Rico
Well-known
By classic, I mean the one from the 60s, or 50s. Contrast is medium, OOF areas are smooth, and OOF point sources are always circular (having 15 aperture blades really works). Based on posted images, the Elmar reissue (just discontinued) has high contrast and superb sharpness - not compatible with a pre-ASPH 'cron 35.
ClaremontPhoto
Jon Claremont
Andrew: Thank you. You're a bigger person than many others.
Ghiom
Established
Thanks for your comments.
I am really a 35/50 person... I know it may sounds curious, in fact I am more of a 35 person but I can't help considering the 50 being the classic... and it is always good to me to return to the basics once in a while especially in an city environmnt such as Paris...
If I review the proposition done here I shall summ up as:
-summicron (last or before the last, since the optical version as not changed since 1979 as far as I know)
-summicron DR
-Elmar (50s)
-Summilux pre-asph
-Hexanon 50
...
any comments of vote for Zeiss (planar or Sonnar) ?
I could here and there that many do prefer planar to summicron...
many thanks for your contributions on helping me choosing a 50
(I have never said that the 35 IV cron is actually the best of 35s... but it is actually the one I have and I am pleased with it...
)
I am really a 35/50 person... I know it may sounds curious, in fact I am more of a 35 person but I can't help considering the 50 being the classic... and it is always good to me to return to the basics once in a while especially in an city environmnt such as Paris...
If I review the proposition done here I shall summ up as:
-summicron (last or before the last, since the optical version as not changed since 1979 as far as I know)
-summicron DR
-Elmar (50s)
-Summilux pre-asph
-Hexanon 50
...
any comments of vote for Zeiss (planar or Sonnar) ?
I could here and there that many do prefer planar to summicron...
many thanks for your contributions on helping me choosing a 50
(I have never said that the 35 IV cron is actually the best of 35s... but it is actually the one I have and I am pleased with it...
)
infrequent
Well-known
i would be keen to know about the zm sonnar. how is the build quality compared to leica / hexanons?!
also what is usually the going price for a pre asph summilux?
also what is usually the going price for a pre asph summilux?
Krosya
Konicaze
Well, I dont know about Sonnar, but I have a couple of ZM lenses and used to have a Planar ZM. From personal observation of MY samples - it's good, but I prefer Hex's build better. THey just feel more solid to me. Also, maybe just me but Planar in Black felt less solid than my ZMs in silver/chrome. Not sure why, I assume they are made from the same materials, but still, thats how it seems to me.
As far as Pre-ASPH Lux 50mm 1.4 - lately they seem to have gone down. Just the other day one in chrome (latest pre-asph, not older ones) went for $1100 USD on ebay. There seem to be plenty popping up at $1400-1500, but they dont sell as well as they used to.
Krosya
Konicaze
yanidel
Well-known
Owning both the v4 and Jupiter 8, I an tell you they are not in the same league at F2, and contrast wise the J-8 is far behind. Maybe the v4 at F2 is not as sharp as other lenses or versions (though I find mine excellent even at F2), but the look at F2 + bokeh makes it a wonderful lens, that cannot be summarized by only "the king of bokeh" name.It's going to be tough to find a 50mm lens to match every facet of the version IV 35mm Summicron.
The first part, finding a 50 with mediocre performance wide open, won't be too difficult; a collapsible Summicron with the ubiquitous "cleaning marks," or a Jupiter-8 with an out-of-whack focus cam should do the trick. The second part, paying $1,200 or more for $300 worth of performance, will be tough. Even the most devilish of ebay sellers doesn't have the huevos to post a four digit "buy-it-now" price for those lenses. And, lastly, you'll have to have a catch-phrase that appeals to the herd mentality of the internet age. "King of Bokeh" has a big head start, but lacks pizzaz, so there's room for competition. Alliteration always helps, though. I'm going to start calling my pre-aspherical Summilux 35 the "Queen of Coma" in every relevant internet post I can in hopes of de-throning the 'King.'
I own the corresponding 50mm Summicron and I find the look to be different. Yet, it is a great compromise of price, size and speed.
Finally, "The Queen of Coma" appelation is already taken by the Industar-69
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
I second the 35/75. I played around with the framelines lever and realized a 50 is kinda too close to 35. A full frame view of a painting or window at each focal length translates into about a one meter step forward or backward between 25-50 to reframe, while 75 is a two meter jump.
A 75/1.4 is kinda big and bulky, but the shallow DOF at 1.4 is more exaggerated than a fast 50 (except for the Noctilux) due to focal length. The look is complimentary only because it is so differant than a 35. Stoped down it gets very sharp. Forgot to mention nice bokey also.
If mobility and size is the issue the Elmar 50/2.8 converts your Leica into a pocket camera. Right now I know of a store that sells their remaining stock with a $300.00 rebate. This is probably a third lense for me, but I'm fighting Gas and trying to limit my kit to two lenses. I like the Elmar because on my SLR I perfer a slower 2.8 55mm Nikon Macro lense over a fast 50/1.4 outdoors during the day because of the sharpness that is more like a flat-field lense.
A good question to ask yourself is how much glass do you need, because there are too many great choices. BTW that 1.5 Sonnar is another lense I lust for.
Cal
ferider
Veteran
Actually, the 75/1.4 has much thinner DOF than the Noctilux at 1m, and in particular at .7m.
Roland.
kipkeston
Well-known
Can this question be asked the other way around? Which 35 is the best compliment to the 50mm summicron?
ferider
Veteran
Might depend on the version.
Leicaphiles might not like this answer, but I find the 35 and 28 Color Skopars to be great matches for my v3 50/2. Hand-holding speed, contrast, resolution and color rendering are quite similar. And they are small, just like the Summicron.
Best,
Roland.
HuubL
hunter-gatherer
I agree! The classic 90 elmarit is an excellent performer!
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
Actually, the 75/1.4 has much thinner DOF than the Noctilux at 1m, and in particular at .7m.
Roland.
Thanks Roland.
Cal
WoolenMammoth
Well-known
the 35mm v4 cron, 40mm sumicron c and the 50 mm cron from the same era all look very similar. If by compliment you are looking for a similar looking lens in a different focal length, that is the direction you want to go. I wound up with a 35v4 simply because I wanted a lens to match the look of my 40 sum c.
infrequent
Well-known
thx!
thx!
@krosya - than it makes sense to wait and buy a summilux because a brand new zm sonnar will cost abt the same give or take. might look for a J3 for my sonnar fix.
any other LTM sonnars worth looking out for?!
thx!
@krosya - than it makes sense to wait and buy a summilux because a brand new zm sonnar will cost abt the same give or take. might look for a J3 for my sonnar fix.
any other LTM sonnars worth looking out for?!
Ghiom
Established
Andy, what is the version of summilux you have?
(the 0,7 m or 1 m minimum focus?)
Considering that I already owned a tabbed summicron of the same years as my cron 35 IV and because I was not pleased with the matching ... I am taking your advice as a serious option...
Of course I guess it is also the expensive one... but it may be the absolute one too in some ways...
(What else could I want once I would own a summilx???)
Would you have some images to show me taken with both lenses (cron 35 and Summi 50) of yours... ?
Thanks
Tom A
RFF Sponsor
The Sonnar ZM 50f1.5 has a bit of the character of the pre-asph 35f2. The Planar 50f2 is more "modern" in its rendition.
My suggestion would be a Pre Stupid Hood version of the Summicron 50f2. The one with a focussing tab and a removable hood. The collapsible hood version of the Summicron did not have a tab (essential for me on a 50 or wider) and the hood kept collapsing at inopportune times. I had a tab put on mine, but in the end i got tired of having to check the hood and cleaning the front element and sold it.
It also depends what you are shooting, color or bl/w - the earlier Summicron's 50's/60's and 70's version excelled at black/white but somewhat "flat" contrast in color. Resolution is about the same on all of them -i,e in most cases better than the film you are using!
I like the Sonnar ZM 50f1.5 - for black and white it is my current favorite. I think that the Planar 50f2 is marginally sharper, but a bit more contrast and "edge". Either one is better than the Summicron's and rivals the Asph Summilux, except in close in performance.
As for the 35/50 kit - I use that all the time - pair it with a wider lens (25/21/18) and a 75/90 you can do most everything you need and still be able to carry it for 14-16 hours/day.
My suggestion would be a Pre Stupid Hood version of the Summicron 50f2. The one with a focussing tab and a removable hood. The collapsible hood version of the Summicron did not have a tab (essential for me on a 50 or wider) and the hood kept collapsing at inopportune times. I had a tab put on mine, but in the end i got tired of having to check the hood and cleaning the front element and sold it.
It also depends what you are shooting, color or bl/w - the earlier Summicron's 50's/60's and 70's version excelled at black/white but somewhat "flat" contrast in color. Resolution is about the same on all of them -i,e in most cases better than the film you are using!
I like the Sonnar ZM 50f1.5 - for black and white it is my current favorite. I think that the Planar 50f2 is marginally sharper, but a bit more contrast and "edge". Either one is better than the Summicron's and rivals the Asph Summilux, except in close in performance.
As for the 35/50 kit - I use that all the time - pair it with a wider lens (25/21/18) and a 75/90 you can do most everything you need and still be able to carry it for 14-16 hours/day.
Ghiom
Established
Thank you Tom for your contribution. I am honored ( )...
but honestly, the whole purpose of this thread is that as I was saying previously, in terms of matching rendition I found the summicron 50 (tabbed) to be somehow diffrent than my 35IV... more "crispy" or "modern look" in some ways ... may be it has something to do with the one I owned or my use of it (I do not now???)... but I started to consider that it is matching more closely to the 35 ASPH version.
From what I could gather here and there, I started to grow some interests in the Zeiss 50s (even Planar that is said to be slightly less contrasty than cron), I have particularly liked the Sonnar rendition very much, even if I was doubtfull on these issues with focusing wide opened and also the 0,9 m mini focus distance... I did not want neither to get into the retro wave that is somehow highly fashion these days... I do equally color and b/w, and I really do aim at matching renditions... I am only looking for 1 extra lens, not looking for trying all the diffrent types of 50mm.... (I did already "loose my time" with 2 attempts...) in other words, I am just looking for the right tool and that is it.
By the way, I was surprised that noone before you mentioned the Sonnar on this thread... And I also should admit that since a little time I have spent more time surfing the net, reading on lenses than actually photographying... and that is clearly an annoying nonsense!
Following Andy's contribution and yours I guess my prospect will now narrow to either the Summilux pre-asph (finally the same years than the 35 IV...) and the Sonnar. Both are very fast lenses, and that is something I did not expect to be looking for, it is a great "news"... they are also on the expensive side, but... I will be taking my time, hunting for the right opportunity... may be of getting a summilux first, and because of its high value, if I shall not be satisfied (possible?) then I would easily be able to turn back to the Sonnar...
Many thanks to all
Of course more contribution are always welcome!
)... but honestly, the whole purpose of this thread is that as I was saying previously, in terms of matching rendition I found the summicron 50 (tabbed) to be somehow diffrent than my 35IV... more "crispy" or "modern look" in some ways ... may be it has something to do with the one I owned or my use of it (I do not now???)... but I started to consider that it is matching more closely to the 35 ASPH version.
From what I could gather here and there, I started to grow some interests in the Zeiss 50s (even Planar that is said to be slightly less contrasty than cron), I have particularly liked the Sonnar rendition very much, even if I was doubtfull on these issues with focusing wide opened and also the 0,9 m mini focus distance... I did not want neither to get into the retro wave that is somehow highly fashion these days... I do equally color and b/w, and I really do aim at matching renditions... I am only looking for 1 extra lens, not looking for trying all the diffrent types of 50mm.... (I did already "loose my time" with 2 attempts...) in other words, I am just looking for the right tool and that is it.
By the way, I was surprised that noone before you mentioned the Sonnar on this thread... And I also should admit that since a little time I have spent more time surfing the net, reading on lenses than actually photographying... and that is clearly an annoying nonsense!
Following Andy's contribution and yours I guess my prospect will now narrow to either the Summilux pre-asph (finally the same years than the 35 IV...) and the Sonnar. Both are very fast lenses, and that is something I did not expect to be looking for, it is a great "news"... they are also on the expensive side, but... I will be taking my time, hunting for the right opportunity... may be of getting a summilux first, and because of its high value, if I shall not be satisfied (possible?) then I would easily be able to turn back to the Sonnar...
Many thanks to all
Of course more contribution are always welcome!
rbrooks
Established
I've been asking myself your original question. I too have the 35mm cron v4 and the 50mm cron v4. The 50mm is indeed more "crispy".Thank you Tom for your contribution. I am honored (
but honestly, the whole purpose of this thread is that as I was saying previously, in terms of matching rendition I found the summicron 50 (tabbed) to be somehow diffrent than my 35IV... more "crispy" or "modern look" in some ways ... may be it has something to do with the one I owned or my use of it (I do not now???)... but I started to consider that it is matching more closely to the 35 ASPH version.
Size, looks, and build-year match up. But for look? Perhaps the lux v2 (which I own) will be a better match? Maybe the elmar(I don't own and elmar).
Benjamin Marks
Veteran
Interesting to read the thread. I wonder, with the benefit of hind-sight, which post was the most useful to the OP? And what lens did the OP choose? My answer would have been similar to Tom's. I do think that Leica lenses from the same period are well matched in terms of build quality and design, rendering and color rendition. I have the 50 Tom suggests, a 50 cron with a focusing tab and a detachable hood. If you like 50's, that lens is just a great all-around performer and was produced at roughly the same time as the 35 the OP started this thread asking about. The Hexanon seems to have a rendering close to this version of the Summicron. The modern 35-Asph is more contrasty than the v. VI wide open, I think. As a general matter, I do think differences between these lenses are most obvious when the lenses are wide open. The question of "best match" is a tricky one, though. And as you can see from the replies above (at least among those who took the OP's question seriously), the answer is highly subjective.