50mm DR

[Harry Lime]

I need some suggestions for a 50mm lens, specifically looking for one that is closest in character to the 50 cron DR, but no so large and bulky, I can live even with a slower lens. I love the images from that lens, but could not get used to the size, are there any smaller alternatives?

I have the DR and collapsible. Also the current incarnation (v4) in M and R mount. Also Nikkor 2/50 and who knows what else.

The collapsible is closer in look to the DR, then any of the newer versions, but it is an entirely different beast. For one thing the DR/Rigid is noticeably sharper and has more contrast.

In terms of size the collapsible Cron is really not that much smaller than the DR, which actually is quite compact for what it is. But the DR/Rigid is heavier.

The DR/Rigid ergonomics are also better for scale focusing.

Bottom line; if you want the DR/Rigid look, there isn't a whole lot else out there. The DR/Rigid was the end of the line for the highres / low con approach to lenses. After that everyone pumped up the contrast.

 

[waltere]

50mm DR

"The DR/Rigid ergonomics are also better for scale focusing."

I just got one a few months ago, Harry, and I am quite pleased with its sharpness. It's my first 50 for my M4, and I do not find it heavy or large in the least. It has a rather small focus ring though, but I guess thats what you mean re scale focusing?? It stays put, yes?

 

[venchka]

Table of 50mm Summicrons:

http://www.kenrockwell.com/leica/50mm-summicron-comparison-table.htm

One more time: If you want the look of the Dual Range Summicron, buy a Dual Range Summicron. There are no substitutes.

 

[ferider]

I challenge anybody: in a blind test, you will not be able to distinguish a Nikkor 50/2 from a DR on prints up to 8x10. An I have both.

The Sonnar has very high center resolution, a little swirly bokeh, high close up performance, lower contrast (also from the mid 50s), etc., much like the DR.

 

[jpfisher]

Since a number of posters have recommended a collapsible 'chron as a smaller alternative to a DR, I'm curious whether a coated Summitar would also be a reasonable alternative, or is that pushing the design envelope too far back in time?

I have the DR Summicron and the Summitar (bought it as a 50mm for the M8, but have used it quite a bit with the M3 as well) -- the lenses have very different characters, to my eye.

The DR Summicron generally delivers smooth bokeh, especially when working close --

Where the Summitar is prone to the swirly -- I love how it works in this shot --

Minimum focus distance is also a concern -- the Summitar is a 1m lens, the DR Summicron is roughly 0.5m.

I look at the Summicron as a general-use lens-- it's my go-to 50mm on film, and the Summitar as a character lens.

 

[grainhound]

I challenge anybody: in a blind test, you will not be able to distinguish a Nikkor 50/2 from a DR on prints up to 8x10. An I have both.

Thanks for that, Roland. I have a rigid and sometimes think about getting a Nikkor 50/2 because Nikkor LTMs appeal to me. But if the results are much the same, I'll pass and save the bucks for something else. Have to beat this gear addiction...

 

[Harry Lime]

"The DR/Rigid ergonomics are also better for scale focusing."

I just got one a few months ago, Harry, and I am quite pleased with its sharpness. It's my first 50 for my M4, and I do not find it heavy or large in the least. It has a rather small focus ring though, but I guess thats what you mean re scale focusing?? It stays put, yes?

Scale or zone focusing. Take a look here.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depth_of_field#Zone_focusing

 

[ferider]

The DR Summicron generally delivers smooth bokeh, especially when working close --
....
Where the Summitar is prone to the swirly -- I love how it works in this shot --

The differences in your examples are due to different backgrounds. Check out my photo in post #25. Also taken with a DR.

 

[LeicaFoReVer]

I was going to agree with this, but thought to check prices. Did that, only to find very few for sale, and the price has shot up to what I paid for it mounted on a mint- M2, my first Leica setup. In case you come across an inexpensive one... The rigid Cron is apparently a bit sharper, but the Elmar also gives you a nice image. I don’t have the patience for testing, so can’t comment on a side by side comparison. I like what I get from both.

A sample in colour from me, and the one that follows on my flickr is also from the Elmar.


corn by found fotos, on Flickr

Hi found fotos,

nice colors and nice image. Which version is yours? Mine has many aperture blades with circular opening giving the nice soft bokeh. How is aperture of early summicrons?

edit:
I found this on kenrock's page. early elmar has 15 aperture blades giving perfectly circular opening like human eye. So I think the bokeh must be smoother in those than summicrons which have 10 blades. Summicrons are ofcourse sharper...

http://www.kenrockwell.com/leica/images/50mm-f28/D3S_8120-1200.jpg
(mine is exactly the same except it is rare one on which 5cm f2.8 is written)

 

[grainhound]

Hi LeicaFoReVer,
Thanks for the compliment.

The version I have is older than Ken's, serial # starting with 15 rather than 19, and indeed, a circular aperture with a lot of blades. It also says 5cm 1: 2.8. I didn't know those were rare; I was shocked to see the prices on ebay.

The corn shot was one of my earlier Leica ones, wide open, 3.3 feet from the corn. My lens has no metric scale, just feet. From the time I took that photo, I've thought the 5cm Elmar has bokeh as good as anything else I've seen. Kevin Li commented to me that the Elmar is better for colour than the Summicron, but I don't know how well that would stand up to a test. It does take photos nice enough that I've never worried about sharpness at f2.8 or 4. Ken includes an f8 shot in his review. I also used f8 for a photo of a friend, and was as impressed by its sharpness as Ken was. Startled, actually.

If I can get around to it, I'll post a bokeh shot from the rigid Cron. No promises about when, however.

 

[Vics]

Bo-Ke? I have wondered for years about the growth in the interest in bokeh. I never heard that term before I came here six years ago. I try hard to use the best possible aperture. Yet I see so many pictures featuring the super-sharp twig, while the people in the "background" are relegated to "bokeh." I don't get it.

 

[loneranger]

Ok, after much research and reading, I found the answer to my original question, and it's one that has not been mentioned by anyone in this thread, the voigtlander 50/2 heliar!
I believe the rendering is similar to the DR, and it is smaller, and it costs much less than the rigid.

 

[Summicronj]

M3 summicron dr kodak 400bwcn

M3 summicron dr kodak 400bwcn

[/url] Ready for Wine by Analogick, on Flickr[/IMG]

 

[alexnotalex]

Any votes for the Canon 50 f1.8?
Worth considering, it's a quality performer...

 

[LeicaFoReVer]

Hi LeicaFoReVer,
Thanks for the compliment.

The version I have is older than Ken's, serial # starting with 15 rather than 19, and indeed, a circular aperture with a lot of blades. It also says 5cm 1: 2.8. I didn't know those were rare; I was shocked to see the prices on ebay.

The corn shot was one of my earlier Leica ones, wide open, 3.3 feet from the corn. My lens has no metric scale, just feet. From the time I took that photo, I've thought the 5cm Elmar has bokeh as good as anything else I've seen. Kevin Li commented to me that the Elmar is better for colour than the Summicron, but I don't know how well that would stand up to a test. It does take photos nice enough that I've never worried about sharpness at f2.8 or 4. Ken includes an f8 shot in his review. I also used f8 for a photo of a friend, and was as impressed by its sharpness as Ken was. Startled, actually.

If I can get around to it, I'll post a bokeh shot from the rigid Cron. No promises about when, however.

Yes, we have the same versions then. I am quite happy with my elmar too...

By the way OP mentioned Heliar f2. I think they are quite pricey and hard to find too, right?

 

[rogerzilla]

Bo-Ke? I have wondered for years about the growth in the interest in bokeh. I never heard that term before I came here six years ago. I try hard to use the best possible aperture. Yet I see so many pictures featuring the super-sharp twig, while the people in the "background" are relegated to "bokeh." I don't get it.

Not everyone does!

I think one reason bokeh shots are popular is that they differentiate film cameras, or very good digital cameras, from the majority of modern digicams where you can't really get shallow DOF due to the small sensors and short focal length lenses.

The "swirly", incidentally, is a characteristic of many older Leitz double-Gauss lenses. The Summar does it at f/2 and the original LTM Summaron does it at f/3.5. I have many examples.

 

[Bingley]

Ok, after much research and reading, I found the answer to my original question, and it's one that has not been mentioned by anyone in this thread, the voigtlander 50/2 heliar!
I believe the rendering is similar to the DR, and it is smaller, and it costs much less than the rigid.

Interesting. I'd like to see some sample shots showing the similarity.

 

[hans voralberg]

I happen to have both, may be time for a comparison!