markinlondon
Elmar user
Strange you should have revived this thread, Marc. The Summicron pictured in Thafred's post is now sitting on one of my M2s having got to me via Telenous.
I've had both versions of the current Summicron formula (tabbed and built in hood). I'd say you gain some contrast over a rigid, but not a lot else except the ability to focus to 70cm. You will also lose some money in the deal. I can't speak for the Planar at all. Your pictures with the rigid have a beautiful look to them. I'd keep it personally.
I've had both versions of the current Summicron formula (tabbed and built in hood). I'd say you gain some contrast over a rigid, but not a lot else except the ability to focus to 70cm. You will also lose some money in the deal. I can't speak for the Planar at all. Your pictures with the rigid have a beautiful look to them. I'd keep it personally.
Meleica
Well-known
Marc-A
I posted about the Zeiss Planar in this thread :
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=43121
I agree - I think the Zeiss is a better all around lens than the Summicron. I have owned both and think for general use - the Zeiss is a better lens mainly due to flare control.
Dan
I posted about the Zeiss Planar in this thread :
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=43121
I agree - I think the Zeiss is a better all around lens than the Summicron. I have owned both and think for general use - the Zeiss is a better lens mainly due to flare control.
Dan
Marc-A.
I Shoot Film
Meleica said:
Thanks Dan. I've read a dozen of threads on the subject, but that one. I highly value your opinion as well as X-Ray's. So I'm leaning towards the Planar.
markinlondon said:
Mark, I fully appreciate what you say. My concern is not about more sharpness, more contrast, more more ... you know I love old lenses like the Summitar or the Elmar (LTM). It's just that I didn't find my style with the Rigid Summicron. It's all subjective. What I do with the Rigid I could do the same with the Summitar, with the same old fashion look, and (for street photography) with the same sharpness. I do'nt say both lenses are the same, but I just prefer the Summitar or the Elmar, and I didn't find my style with the Rigid.
That being said, I would like to test some modern lenses not because they have more of this or more of that, but because they have a different quality, look. That's why I'm considering buying the current Summicron or the Planar.
I must add that I'm very very impressed by the quality of the Summilux (old or new) ... it's not better than the Summicron, but different and I like this difference. And when I read that X-Ray value the Planar above the current Summicron and even the Summilux Asph ... well it makes me think ...
Thanks Mark for your precious advice. I hope you understand better what I'm looking for ... at least in this moment.
best,
Marc
Krosya
Konicaze
Samples
Samples
Marc-A,
Here are a couple of samples from all the lenses I talked about before:
Rigid Cron first, Summitar second, first shot with M3, second with Bessa R (when I had it)
Samples
Marc-A. said:Thanks for your answer Krosya
I guess with Leica we have (in French) "l'embarras du choix" (= we're spoilt for choice)!
Marc-A,
Here are a couple of samples from all the lenses I talked about before:
Rigid Cron first, Summitar second, first shot with M3, second with Bessa R (when I had it)
Attachments
Last edited:
Krosya
Konicaze
x-ray
Veteran
Marc -
The differences between the summicron and planar won't knock anyone out if their chair. The biggest difference to me is the much better flare controll. I noticed how bad flare was with the summicron when I was shooting between my Nikon S3-2000 and new 50 1.4 RF Nikkor and my tabbec summicron. I had a good bit of light from the back of the subject as well as sources just out of the frame. the contrast and flare resistance difference between the Nikkor and summicron was dramatic. The Nikkor walked all over the summicron. No competition, the Nikkor stomped it in the dirt. I later purchased a asph suimmilux and also found the flare controll to be suoerior to the summicron and also appeared to be sharper and higher contrast. I now found myself using the asph summilux rather than the summicron. Over the years I had the summicron I had focusing helix problems. It was sticky at 3ft and would bind. I sold the summicron and deceided to replace it with a 50 planar. I have two bags with 2 bodies in each and a ful set of lenses in each. On assignment I carry a full backup kit just in case. This has saved my life a few times with other cameras. On assignment I always carry backup equipment, strobes, meters, lenses and bodies. I found a really good deal on the ZM planar for $461 new USA from Calumet. After using the planar I found it to be equally flare resistant and possibluy slightly better than the asph summilux (not a big difference). I found it to be tack sharp but more peaches and cream compared to the asph but both are stunning ;lenses. There was no side by side comparisons between the planar and the summicron or summilux but shot under relatively the same conditions and dound the planar to have noticably better flare controll and similar tonality to the summicron (possibly the zeiss is a little more creamy but not much) and smoother tonality than the summilux. Both are very good but different. Now having shot a few thousand frames with the planar I really love the peaches and cream tonality and especially the resistance to flare. The differences are there and the flare controll makes the planar for me. The erganomics are better in my view than either the asph or the summicron. I just don't like the focusing tabs on the new leica glass. The serated focusing ring on the planar is much better. This is just a personal choice thing but it's my preference.
I don't have a direct comparison between the three and don't own the summicron any longer. Other then flare I don't think the differences would show on the internet. Too much quality is lost in jpg compression and loss on the internet.
The differences between the summicron and planar won't knock anyone out if their chair. The biggest difference to me is the much better flare controll. I noticed how bad flare was with the summicron when I was shooting between my Nikon S3-2000 and new 50 1.4 RF Nikkor and my tabbec summicron. I had a good bit of light from the back of the subject as well as sources just out of the frame. the contrast and flare resistance difference between the Nikkor and summicron was dramatic. The Nikkor walked all over the summicron. No competition, the Nikkor stomped it in the dirt. I later purchased a asph suimmilux and also found the flare controll to be suoerior to the summicron and also appeared to be sharper and higher contrast. I now found myself using the asph summilux rather than the summicron. Over the years I had the summicron I had focusing helix problems. It was sticky at 3ft and would bind. I sold the summicron and deceided to replace it with a 50 planar. I have two bags with 2 bodies in each and a ful set of lenses in each. On assignment I carry a full backup kit just in case. This has saved my life a few times with other cameras. On assignment I always carry backup equipment, strobes, meters, lenses and bodies. I found a really good deal on the ZM planar for $461 new USA from Calumet. After using the planar I found it to be equally flare resistant and possibluy slightly better than the asph summilux (not a big difference). I found it to be tack sharp but more peaches and cream compared to the asph but both are stunning ;lenses. There was no side by side comparisons between the planar and the summicron or summilux but shot under relatively the same conditions and dound the planar to have noticably better flare controll and similar tonality to the summicron (possibly the zeiss is a little more creamy but not much) and smoother tonality than the summilux. Both are very good but different. Now having shot a few thousand frames with the planar I really love the peaches and cream tonality and especially the resistance to flare. The differences are there and the flare controll makes the planar for me. The erganomics are better in my view than either the asph or the summicron. I just don't like the focusing tabs on the new leica glass. The serated focusing ring on the planar is much better. This is just a personal choice thing but it's my preference.
I don't have a direct comparison between the three and don't own the summicron any longer. Other then flare I don't think the differences would show on the internet. Too much quality is lost in jpg compression and loss on the internet.