50mm Summilux Pre-Asph--A Little Help

[wjlapier]

Looks like I'm adding the Pre-asph 50mm summilux to my kit. I've read that the first version should be avoided if one wants to shoot wide open and I do. Second optical formula is preferred, but which version? I've also read that some prefer the pre-asph to the asph--why? What's a good price for a clean, nice looking lens? What about hood--does this one have one integrated? If not, which one is the correct one? Finally, if there is anything else that would help in finding my next lens, I'd like to know about it.

Thanx--Bill

 

[tbarker13]

Just went through the same thing. Found a good price on a v.3.
For me, the .7 meter close focus was critical. If it weren't for that, I would have gone for the v.2.

 

[Damaso]

I have a v2 and am looking for a v3. The hood is a little awkward to take on and off and I would prefer the closer focusing of the v3. All that said it is a great lens and will be cheaper by a few hundred dollars than the v 3.

 

[peter_n]

I loved my v.2 but sold it for a BP v.3. Now I love the v.3. In addition to the 0.7M closest focus the v.3 has a much shorter focus throw than the v.2. The major disadvantage of the v.3 (at least from my perspective) is that it has a slide-out lens hood. I got round this problem by fitting a heavystar 46mm hood to the lens.

 

[helen.HH]

Had a version 2 (1962) which I ADORED....its Eric's now🙁

just got a ver 1 but found it Toooo Soft
but really fab oof....Tres Cool
however I sent it back.....😱
Not tried a Ver 3
but ver 2 is Superb !!!
All my lux shots on flickr and @getdpi are Ver 2 / except 1

Price range for ver 2
generally speaking 875.00 - 1200.00

Best to You W-
Helen

 

[wjlapier]

Thanx Helen, and everyone else. Wasn't aware of the closer focusing of the Ver III.

So, a couple more questions if you don't mind.

Helen, I have your old DR cron--how would you compare sharpness and bokeh at f/2? Was your Ver II 50 lux sharper at 1.4 than the DR cron at f/2? As sharp? Anyone for that matter?

And if anyone has the new Nokton 1.1, how does the Ver II/III 50 lux compare to it? Say at respective fastest apertures and similar apertures?

Bill

 

[snausages]

The Lux V2 (bought on RFF) has served me very well for a couple years now. If .7m vs 1.0m is really a concern, you could solve the close-focus issue by getting a v2 AND a ZM Planar 2.0 for the price of one v3. To me 50mm portraits don't need to be just someone's face. If that's what you want, why not get an 80mm on an Olympus OM for $100. The v2 at 1.4 isn't amazingly sharp, but it still looks great, and I'm not sure 'sharp' is the priority for any lens handheld without IS at 1/15th or slower.

 

[helen.HH]

Bill, to my EYE
The DR cron was Sharper @2
than the lux's 1.4
however you can't beat the allure of the lux's signature / it imparts a luxurious glow


the lux 5.6 -on was Crisp Lovely Sharp ...a Beautiful Round Lush Sharpness

Best - H

 

[awilder]

The sharpness question of the v2 'lux wide open compared to the DR wide open is pretty easy. The DR wide open is sharper across the frame but the the 'lux by f/2 equals or exceeds in axial performance of the DR at f/2 but never really catches up to the DR outside the cental zone until stopped down to about f/8 over most ot the frame. This pertains however to flat field subjects like landscapes but since the 'lux has modest curvature of field, if the subject lies within the curved plane, the imaging will be sharp without much stopping down. What you do get in exchange for curvature of field is greater contrast over the DR, something Leitz needed to do to compete with Japanese 50/1.4 offerings.

 

[helen.HH]

The sharpness question of the v2 'lux wide open compared to the DR wide open is pretty easy. The DR wide open is sharper across the frame but the the 'lux by f/2 equals or exceeds in axial performance of the DR at f/2 but never really catches up to the DR outside the cental zone

PURRfectly put AWILDER...🙂

 

[awilder]

Thanks Helen. This partly explains why many Leica afianados use to own both lenses a 'lux and 'cron, one for low light shooting especially with Tri-X the other for general purpose with slower fine grained film where greater sharpness is needed across the frame especially when a flatter field is required or if close work is required as in a DR version.

 

[35mmdelux]

My fav pre-asph 50 has got to be V3 black paint. Its ergonomics are diff than the other v3s but really nice, sort of retro look.

 

[marke]

you can't beat the allure of the lux's signature / it imparts a luxurious glow

You mean this? 🙂

Version 3 captures my greyhound, Zoomer, in the dappled light of a lazy summer afternoon.

 

[ampguy]

I've had both, now only have the E46, so here are my thoughts on just the 2 I owned:

E43 is heavier (mine was a 1966 black chrome Wetzler) and felt solider than my new (> 4M s/n) E46 b.p. Optics and signature are quite similar - the b.p. E46 actually goes back to a scalloped focus ring, which even the '66 used a non-scalloped. Again, look is similar, older one ('66 ish) may have more IR/UV filtering than newer one, but not an issue if you stick an IR/UV filter on it.

Build quality and materials of a Wetzler old one are better, materials are better, more solid feel, longer focus throw, like the lux 75/1.4.

E46 is lighter, b.p. is very pretty, feel is less solid, focus is smooth and light, almost too light, lighter than any old Leica lens.

Both give "better" bokeh the the asph version. Both also have a "bluish" cast relative to some other 50s. Technically it is probably not as good as the asph.

Like all lenses, some examples may not be equal - see this guy's blog review - his apparently has some severe CA issues.

If I were buying again, I think I'd try to be happy with an E43, btw, they're all V2s except for the asph. I can't figure how they are the same optics, but went for 40 some years not supporting closer focus.

An overview of the pre-asph 50 lux versions is here

I wouldn't buy an old one if it weren't CLA'd, or I would factor in having that done. I also wouldn't buy an E46 without warranty, or ability to check focus, and CA issues.

 

[peter_n]

E43 is heavier (mine was a 1966 black chrome Wetzler) and felt solider than my new (> 4M s/n) E46 b.p...

Build quality and materials of a Wetzler old one are better, materials are better, more solid feel, longer focus throw, like the lux 75/1.4.

E46 is lighter, b.p. is very pretty, feel is less solid, focus is smooth and light, almost too light, lighter than any old Leica lens.

Interesting. I had a v.2 built in 1972 in Wetzlar and now use the BP v.3 like you. I had and used both together for about 2 months. My v.2 is different from yours I think because my impression was that the BP was the better all-round lens (which is why I kept it and sold the v.2). It is definitely much heavier than the v.2 since it has a brass barrel and rings, and the build quality of mine is excellent. It also has an extremely smooth focus action but what I really like about it is the 0.7M and short throw.

 

[ampguy]

hmm

hmm

Maybe mine was just an exceptionally good one, and had a recent CLA making the optics perfect.

I don't know that they made V2s lighter in '72 than in '66, but maybe there was a shortage of heavy stuff.

Yes, the .7m is nice, short throw is fine, I don't think I've missed any shots due to shorter throw.

Also, built-in hood of E46 is convenient, though I've wondered if it's long enough.

On the E43, or E46, I've not had flare issues.

Interesting. I had a v.2 built in 1972 in Wetzlar and now use the BP v.3 like you. I had and used both together for about 2 months. My v.2 is different from yours I think because my impression was that the BP was the better all-round lens (which is why I kept it and sold the v.2). It is definitely much heavier than the v.2 since it has a brass barrel and rings, and the build quality of mine is excellent. It also has an extremely smooth focus action but what I really like about it is the 0.7M and short throw.