50 Summicron Rigid vs Summilux ASPH

[Corsair]

I currently favor my vintage 50mm Summicron v2 (the so-called "Rigid") and have, naturally, considered obtaining a new 50mm lens. As a film shooter (M3), what benefits would I see from the Summilux ASPH beyond the obvious f-stop advantage?

I'm also thinking about the APO Summicron, but will likely wait to get that one with the M10-R, since I don't think its resolution advantage would be visible on scanned film.

 

[Erik van Straten]

gelatin silver print (summicron 50mm f2 rigid) leica m2

Erik.

 

[Erik van Straten]

But maybe its resolution advantage will be visible on high quality hand made prints. Nobody tried AFAIK.

Erik.

 

[Ronald M]

But it is visible on film. Own all three of of mentioned lenses. My rigid is perfect condition and does great pic at 4-8 or 11. At 2.0 only the center is sharp. Dual range is the same. Construction is superb and better than what you can buy today. Sorry Leica

I never bought a 1.4 because none ever satisified me until the current. So if you will use 1.4 to 4, there is advantage over rigid. 1.4 is very good and zone of good sharpness extends almost to the very corners . Rigid is center only.

APO is is more perfect but not clinical. Cost is worth it. Lighter and smaller than 1.4 and works like a charm on my M10R at any aperture and distance anywhere on the frame.

Either puts the Rigid to shame although I still use mine .

Keep in mind depth of field is VERY shallow even with the modern 2.0 & 1.4 and not suitable for landscapes and travel usually. The RF has to be spot on to get them to focus properly. Both are designed to have high contrast in the focus plane and fall off outside of it for nice 3D effect.

 

[Erik van Straten]

I never bought a 1.4 because none ever satisified me until the current. So if you will use 1.4 to 4, there is advantage over rigid.

I have an old 1.4 that is at full aperture better than my rigid @ f2.8. It is the black paint version of the first Summilux 50mm f1.4. Serial 1704XXXX.

gelatin silver print (summilux 50mm f1.4 v1 black paint) leica mp

full aperture

Erik.

 

[Ronald M]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bkmf_2SZAc4&t=1007s

You might want to watch this non technical video

I might add I never found a first version `lux , ie the very first not the one made for 40 years. There was one made Between the Summarit and pre ash. It was a fairly short run. I think the above might be one because the 40 year run model had pincushion distortion which I do not see above. Also the 40 year ones I looked at were never sharp until F8.

 

[Erik van Straten]

Yes, I also have the second version of the Summilux 50mm f1.4. It draws a bit like the first Noctilux 50mm f1.0. But the first version of the Summilux 50mm is totally different. It is based on the old Xenon 50mm f1.5 design. It used very modern lanthanum glasses. However, the optical elements were not made by Leitz, but by Taylor, Taylor and Hobson in England. This made the lens very expensive, so Leitz decided to design their own version of the 50mm f1.4. This became the second Summilux 50mm f1.4, starting with number 1844001.

Erik.

This is with the second version:

gelatin silver print (summilux 50mm f1.4 v2) leica m3

 

[raid]

WOW. This is good stuff. I have not yet purchased (any) 50mm Summilux. These images look very nice.

 

[Erik van Straten]

Thank you, Raid! Indeed, both the first and the second Summiluxes are very interesting and usable lenses.

gelatin silver print (summilux 50mm f1.4 v1 black paint) leica mp

Erik.

 

[teddy]

Thank you, Raid! Indeed, both the first and the second Summiluxes are very interesting and usable lenses.

gelatin silver print (summilux 50mm f1.4 v1 black paint) leica mp

Erik.

Hi Corsair and Erik, to me the second version of the Summilux 50/1.4 is perfect and I prefer it however you prove that the first version is fine also Erik by the way you scan your photographs - just fine even in resolution, tone and character. The "Rigid" Summicron is perfect also. I don't own the APO Summicron (and not interested either) and it does not seem to render "clinical" images like others say.

Each to their own but I wish that Leica began to re-issue their old lens designs as I think they are a perfect balance.

Lenses at 1.4 aperture have a peculiar rendering at 10 metres away. I like it most of the time. The "thicker" the lens elements inside the more it affects blur qualities in an image. I'm talking about Sonnar designs but in this instance the Summilux is not "quite" like that and it has it's peculiar rendering.

In terms of sharpness, most things in focus are in the centre typically when portrayed so in many cases it doesn't matter so much - there for I'm super happy with the old Summicron and Summilux sharpness. Funny how priorities change as one gets older. It's a bit like hi-end audio.
Ultra high treble resolution does not matter any more.

And yes I know - it is all according to taste.

 

[teddy]

Leica M3, Leitz Summicron 50/2 DR, 81a Warming Filter, Provia 100F


Leica M3, Leitz Summicron 50/2 Dual Range (1959), Green Filter, Acros 100

 

[Erik van Straten]

Hi Corsair and Erik, to me the second version of the Summilux 50/1.4 is perfect and I prefer it however you prove that the first version is fine also Erik by the way you scan your photographs - just fine even in resolution, tone and character. The "Rigid" Summicron is perfect also. I don't own the APO Summicron (and not interested either) and it does not seem to render "clinical" images like others say.

Each to their own but I wish that Leica began to re-issue their old lens designs as I think they are a perfect balance.

Lenses at 1.4 aperture have a peculiar rendering at 10 metres away. I like it most of the time. The "thicker" the lens elements inside the more it affects blur qualities in an image. I'm talking about Sonnar designs but in this instance the Summilux is not "quite" like that and it has it's peculiar rendering.

In terms of sharpness, most things in focus are in the centre typically when portrayed so in many cases it doesn't matter so much - there for I'm super happy with the old Summicron and Summilux sharpness. Funny how priorities change as one gets older. It's a bit like hi-end audio.
Ultra high treble resolution does not matter any more.

And yes I know - it is all according to taste.

For years I've been using the v2 Summilux - it is a small Noctilux 50mm f1 in fact - but I'm so happy that I now have the best version of the v1 Summilux - the black paint version (different glass) - so I now I can work on the highest level of Leica photography.

Erik.

 

[raid]

Show us results, Erik. You have several hard to find lenses.

 

[Derek Leath]

This was shot with a V1 and a M6.


Leica M6
by
Derek Leath,
on Flickr

 

[Erik van Straten]

gelatin silver print (summilux 50mm f1.4 v1 black paint) leica mp

 

[bluesun267]

You guys are giving my Summitar, Topcor, Nikkor S.C, and M-Hexanon a collective inferiority complex

 

[Derek Leath]

1958 # 159928x

 

[brusby]

50mm Summilux ASPH, taken yesterday. Late afternoon light filtered through some brush, was getting kinda flat.

M2408397 by Brusby, on Flickr

 

[Erik van Straten]

gelatin silver print (summilux 50mm f1.4 v1 black paint) leica mp

full aperture

Erik.

 

[brusby]

. As a film shooter (M3), what benefits would I see from the Summilux ASPH beyond the obvious f-stop advantage?

IMO the 50mm asph has the best bokeh of any Leica 50mm with the possible exception of Noctilux. I prefer it to what I've seen from any summicron including the apo.

Also, close focusing with the asph seems to suffer less from chromatic aberration than older summilux and possibly summicron too, although the rigid shares the same lens block with the dual range which is designed for close range. I've actually swapped out the lens blocks between my rigid and DR and both lenses functioned perfectly. Even rangefinder focus remained spot on with both lenses regardless of which lens block was installed. But the asph focuses to .7 meters without requiring goggles.

The one stop difference can be pretty useful, not only allowing shooting in lower light, but also contributing to the overall look of the image by enhancing subject isolation.