flare - I doubt anybody here could pick one of the lenses in a blind test). It will be more important that your camera is well adjusted to the lens, and that you get a good lens sample, than which lens you pick.

I recommend to pick based on focal length, size, speed, condition, price, filter size, etc, and ignore the optics (again, given your list and excluding the Heliar).

And I usually don't say this when it comes to picking lenses 🙂 Personally, I have used 40/1.4 SC and MC, both 40 Summicron and Rokkor, and M-Hexanon 50/2. From all those lenses, I have kept a 40/1.4 SC.

Roland.

 

[venchka]

Dual Range Summicron.
If the price is within your budget and you deisre a modern lens: 50/2.0 M-Hexanon based on my experience with the 28/2.8 M-Hexanon and 35/2.0 UC-Hexanon.
That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

 

[brokencivilian]

I doubt you'll find anything with a focus distance of 70cm, considering the base length is 1m (3.3ft). I'm also looking into an M6.

one thing i dont know is if you can get adapters and such for close focus

 

[PatrickONeill]

are 50mm cron's even available at the $500 price point anymore?

also, why is the CV Heliar 50 f/2 a special purpose lens?

 

[ChrisP]

Why?

Why?

Jus wondering what makes the CV 40mm such a difficult lens? I was originally going between the 1.4 and rokkor/summicron-c so I'm very interested to hear your take on the matter.

I have a CV 40mm 1.4 MC and a Rokkor 40mm. The CV is sharper at f/2, but is a very different lens. I prefer the Rokkor's rendering. If I only wanted f/2 I would certainly pick the Rokkor. If I was forced to keep one 40mm I would go for the CV for the extra stop.

 

[Mudman]

are 50mm cron's even available at the $500 price point anymore?

also, why is the CV Heliar 50 f/2 a special purpose lens?

Dunno about the Heliar, but I bought my collapsible Cron for $275.

 

[raid]

There is a lens comparison for 50mm lenses at Roland's smugmug site.
The Planar design is meant for edge to edge flatfield sharpness, while the Summicron is equal in this regard.

I would not dwell on this issue or worry too much since there are so many excellent 50mm lenses with such characteristics.

 

[Perfect Imposter]

Jus wondering what makes the CV 40mm such a difficult lens? I was originally going between the 1.4 and rokkor/summicron-c so I'm very interested to hear your take on the matter.

Not "difficult" but "different". I like the Rokkor's images better at f/2. Better bokeh, and smoother transitions. I don't think either of them are amazingly sharp in the corners at f/2. The CV is harsher overall. By your criteria of best lens at f/2 I'd go with the Rokkor between these two. I've never owned any of the others on your list so I can't comment on them.

 

[Jim Evidon]

Try to find a very good used Summicron C 40mm f2. It is an excellent lens and is very under rated, although with the favorable comments on this and the Leica Users forum, they may become scarce. It is very small, and light. The only problem is that it has a 5.5 filter thread (an odd size, but Leica has done stranger things), but adapter rings are available.

 

[pagpow]

My list so far would be
Summicron-c 40/2 or Rokkor 40/2
CV 40/1.4 SC
CV 40/1.4 MC
CV Heliar 50/2
Hexanon 50mm/2
Maybe a Zeiss 50/2 (but I doubt it)

Anything else you can think of?
My order of importance would be:
corner sharpness at f/2
Bokeh
Size
Flare and CA resistance

Chris,

I don't have the Heliar 50/2 and only have the MC version of the CV 40. Have the others. You can have fun thinking about which one fits all your criteria, but you could hardly make a mistake putting that list on the wall and choosing by throwing darts.

We've had threads on the Hex and the Planar surface here in the last couple of days -- worth a look.

Good luck. Enjoy the selection and then enjoy the lens you choose.

Giorgio
"If you can't be with the one you love, love the one you're with."

 

[David Murphy]

You've sort of defined the 50mm F2 Summicron. A collapsible is in your price range - possibly a DR without the eyes if you are patient.

 

[Mudman]

I dunno about corner sharpness; here's two shots at F2.8

1.

2. This one is at F2

Both M3, Ilford Pan F 50

 

[ferider]

also, why is the CV Heliar 50 f/2 a special purpose lens?

Much softer than the others on the list, at f2 and in the corners. The Heliar is just a very different design than the others (all 6-7 element double Gauss variants).

BTW, collapsible and DR Summicron are pretty soft in the corners, too, at f2.

Roland.

 

[crist]

not F2 , but heliar 50 3.5 is the best corner to corner

 

[venchka]

...

BTW, collapsible and DR Summicron are pretty soft in the corners, too, at f2.

Roland.

What's wrong with that? Part of the overall charm.
OP: Are you planning to shoot flat brick walls? Sharp is nice. It's not the primary ingredient in a good photograph.
As for budget, I see good D.R. Summicrons listed all the time for $500 and under.