50mm LTM lens: still looking

FrankS

FrankS

Registered User
Local time
10:18 AM
Joined
Aug 23, 2004
Messages
19,348
I'm able to use my "new" Canon VI with an Industar 61 f2.8 lens, but my ultimate goal is to find a "premium" lens for it.

With a bit (lot) more saving, I guess the CV 50mm f1.5 Nokton lens is an option. Finding one used (perhaps from someone switching to the new 40mm f1.4) would be fantastic.

I have to be patient. A local repair shop in Toronto (Komenic) has a few SM Leica lenses for sale.

50 F 2 collapsible Summicron $549
50 F 3.5 " Elmar in original bubble case $499
50 F 2 " Summitar $299

Any thoughts on the Summitar?

Could I ask you guys to keep an eye out for me for a 50mm (at least f2) Leica/Canon/Nikon/CV lens?
 
Both my photos for the RFF book were taken with a Summitar ("Bicycle" and "Mirror"). Some others in my gallery, too.
I noticed it has some distortion ("pillow" effect) in some photos I've taken. Otherwise, a very nice lens - and from what I've heard, quite comparable to older Summicrons.

Denis
 
I haven't paid much attention to the going rate for old Leitzl lenses recently and I'm a little astonished that a Summitar could cost that much. I don't doubt that a Summicron is worth that much on the open market, but the Summitar, while a good lens, is tough one for me to swallow as a $300 lens.

Don't get me wrong, I have one mounted on a Leica IIIf and it is terrific, but I think if I were going to spend $300 on one today I would just go the extra distance and get a good Summicron.

Have you considered one of the Canon Serenars or pre-Serenars! They were probably original equipment on your Canon VI. 50mm/1.8, non-collapsible. The early one were just called Canon, but the later ones were labeleed Canon Serenar. I think they are Planar formula lenses. I have one of the early ones, and it is a little better than my Summitar, (sharper at the edges and corners), but VERY heavy. They also cost a LOT less. The early ones are about the same age as the Summitar, early 1950's.

-Paul
 
Re: 50mm LTM lens: still looking

FrankS said:
50 F 2 " Summitar $299

Any thoughts on the Summitar?
Click to expand...


Well, no idea whatsoever about whether that price is reasonable, but....I have a summitar on my IIIf. It's a lovely little thing, solid, beautiful feel to it. and collapsible means that the IIIf really can go into your pocket. I have read that the front element scratches really easily and a lot of them are scratched to some extent, but mine is clean.

The results are none too worse either - nice bokeh, clear, sharp. It does lose a bit of sharpness at f2, but that's not exactly unexpected.

My B&W shots in the gallery http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showgallery.php?cat=500&ppuser=570 are done with the Summitar.

tim
 
Tim, I took a boo at your gallery and totally agree with you about the technical quality of this lens. As for asthetics and your eye for pictures, I love your Gotham City shot, and the look on the Tired Boy's face is priceless! You needn't feel humbled.
 
The early one were just called Canon, but the later ones were labeleed Canon Serenar.

i think it's the reverse of that paul. the early ones were canon serenar and then the later ones dropped the serenar and kept only the canon name.
 
Re: 50mm LTM lens: still looking

FrankS said:
...but my ultimate goal is to find a "premium" lens for it.
Click to expand...

Frank, are you interested in screw mount Summilux? :D

My Nokton is up for sale if the price is right because I love this lens and it hurts to part with it. I just have to find a way of unlocking the M-adapter because I use Loctite threadlock on it.
 
Frank, lots of choices out there including the Jupiter-3 and -8. I think there are several of us here who have the VC 50mm f/2.5 Color Skopar, which I find to be a very pleasant compact lens. It's missing the harshness sometimes seen with the f/1.5 Nokton and other current/modern designs.
 
Hi Doug, Yes I was looking at some J-8's and J-3's on ebay today. My problem is that I'm an ebay virgin (never bought over ebay) and I'm nervous about buying a lens from Russia, given their spotty quality control. Especially for Russian stuff, I'd prefer to look at camera shows where I can actually hold the lens and examine it.

As for the Skopar, my experience so far with the f2.8 Industar from Joe, (edited here: of course I meant Joe, not Doug) makes me want an extra stop brighter at least. ( f1.4 Canon, f1.5 Nokton, Jupiter, or Canon, an f1.8 Canon, or even an f2 Jupiter, Summitar, or Summicron) Does anyone know anything about the f1.5 Summarit?

Heck, I've got about 3/4 of an f1.5 Canon lens that came with the camera!

The f1.8 Canon seems to be the best choice so far, I just need to save a bit and maybe buy one from Kevin's Camera.

If I'm patient something will come along.
 
Last edited:
Joe, that poor guy has tried multiple times to sell that lens. In fact he was offering it at the same time as another Photo.netter was selling one, and I bought mine from this other guy for $175, like new and with original box and materials. I have refrained from pointing this out to the current seller as a matter of courtesy. :)

You recall my pic of the blonde outside the juice bar? That and the one below were with the 50/2.5; this one at about f/2.8 illustrates the bokeh... (a little grainy due to Fuji NPZ800 film; reddish illumination from our porch light)
 
Last edited:
Lenses and their "fingerprints"

Lenses and their "fingerprints"

Frank, as an aside, it also depends on what you're looking for in a lens.
There are guys on Leica forum on photo.net who have 6-7 Leitz lenses, all 50mm - Summicrons, Simmiluxes, and whatnots.
I don't know about having that many (seems like overkill), but not all "normal" lenses are the same. I like older Leitz lenses (collapsible and older rigid Summicrons), because of their bokeh.
I also have a Jupiter 8, and two Nikkor 50mm lens that I (used to) use on my Nikons. Nikkor 50mm lenses (50/1.8 AI) are nothing to write home about - they're sharp, but that's all. Bokeh can get *really* ugly, and there's tendency in them to so-called "cross-eyed bokeh", which is particularly unpleasant.
Jupiter 8 is OK, but it's missing that "pop" effect that Leitz lenses have.
I was pleasantly surprised at the quality and OOF effect of the Yashinon lens on my Yashica Lynx 14e - it's sharp, with excellent OOF rendition (50/1,4). Of course, if you want that lens, you'll have to buy the body (Yashica Lynx) that goes with it, since it's a fixed lens :)

Here are some examples which might illustrate what I'm talking about.

First, a color sample taken with LTM Summitar, which I find quite nice... Sharp, pleasant OOF rendition...
 
Another sample

Another sample

And here's a sample of Yashica Lynx (Yashinon 45/1.4):
 
Another one - Jupiter 8

Another one - Jupiter 8

And here's one taken with Jupiter 8 (in Kiev bayonet mount, on my Kiev 4A). It has funny bokeh sometimes - "pointy" light sources are sometimes rendered as triangles, which might be disturbing. I haven't noticed that (yet!) with my LTM Jupiter 8... It's not that visible in this one, but can be seen on some other photos I have.
Scan leaves a lot to be desired - but it will do for an illustration....
 
In short, it depends on what you want in a lens. Some are faster, and go to f1.4, but are not that sharp wide open, and the OOF can be ugly. Some are slower (f2 or f2.5 or f2.8), but the sharpness is excellent all over, and OOF rendition (bokeh) can be really nice.
For that Leica "pop" (3D effect), Summicron is great - but the best one I've tried so far was a late Summilux 35/1.4 - the photos taken with that lens really stand out compared to others!
But that beast is *very* expensive, and out of my reach. About 1.400 EUR for a used one (something like $1,600) :(

Still dreaming, though :D

Denis
 
Last edited:
Thank you Denis for your excellent explanations on the different qualities of lenses, including illustrative pics! Based on my coffeehouse photography, the most important quality I need in a 50mm lens is speed (f2 or better). My Canon rangefinder camera seems ideally suited for low light interior shots like that. Given that, of course I'd prefer sharpness but not at the cost of notebly ugly bokeh. If I had to rate the importance to me of bokeh and sharpness though, I think I'd lean towards wanting better sharpness. I would not be interesed in a soft lens even if it produced beautifully rendered out of focus highlights. A lens like that would be interesting if it can be had for cheap, just to keep around for the (very) odd times I'm called upon to do figure photography, to capitalize on those qualities when sharpness is not the most important criteria. Being spoiled with medium format quality, I'd want the best lens I can afford (which feels like about $300Cdn for me right now) on a 35mm camera.
 
doug,
i know that guy has had no luck selling his lens. but he has been lowering his asking price and might be ready to make a real deal.

frank, don't forget that you can always pop in some faster film.
one of the beauties of 35 mm is grain!

joe
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom