50mm Elmar..? [the trouble with GAS]

[Steve George]

...well...Christmas has been and gone and a new year of much photo-geeking is rapidly approaching. As it's not quite 2006 yet though I can still look at some equipment without breaking my "no new lenses" New Year's Resolution just yet!

50mm is far and away my most used focal length on rangefinders and I'm starting to get a little GAS. I've recently got a 2nd M body - partly so I can use different focal lengths for weddings without having to swap-around lenses too much but for my general walk-about-on-holiday type of photography 50mm is likely to be mostly what I use, meaning the lens is going to be swapped repeatedly between colour body and b&w body..

So I'm looking for something 50mm to compliment my current version Summicron - a "different" character is what I'm after really - something that allows me to make a conscious choice for a particular scene: "this would look great with lens X instead of the 'cron" and vice versa. As I'm sure everyone knows the current Summicron is ultra-contrasty and very very sharp - not always the best combination (though I love it 99% of the time).

So really I'm looking for some pointers - why do 50mm Elmar users use this lens? And which version?

Other than a low-profile when pocketed what is the appeal of a collapsible 'cron over a rigid?

Thank you all for your time!

 

[Buttons]

I use the 50mm Elmar 90% of the time, although I have the 50mm Summicron as well. Why.... because I like the "temperature" it pits in a (B&W) print, it's snappy but not messy, the out of focus part is a work of art on it's own (Ishoot 80% for out of focus properties with the Elmar) it's nice at 2.8 while not it's best stop, which is 5.6, 2.8 is sharp central and quite sharp on the edge. I am not a knower of photography and/or lenses so my comment is purely subjective and according to my tastes only.

I love tessar design designs, I use to have the 45mm on my FM2, I have the rolleiflex 3.5T
Just for the lens quality

BTW I only do B&W with the elmar (tri-x with either rodinal or HC110 - H)


It's compact, I love the look when retracted

 

[wilt]

Interesting to hear about your experiences Summicron vs. Elmar, Button. Agree that the impression of a lens is subjective and a matter of taste.

I shoot the Summicron 50 (1980's model, tabbed) and the Minoxar 35 (Minox 35 GT-E). While the Summicron delivers great performance, quite often I find the tonality produced by the Minoxar, which is a Tessar type lens, nice. Would be fun to have something similar in 50 mm on the Leica.

 

[kevino]

I'll have to agree with Buttons' opinion of the Elmar. I recently picked up a current 50mm Elmar M.

I did a lot of wide open (f 2.8) shooting over Thanksgiving and Christmas. The negs look great and the oof areas look very nice - (what I can tell from the neg). Hopefully I'll get a chance to do some darkroom printing this weekend. I'm anxious to see how these negs look enlarged as compared to the Summicron. I've got a current 50mm Summicron and the performance from that lens is outstanding!

The Elmar is compact. Extended with the hood it's about the same size as the 'cron. Collapsed it is a little shorter. I think what makes it feel so compact is it's weight. I can't remember the actual specs of this compared to the cron (both black) but the Elmar feels a lot lighter. My M6TTL handles very nicely with it.

 

[laptoprob]

I have a '34 uncoated Elmar. Very different than the 50's Summicron, again different than the 1,2 Canon. The Elmar delivers very soft contrast, for certain purposes this is great.

Rob.

 

[Avotius]

the 50 Elmar has also peeked my interest, im working on getting a leica and a lens and the elmar looks neat not only because its cheap, but because it seems to have that classic look and qualtiy to it that makes a leica so special, frankly I really would rather have a noctilux but that will never happen. From what I have heard this is a pretty good lens, not as good as the cron but there is a large price gap there too....sigh, I got GAS too

 

[vha]

Have both the elmars (58 and 95) and would probably go for the first version in screwmont during 2006 (and a collapsable 90 😀 )

All of them has a special signature, and for me who just knows Contax G, the Elmar has a more soft and natural look, the Planar for G system is just too sharp and contrasty, but both are nice, but different.

just remember Elmars are adicctable. 😉

vha

 

[Marko]

Hello Leica Peoples.

Iam also interestet in a Leica Elmar 50mm. I have read a very interesting article in the LFI (Leica Fotografie International) magazine about a comparing of all Leica M 50mm lenses.

Unluckily, the test photos are shot without bokeh fashion. So my question; how is the bokeh of a Leica M 50mm Elmar? Any photos for me? Many thanks...

 

[zuikologist]

Daniel - very nice shots, especially the last one. All four photos have sharp but gentle character.

 

[Paulbe]

Daniel--really beautiful pix! I loved the first one! Thanks for posting..

One thing about Elmars--there aren't many around used. At leat I have a hard time finding listings--Igor has one at $487 and I don't see a used one on the bay---maybe I'm looking in the wrong place?

Paul

 

[chesapeake1787]

Elmar and color film?

Elmar and color film?

Daniel –

The Bergen, Norway shots are excellent. Have you any experience with the new Elmar and color film in the same kind of lighting? Would you say the summicron or the Elmar renders hues, reflections, or emitting or reflecting steady, suffused, or glowing light better?

Best,

Daniel

 

[richard_l]

The new Elmar 50 is almost the opposite of some of the older Elmars described in this thread. It's actually more crisp and contrasty that my 50 Summicron (also the latest version). Surprisingly, the Summicron and the Elmar have almost identical bokeh. I prefer the Elmar over the Summicron for architecture. Neither lens is better than the other, but I'm a Tessar freak, so I favor the Elmar.

 

[peter_n]

I've had two of the current Summicrons and currently have a current Elmar-M and a 1949 Elmar f3.5. The Summicrons were painfully sharp and a little cooler in color rendition than the Elmar-M. The Elmar-M is plenty sharp with good contrast and very nice OOF rendition. The Elmar is an excellent lens with less contrast than the current Elmar-M. The companion lens for my Elmar-M is a Summilux and they make an excellent pair.

 

[vha]

Developed and scanned the first roll shot with the new elmar (1995 ed) and I´m happy with it, compared to similar shots done with the 45mm planar G it follows more my flavour for black and white shots. Finally a combo that fits nice in the pockets of my Scott parka without making me look like a loony. 🙂

Shots are done with M6, Kodak BW400CN at 400, no filter, 019 at f4 and 000026 at f11 (I think)
.
Winter in Norway in -20 C.

vha

 

[peter_n]

Nice pics - glad you like the lens! 🙂

 

[Steve George]

Thanks all for such interesting replies...my GAS is getting worse - I've found a relatively cheap 50mm Elmar, f2.8 that I'm going to have a look at...if it proves irresistable I'll take the plunge and post the results here.

 

[kevino]

Nice shots vha!

 

[Beniliam]

Hi guys!

I dont have the early versions of the 50 mm Elmars. I have the current version, so I cant compare with the older versions. I never have a Summicron, but my first lens in M mount was a Nokton. I see always some forgetfulness for the Elmar lens by many M users... I dont know if it is just... I have great respect to other people opinions... but sometimes, I do not understand why Summicron... always is BETTER than the rest of the lens in the market. I think that the people, when buy one lens go autoconvinced that this lens is the better lens that they can buy for their cameras, and dont accept that other *cheaper* lens can do too great results.

Some photos taken with the lens