A Summitar (6-blade) 50/2 or a Canon 50/1.4/1.8 ?

[kb244]

Seeing as the price might be about the same (~ 250-ish), would you go with a Canon 50/1.4 (or 1.8) that's got a bit of dust inside but no fungus/haze/etc, or a Summitar 50/2 (the newer 6 bladed version) with a stiff-ish aperture ring and engraved? (to go on a Canon 7)

I used to have a 50/1.8 on my P that I liked, but not sure of the optical quality of either the black-barreled Canon lens or the Summitar.

 

[02Pilot]

First the objective technical, then the subjective personal, assessments.

The Canon 50/1.4 is very capable and probably the best objectively overall. The later black barrel 50/1.8 is known to suffer hazing problems that may result in permanently etched glass - make sure you're getting one that hasn't suffered this fate, or get the earlier chrome design. Filters are oddly sized (40 and 48mm). The 50/1.4 is rather large on a lot of LTM bodies, but perhaps not surprisingly balances pretty well on the large late Canons.

The Summitar is a little softer wide open than the Canons, and probably has a little more distortion (I don't particularly care about minor distortion, so I haven't paid much attention on this point). The OOF areas may be slightly less pleasant with the 6-blade aperture, most notably in points of light, which will exhibit a clear hexagonal shape; there are no click-stops. It uses an oddball filter arrangement, but this can be dealt with by use of an adapter. Note that the Summitar likely will not collapse into the Canon body due to the position of the light baffles.

Subjectively, I find the Summitar a lens with great character, while the Canons are technically better but a bit less interesting to me. I am willing to accept the faults of the Summitar (clickless aperture, fragility of the glass, optical limitations at large openings) because I love the way it renders, especially around f/4. I use mine on Barnacks primarily, so I am able to collapse it.

 

[raid]

The Canon 50/1.4 can compete well with a Summilux.

 

[kb244]

First the objective technical, then the subjective personal, assessments.

The Canon 50/1.4 is very capable and probably the best objectively overall. The later black barrel 50/1.8 is known to suffer hazing problems that may result in permanently etched glass - make sure you're getting one that hasn't suffered this fate, or get the earlier chrome design. Filters are oddly sized (40 and 48mm). The 50/1.4 is rather large on a lot of LTM bodies, but perhaps not surprisingly balances pretty well on the large late Canons.

The Summitar is a little softer wide open than the Canons, and probably has a little more distortion (I don't particularly care about minor distortion, so I haven't paid much attention on this point). The OOF areas may be slightly less pleasant with the 6-blade aperture, most notably in points of light, which will exhibit a clear hexagonal shape; there are no click-stops. It uses an oddball filter arrangement, but this can be dealt with by use of an adapter. Note that the Summitar likely will not collapse into the Canon body due to the position of the light baffles.

Subjectively, I find the Summitar a lens with great character, while the Canons are technically better but a bit less interesting to me. I am willing to accept the faults of the Summitar (clickless aperture, fragility of the glass, optical limitations at large openings) because I love the way it renders, especially around f/4. I use mine on Barnacks primarily, so I am able to collapse it.

Over on Apug, Frank mentioned the same kind of 'character' in regards to the Summitar he had (which was an older 10-blade aperture). He also concurred that the Canon 50/1.4 as large as it is would be more 'balanced' on something the size of the Canon 7.

In regards to soft edging, I already get that with my Canon Serenar 35mm f/2.8 Mk1 which wide open is still tack sharp in the center, but more or less distorted/soft at the edges which sharpen up by f/5.6.

Clickless apertures I find can be desirable if I throw the lens onto an LTM/M43 adapter and use it for video on a mirrorless. Though the Summitar that may be coming up for sale shortly has as he described "the aperture ring is pretty stiff, usable but stiff", and it's mainly priced low because the previous owner scrawled their initials onto the barrel.

Far as the Canon's go, I'm seeing a good number of them (though mostly from Japan, would rather buy domestically if I can, as I usually only buy new from Japan, particularly fountain pens, unless it's a 1960s/70s elite which I can clean up myself). But most including the later black barreled ones mention being hazy, or in the picture it seems more like fungus than it is haze (based on the patterning, unless perhaps oil got off the blade and onto the element).

 

[kb244]

The Canon 50/1.4 can compete well with a Summilux.

The difference between a Summilux and a Summitar?

 

[xayraa33]

The Summitar produces photos with more old fashion character and with superb bokeh in a lot of cases. The two Canon lenses are great too and produce a very modern look in photos, even by today's standard.

It all depends on what results you are looking for, ideally it would be nice to own all three 50mm lenses.

 

[kb244]

The Summitar produces photos with more old fashion character and with superb bokeh in a lot of cases. The two Canon lenses are great too and produce a very modern look in photos, even by today's standard.

It all depends on what results you are looking for, ideally it would be nice to own all three 50mm lenses.

Is this true of the 6-bladed Summitar? (and not strictly the older 10-blade)

Ideally if the center is sharp (wide open) and the bokeh looks smooth then the edging doesn't impact me as much since I have plenty of other cameras/lens if I need edge-to-edge modernistic clarity.

And mainly looking for f/2 or faster, but I don't really want to spend over 200-250 for a 50mm, least I just use the Industar-61L/D 55/2.8 or Industar-10 50/3.5 I already have.

If I wanted crisp contrast modern look I'd try to aim for a voightlander. 😀

 

[FrankS]

You could also try a Jupiter 8.

 

[kb244]

You could also try a Jupiter 8.

Kind of hit-or-miss aren't they? especially with the aperture shape.

 

[kb244]

Why was this moved to a canon-specific forum when it also asks about a Leica branded model?

 

[xayraa33]

Is this true of the 6-bladed Summitar? (and not strictly the older 10-blade)

Ideally if the center is sharp (wide open) and the bokeh looks smooth then the edging doesn't impact me as much since I have plenty of other cameras/lens if I need edge-to-edge modernistic clarity.

And mainly looking for f/2 or faster, but I don't really want to spend over 200-250 for a 50mm, least I just use the Industar-61L/D 55/2.8 or Industar-10 50/3.5 I already have.

If I wanted crisp contrast modern look I'd try to aim for a voightlander. 😀

I own the hex shaped aperture opening Summitar lens and it still does produce that great 3D bokeh at medium opening to full bore, same as the round aperture Summitar lens that I owned in the 1970s.

Remember, at full bore, the aperture blade configuration is of no significance.

That round aperture opening lens came on a Leica IIIc that I bought and I got rid of that lens because the front element was too scratched up for my liking, nowadays it would be valued for the extra Leica glow it will produce.

 

[kb244]

Just remembered one I used to have for my Canon P, a Chiyoko 50mm f/2

I own the hex shaped aperture opening Summitar lens and it still does produce that great 3D bokeh at medium opening to full bore, same as the round aperture Summitar lens that I owned in the 1970s.

Remember, at full bore, the aperture blade configuration is of no significance.

That round aperture opening lens came on a Leica IIIc that I bought and I got rid of that lens because the front element was too scratched up for my liking, nowadays it would be valued for the extra Leica glow it will produce.

Good point about bokeh at wide open.

 

[Daryl J.]

Stiff Summitar aperture adjustment rings seem to be a complaint. Mine's is borderline functional because of it.

Fixable with a CLA?


This thread is of interest to me as I'm tossing about the idea of a fast Planar lens. As in LTM, not M mount.

 

[kb244]

Stiff Summitar aperture adjustment rings seem to be a complaint. Mine's is borderline functional because of it.

Fixable with a CLA?


This thread is of interest to me as I'm tossing about the idea of a fast Planar lens. As in LTM, not M mount.

I'm curious about that as well.
I'm guessing if that's common then it will only get stiffer as it ages.

 

[Daryl J.]

My copy is from 1946-47 and has very little indication of much use. But that aperture ring.........

 

[kb244]

My copy is from 1946-47 and has very little indication of much use. But that aperture ring.........

He might be able to address it if the price is justifiable to you (but then it would be a fully CLA'd lens)

http://www.yyecamera.com/price_lens.html

 

[xayraa33]

Kind of hit-or-miss aren't they? especially with the aperture shape.

Frank's suggestion has real merit if you are patient and are willing to go through a few J-8 lenses till you chance upon a gem of a specimen.

Many would argue it is not worth spending their time and money on. Plus LTM J-8s are not five to 25 dollars a pop anymore, they have a point too here.

The best J-8s are the equal of the Nikkor 5cm f2 in optical rendering on photographs, (but never equal to the Nikkor in build quality.. with the exception of the aperture blade reliability from my experience. )

 

[VictorM.]

Here's an ancient post dealing with lubricating the Summitar aperture selection ring: http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showpost.php?p=689626&postcount=6

 

[kb244]

Frank's suggestion has real merit if you are patient and are willing to go through a few J-8 lenses till you chance upon a gem of a specimen.

Many would argue it is not worth spending their time and money on. Plus LTM J-8s are not five to 25 dollars a pop anymore, they have a point too here.

The best J-8s are the equal of the Nikkor 5cm f2 in optical rendering on photographs, (but never equal to the Nikkor in build quality.. with the exception of the aperture blade reliability from my experience. )

It's because they're not $25 a pop anymore that I'm skeptical of. I've have/had a few Jupiters, the J-11 being my favorite telephoto , and used to have a J-12. But they were almost always 100. The J-8s aren't, so kind of expensive to go thru a few to find the gem.

 

[xayraa33]

It's because they're not $25 a pop anymore that I'm skeptical of. I've have/had a few Jupiters, the J-11 being my favorite telephoto , and used to have a J-12. But they were almost always 100. The J-8s aren't, so kind of expensive to go thru a few to find the gem.

The J-8s in LTM have been creeping up in price in these last few years.

Forums like ours don't help keeps prices stable or low, look at what the original J-3s are up to now, even the ones in Kiev/Contax mount.