Quick comparison of Eight Double-Gauss 5cm Leica mount lenses (7F2, and an F1.9)

Click on each image to link to the full-res image on imgbb. You can then click on the Album name for all of the images for each lens.

Conclusion? I like all 8 lenses and have to send one back to the rightful owner...
 
I bought this Summicron almost 25 years ago, on an M3 with a Hektor-M 135/4.5 for $1K. Had Essex do a CLA on all three. They had to polish the center of the coating off, just behind the aperture. It's a great performer. I had a V2 Rigid Summicron, 6/5- let it go and kept this one.
One metric for sharpness: I use JPEG lossless compression with Lightroom. The Slat picture for the Summicron at F2 is larger than all the others, meaning it has more high-frequency, ie more resolution.
 
Because I am a massive dork, I downloaded all the fence post f/2 shots so I could more easily compare them.

To me:
  • the Konica has the weirdest colour;
  • the Summicron seems the most neutral;
  • the Fujinon "feels" softest (even though I don't think it is);
  • the Summar has the flattest contrast (no surprise there);
  • the Amotal looks the "busiest" in the OOF areas (and I thought the Summar would take that crown!);
  • the Amotal also has the most pronounced vignetting;
  • and the Topcon is surprisingly close to the Summicron.
Out of the lot, the only ones I think I actively dislike are the Konica and the Canon, personally. I'm not sure I'd use the Fujinon, but it's not the most objectionable of the lot. That Topcon is surprisingly good, though.

@Sonnar Brian, what changed between the 50/2 Serenar and the 50/1.9 Serenar? The Canon Museum is, typically, not very helpful in this regard. In my own personal testing, I found the f/1.9 Serenar to be very close to the Summar in performance and rendering, but not as good towards the corners.
 
I have two Canon 50/1.9's, and a direct comparison would be the easiest way to show the difference. Mechanically, the F1.9 moved to a double helical, the lens does not rotate as you focus. Optically- the F2, F1.9, and F1.8 are all 1-2-2-1 configurations. But- it's like comparing a Summitar to a Summar: the optics are all larger diameter to reduce vignetting and improve corner-to-corner sharpness.
 
Last edited:
I will add some walking around shots with each of these lenses as I get time. I set them all aside in one bag, all with Hoods and Adapters.

First up, a few more with the Amotal on the M240.

F2 and F4 pairs.
M2406239.jpgM2406240.jpgM2406241.jpgM2406242.jpgM2406250.jpgM2406251.jpg
 
Sonnar Brian said:
I will add some walking around shots with each of these lenses as I get time. I set them all aside in one bag, all with Hoods and Adapters.

First up, a few more with the Amotal on the M240.

F2 and F4 pairs.
View attachment 4848217View attachment 4848218View attachment 4848219View attachment 4848220View attachment 4848223View attachment 4848224
Click to expand...

You'll not get a fair appraisal from me. I am very biased in favor of the Amotal for how it can handle light on many circumstances, but not all. I have to go back and take a good look at what you have done. Thanks so much for your effort and interest.
 
Sonnar Brian said:
I bought this Summicron almost 25 years ago, on an M3 with a Hektor-M 135/4.5 for $1K. Had Essex do a CLA on all three. They had to polish the center of the coating off, just behind the aperture. It's a great performer. I had a V2 Rigid Summicron, 6/5- let it go and kept this one.
One metric for sharpness: I use JPEG lossless compression with Lightroom. The Slat picture for the Summicron at F2 is larger than all the others, meaning it has more high-frequency, ie more resolution.
Click to expand...
I have a few recommendations for your testing.
First is that the subject appears fairly flat in color and contrast. I have found that vintage lenses vary widely in this matter did to lesser lens coating and also due to condition issues. A high contrast subject may make it easier to separate lens qualities.
Also, vintage lenses often have spherical aberrations where the edges of a flat subject may not be on focus, but a subject curving in or out may give better results.
I also would point out an inherent bias in this test. The summicron was serviced somewhat recently and you had also picked it among others already as a high performer. It may be good to mention the condition each lens. For instance I also have a Canon 50mm f2, and the coating appears fairly soft, not exactly clear. This may affect the image more than the lens design.
 
If there is going to be some qvetching about the test I would offer that better would be good artificial light and a selection of colorful objects to enable an equal comparison of subjects under the same light and an idea of how the lenses handle colors. The SBS would have been sweet as it does color so nicely, really almost spookily. That said this is a welcome test and gives so many of us welcome and useful information. Thank you.
 
Darinwc said:
I have a few recommendations for your testing.
First is that the subject appears fairly flat in color and contrast. I have found that vintage lenses vary widely in this matter did to lesser lens coating and also due to condition issues. A high contrast subject may make it easier to separate lens qualities.
Also, vintage lenses often have spherical aberrations where the edges of a flat subject may not be on focus, but a subject curving in or out may give better results.
I also would point out an inherent bias in this test. The summicron was serviced somewhat recently and you had also picked it among others already as a high performer. It may be good to mention the condition each lens. For instance I also have a Canon 50mm f2, and the coating appears fairly soft, not exactly clear. This may affect the image more than the lens design.
Click to expand...
I use the Fence Slats specifically to show flatness of field. I use the fence post to check RF calibration. The Summicron was serviced 25 years ago, and I can see some haze forming around the outer edges of the elements again, will be time for me to open it up and clean it. The Amotal has some coating marks on the front element. The Topcon, Hexanon, and Fujinon have all been serviced before being purchased, the glass is near mint. The Canon- I did a full CLA on it, replaced the infinity lock. The glass is near perfect. The Minolta- near perfect glass, maybe a few marks. I did a full disassembly on an earlier one, that uses 40.5mm filters. The Summar is special. I replaced the front element myself, and did a full CLA. I also took out the glass and redid the anti-reflective paint.

This is not a formal lens test, if it were you would see a resolution chart. It's more like a two-point calibration to show center sharpness and edge-to-edge performance. I mentally noted focus shift from F2 to F4, but chose to correct the difference using the EVF. I figure more people use EVF these days.

And a real test would require a larger sample size. Anyone that wants to buy 8 copies of each lens in this test, do so and send them to me. I will take a week off and test them. Of course, I get to keep them all for my effort.
 
Last edited:
The Summar front section simply unscrews. ALWAYS hold the lens upright with the front section off, or the aperture blades may fall out.
Best to do that for most lenses unless you know for a fact that they will not fall out.

The Type 1 Rigid Summicron 5cm F2 is well known for resolving power. No Bias in this test, tripod setup and 8 lens changes made as quickly as possible Two scenes. Light source is not fixed, but the small changes in light will not change the resolution of the lens. I do a lot of walking around tests at the Marine Museum at Quantico for constant light, but cannot use a tripod there.

I took apart three of my Canon 50mm lenses this week to clean out haze. I tend to inspect my lenses, and open them up to clean haze quickly.
Who remembers my Hello Kitty Backpack test before and after cleaning Haze out of a Summarit? Made a big difference for Hello Kitty.
 
Last edited:
If it is reoccurring that quickly- try cleaning out the lubricants and relubing the helical.
Canon lenses have been the worst I've dealt with- a combination of the lubricant outgassing and glass used being susceptible to etching, so I inspect at least one a year.
The Summarit hazed up after 15~20 years, so I cleaned it out.
If you get to it quickly, does not get into the coating and comes right off with eyeglass cleaner. I place on using a Q-Tip and very gentle stokes. Wipe off with Lab grade "Kimwipes" task wipes.
 
Sonnar Brian said:
I use the Fence Slats specifically to show flatness of field. I use the fence post to check RF calibration. The Summicron was serviced 25 years ago, and I can see some haze forming around the outer edges of the elements again, will be time for me to open it up and clean it. The Amotal has some coating marks on the front element. The Topcon, Hexanon, and Fujinon have all been serviced before being purchased, the glass is near mint. The Canon- I did a full CLA on it, replaced the infinity lock. The glass is near perfect. The Minolta- near perfect glass, maybe a few marks. I did a full disassembly on an earlier one, that uses 40.5mm filters. The Summar is special. I replaced the front element myself, and did a full CLA. I also took out the glass and redid the anti-reflective paint.

This is not a formal lens test, if it were you would see a resolution chart. It's more like a two-point calibration to show center sharpness and edge-to-edge performance. I mentally noted focus shift from F2 to F4, but chose to correct the difference using the EVF. I figure more people use EVF these days.

And a real test would require a larger sample size. Anyone that wants to buy 8 copies of each lens in this test, do so and send them to me. I will take a week off and test them. Of course, I get to keep them all for my effort.
Click to expand...
While I am unlikely to ever own any of these lenses (My 50 mm collecting vice extends only to Zeiss Contax mount Sonnar and Tessar lenses) I like your testing method. Any photographers worth their salt aren't shooting test targets, they are photographing people or things in the real world. I'm not discounting the value of test charts for objective comparison of the kind that Modern Photography and other magazines used to do, but as we know sometimes the sharpest lens doesn't always make the best picture. And for you, these are subjects that you have shot before many times so the "look" of a lens must be readily apparent when you shoot them.
 
Sonnar Brian said:
I use the Fence Slats specifically to show flatness of field. I use the fence post to check RF calibration. The Summicron was serviced 25 years ago, and I can see some haze forming around the outer edges of the elements again, will be time for me to open it up and clean it. The Amotal has some coating marks on the front element. The Topcon, Hexanon, and Fujinon have all been serviced before being purchased, the glass is near mint. The Canon- I did a full CLA on it, replaced the infinity lock. The glass is near perfect. The Minolta- near perfect glass, maybe a few marks. I did a full disassembly on an earlier one, that uses 40.5mm filters. The Summar is special. I replaced the front element myself, and did a full CLA. I also took out the glass and redid the anti-reflective paint.

This is not a formal lens test, if it were you would see a resolution chart. It's more like a two-point calibration to show center sharpness and edge-to-edge performance. I mentally noted focus shift from F2 to F4, but chose to correct the difference using the EVF. I figure more people use EVF these days.

And a real test would require a larger sample size. Anyone that wants to buy 8 copies of each lens in this test, do so and send them to me. I will take a week off and test them. Of course, I get to keep them all for my effort.
Click to expand...
Thanks for filling in some of the details.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom