50mm collapsible or Dual-Range summicron

[Gary R]

I am new to this site, and to Leica's (I just got an M4-P on Monday) and am looking for a 50mm lens. I have the choice between getting a 50mm collapsible summicron from a reputable dealer or buying a Dual-Range summmicron from a professor of mine. Can you give me some recommendations on which of these is a better performer sharpness and contrast wise. I will be using both color slides and black and white film. I know these type of questions are all to common but I would like to get some opinions from people who have used these lenses in real world conditions.
Thanks,
Gary

 

[denishr]

Get the dual range, even if it doesn't have the "eyes" (which are used only for close-ups, anyway, and add bulk to the package).
AFAIK, the only advantage of the collapsible (which I *DO* have) is that it's smaller and lighter - makes a smaller package.

Others will chime in, I'm sure.

BTW, welcome to RFF! 🙂

Regards,

Denis

 

[xcapekey]

i second the DR especially if you plan to shoot anything under 3 feet....it's actually pretty small in size....

the collapsibles (particularly the summar and summitar) are good for a particular look but not much gain in terms of sharpness....

i shoot with 2 50s, the hexanon (focuses closer than 3, though not as close as the DR i think) and the summar for dreamy portraits and that vintagey look

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

Two different beasts, imo. The collapsible Summicron gives you a nice feel for B&W, while the DR gives you overall great performance no matter what you're shooting. It's a matter of personal taste, and available money. I think that the DR without the goggles is a bit pointless; you may want to do close-ups, and that's what this glass was optimized for. I'd go with whichever looks the cleanest and flawless.

 

[former member]

The coating on the DR is improved over the earlier collapsible. It is also reformulated and said to be somewhat sharper. I have the Type I rigid, optically identical to the DR.

The DR cannot be used on the newer Cosina/Voigtlander Bessa's.

 

[rover]

I will agree that condition is king. If either is notably better than the other then pick that one. All things being equal, then I would say to go with the DR. The DR being a personal sale, you will of course be able to inspect it prior to sale. If this professor is a trustworthy guy and allow you a week or so to try it out with a money back guarantee that would be great.

 

[dcsang]

I only have the collapsible Cron-M variant - I considered the DR until, as Brian has noted, I found out it couldn't be used on the Bessa R3A.

After seeing some initial results - I'm extreeeeeemely happy 😀 with the collapsible. Only issue is it may get harder and harder as time goes on to get and keep a good copy of the lens - most of them have minor surface scratches on the front and rear elements that really don't (at least not on my copy) impact images.

The DR is apparently a ridiculously sharp lens (some say, sharpest out of all the 50 Crons).

I don't think you could go wrong with either if they were good copies.

Cheers
Dave

 

[Gary R]

Thanks for the suggestions, I will probably go with the dual range summicron as my professor will probably let me check it out for a few days. Now I just have to wait until monday for him to get back from a trip.

 

[hoot]

What I don't understand about the DR is that it focuses down to 19" or 20", which is approximately 48 to 50cm, but M bodies built at the time focus down to 70cm or 1m. There must be some sort of trick involved.

 

[former member]

The trick is all in the "eyes". For the close-in range, the "eyes" shift the focus zone of the viewfinder and RF. Kind of like a Nooky.

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

What I don't understand about the DR is that it focuses down to 19" or 20", which is approximately 48 to 50cm, but M bodies built at the time focus down to 70cm or 1m. There must be some sort of trick involved.

The goggles. 🙂

 

[hoot]

Well, yeah, but then doesn't something completely different get recorded on film? The eyes are just a viewing aid for the photographer, right? They don't actually influence the photograph?

<- thoroughly confused now

 

[rover]

When the focusing ring is lifted and moved to the close range the focusing cam is shifted allowing the camera to be "fooled" into continuing to adjust focus closer. The goggles adjust for the additional parallax error which occurs at closer distances. The trick though, since the camera has already reached its limit, is the physical shift of the focusing cam.

 

[hoot]

Ah, got it. Thanks for the explanation!

 

[rover]

You can find the words of Gandy on this topic here....

http://www.cameraquest.com/m50dr.htm

 

[StuartR]

I would say go with the Dual Range. I have the collapsible and love it, but as others have said, it is very prone to coating loss, and it is not as mechanically sturdy as the dual range. If the dual range has the goggles, then you can get an extra couple of inches of closer focus. The collapsible is a great lens and gives beautiful, very vintage looking images, but the dual range is a more versatile lens, and the contrast and sharpness are probably both higher. Whichever you choose, make sure you get a good hood, as both of these lenses are quite prone to flare as compared to their modern equivalents.

 

[MCTuomey]

I have the DR, a beater, and it does benefit from a hood. It tends to be somewhat unflattering for portraits, even wide open. But it is a fine lens and built like a little tank. Handles well on my M4 and takes 39mm filters, which works well kit-wise with my 90/2.8 Tele-Elmarit for that reason.

Brian and others: I've used my DR with my R2A - have I missed something? Or done some unknown harm?