50mm Summilux ASPH - first short walk in the park to test

[Freakscene]

Mine flares quite badly, I thought it was just my sample. I tried a deeper hood thinking it might help, sadly not.
Sent it to Leica, they said there was no problem.

When it flares, it flares fairly severely.

A lot of how much it bothers one individual photographer depends on individual tastes about light and angles. I found that with the v5 Summicron that I was losing shots all the time. A lot of my compositions seem to use the sort of light that provokes flare in that lens. With the Summilux ASPH I get flare less often, but it is pretty bad when I get it. It also changes things that in the meantime I switched from using black and white film to a Monochrome, so I could preview and change angle if I needed to.

The 50mm Summilux ASPH often gives me big washed out areas or huge flare arcs (see below) when it does flare. In the photo below, moving the camera maybe 20-25cm eliminated the flare. It is one area where some of the giant 50mm lenses for mirrorless cameras can do better.

 

[Erik van Straten]

Off topic, but I like to tell this here.

The optics of the early 50mm Summiluxes were not designed by Leitz only, but this was done by Leitz in cooperation with Taylor, Taylor & Hobson from England. Only later, from number 1844001, the design of the Summilux 50mm was for 100% original Leitz. The difference was clearly visible in the images: the later Leitz designed lenses show a considerable barrel distortion. There were also problems in the rear lens group of these lenses: the tensions in the sealant layers (because different types of glass were glued together) caused the well-known "stars".

Today's users are better off with the older, TTH-built black 50mm Summiluxes IMO: no distortion and sharper images. And the best thing: no aspherics. And no problems in the sealant layers. The chrome lenses from the collaboration period Leitz/TTH are good, but they lack the extreme sharpness the black ones have. But I always would prefer these chrome ones over the later "all Leitz" ones.

gelatin silver print (summilux 50mm f1.4 v1 1703XXX (black)) leica m2

 

[tcmx3]

Im not sure what advantage having no asphericals has.

Rendering is personal. To me the old Luxes are just old lenses. The current one is the best rendering lens Ive seen in my entire life. If it were just about sharpness, I'd save myself thousands of dollars and get the APO Lanthar. Old crons are special though, Ill give them that. I have a DR, great lens.

 

[Erik van Straten]

Im not sure what advantage having no asphericals has.

Rendering is personal. To me the old Luxes are just old lenses. The current one is the best rendering lens Ive seen in my entire life. If it were just about sharpness, I'd save myself thousands of dollars and get the APO Lanthar. Old crons are special though, Ill give them that. I have a DR, great lens.

Ofcourse this all is very subjective, just like the choice between film or digital. Reminds me of the preference of classical violinists for old instruments.

 

[tcmx3]

Ofcourse this all is very subjective, just like the choice between film or digital. Reminds me of the preference of classical violinists for old instruments.

sadly, there are too few Guarneris for all the great violinists of the world 😔

 

[Erik van Straten]

gelatin silver print (rf nikkor 50mm f1.4) nikon s2

G.L., 1998

 

[tcmx3]

The new close focus version of the 50/1.4 ASPH is 5mm wider and 7mm longer than the old one, but weighs the same. In practice I found the size difference immaterial. It’s certainly still very much smaller than most of the giant 50mm f1.4 and 1.2 lenses for mirrorless cameras, even the very best of which are only marginally better than the Leica M. The Nikkor Z 50mm f1.2 S, as an example for comparison, is approximately the size of a house brick*.

The big difference for me is that I can use the 50/1.4 in close focus mode as a substitute for the 75/2. So the new lens makes my bag 430g lighter, or lets me carry an 18mm Super Elmar and my bag is still lighter.

Marty

*exaggeration, but it is really huge. The Nikkor weighs about the same as a 50/1.4 ASPH and an M10 or M11 series Leica M camera.

Well various things happened and I just got the new CF version in the mail.

I think more than anything else it looks bigger and that plays tricks on your brain. If I'm not looking at it and just manipulating it behind the camera it doesn't make much difference. If the 11891 variant had been significantly discounted (the MIG version, frankly) and offered concurrently it would have been an easy choice to get that. As it wasn't, and I just wanted a new lens with no issues, it was an easy choice to get V2.

I'm willing to admit I was wrong about this one, I think both v1 and v2 are justifiable. If you already have a good copy of a v1, dont bother upgrading IMO. if you dont have a v1 and want one, IMO consider just spending a bit extra and getting a brand new lens. I have nothing against used gear, however I really do have better experiences with new stuff and in a month I'll have forgotten about the price difference.

sigh.

well, at least I still have a 50 Lux ASPH, which I still feel is the best 50mm lens ever made.

 

[Freakscene]

Well various things happened and I just got the new CF version in the mail.

I think more than anything else it looks bigger and that plays tricks on your brain. If I'm not looking at it and just manipulating it behind the camera it doesn't make much difference. If the 11891 variant had been significantly discounted (the MIG version, frankly) and offered concurrently it would have been an easy choice to get that. As it wasn't, and I just wanted a new lens with no issues, it was an easy choice to get V2.

I'm willing to admit I was wrong about this one, I think both v1 and v2 are justifiable. If you already have a good copy of a v1, dont bother upgrading IMO. if you dont have a v1 and want one, IMO consider just spending a bit extra and getting a brand new lens. I have nothing against used gear, however I really do have better experiences with new stuff and in a month I'll have forgotten about the price difference.

sigh.

well, at least I still have a 50 Lux ASPH, which I still feel is the best 50mm lens ever made.

It’s quite simple - do you need close focus or the same biting sharpness at middle distances that it produces close in or at infinity? If the answer is yes, go for the new one. If no, there are bargains to be had on the old one. To keep my photography operational at all times, I kept the old one for use when the new one is off getting CLAd and/or having the focus adjusted.

Marty

 

[Erik van Straten]

This is with the first Summicron 50mm f2, no. 1319XXX at full aperture, collapsible screw-mount, made in 1955.

gelatin silver print (summicron 50mm f2 collapsible) leica lll

Taken two days ago and printed yesterday.


gelatin silver print (summicron 50mm f2 no. 1319XXX) leica lll

Frank B., 2024

 

[brusby]

This is with the first Summicron 50mm f2, no. 1319XXX at full aperture, collapsible screw-mount, made in 1955.

gelatin silver print (summicron 50mm f2 collapsible) leica lll

Taken two days ago and printed yesterday.


gelatin silver print (summicron 50mm f2 no. 1319XXX) leica lll

Frank B., 2024

View attachment 4838942

Erik, I see you've kinda taken over this thread. I'm just curious about your thought process. I can somewhat understand your post about the first generation Summilux since this thread is about the Summilux ASPH. But how do you calculate your posts of photos taken with rf nikkor 50mm f1.4 and the first generation collapsible Summicron have any relation to the original topic?

 

[Erik van Straten]

Erik, I see you've kinda taken over this thread. I'm just curious about your thought process. I can somewhat understand your post about the first generation Summilux since this thread is about the Summilux ASPH. But how do you calculate your posts of photos taken with rf nikkor 50mm f1.4 and the first generation collapsible Summicron have any relation to the original topic?

It is all about photography.

 

[35photo]

It is all about photography.

This thread is about photography with a specific lens…. It’s just not “about photography” There is a difference.

 

[brusby]

It is all about photography.

According to your reasoning there's no need for individual threads. One entitled "photography" should be sufficient. Or am I misunderstanding you?

 

[Erik van Straten]

This thread about Marty's photos with the 50mm Summilux ASPH has been going on for quite some time. He has had some bad luck with the Summilux ASPH. I wonder if he wouldn't have been better off using a different, older lens. I give some examples of black and white photos with other, older lenses that do not flare and that he might have used better. What is wrong with that?

 

[35photo]

This thread about Marty's photos with the 50mm Summilux ASPH has been going on for quite some time. He has had some bad luck with the Summilux ASPH. I wonder if he wouldn't have been better off using a different, older lens. I give some examples of black and white photos with other, older lenses that do not flare and that he might have used better. What is wrong with that?

Wow, the OP of THIS thread is brusby NOT Freakscene by the way... You are in the WRONG thread.

 

[sebastel]

it is what erik does. if you don't approve, you may consider to ignore him.
i think, while such posts are strictly speaking off topic, they still broaden the horzon, cuz there is more than one lens in the world.

back to the asph summilux, i used to own and use one for almost ten years now. finally, i replaced it with its direct predecessor. not because it's a bad lens - not at all. i think, as long as 50mm gives the field you need, there is no situation where the summilux asph would not be able to deliver. but in the end, i had to admit to myself, that i got it in the first place, because the one lens i wanted wasn't available at reasonable prices then, and i wanted the pre asph, because ... magic? not a term i like to use (i'm an engineer).

also, the version 1 summilux (mine was chrome) didn't do. heavy! now the voigtländer heliar classic takes over that task, so the v1 lux had to go, replaced by a dr summicron.

it's not about a single lens, but about several ones, each with their own strengths.

if i was to settle for only one 50mm only, my desert island lens could be the asph. but more probably some summicron, or ...

oh my, how happy i am to be able to carry more than one!

cheers,
sebastian

 

[brusby]

it is what erik does. if you don't approve, you may consider to ignore him.

I've ignored it/him on many occasions because you are absolutely correct "it is what erik does". But I finally decided to speak up because I find it rude and inconsiderate, particularly considering that most of the photos have been posted many, perhaps even dozens of times before.

 

[Erik van Straten]

Wow, the OP of THIS thread is brusby NOT Freakscene by the way... You are in the WRONG thread.

Yes, you are right ... ! I'm sorry. My fault.

Brusby: this is a fine lens: Summilux 1.4/50mm black paint * | A00853

 

[brusby]

Yes, you are right ... ! I'm sorry. My fault.

Brusby: this is a fine lens: Summilux 1.4/50mm black paint * | A00853

All cool. And I apologize for being too reactive.

 

[Freakscene]

This thread about Marty's photos with the 50mm Summilux ASPH has been going on for quite some time. He has had some bad luck with the Summilux ASPH. I wonder if he wouldn't have been better off using a different, older lens. I give some examples of black and white photos with other, older lenses that do not flare and that he might have used better. What is wrong with that?

All lenses have problems, and I push my lenses pretty hard a lot of the time. But I have tried virtually every Leica M mount 50mm lens and the 50/1.4 asph is the best for my purposes. Older lenses are less sharp and have less resolution. Mostly they flare more too, although a lot of that depends on whether you use film or digital. The 50/1 Noctilux flares a lot less on film, but was not designed to manage reflections back from the sensor and can flare a lot on digital.



This is not my thread.

One other comment I would make is that older lenses exert a greater influence on the photo. I don’t want ‘character’ I just want to show the scenes I photograph with as little fuss as possible. The newer the better for me.