Another Summicron recommendation thread

[Redseele]

Hi all,

For some years now I have had a Summicron Collapsible in extremely good (almost mint) shape. I love the black and white pictures I take with it, particularly on film. I like the tones I get, and there's something very classic about the way it draws. I really really love this lens. I, however, don't like it as much for color (in either my M3 or my M9)

For color purposes, a couple of years ago I got a Zeiss Planar 50mm. Nice lens, but there's something about rendering I don't like about it. Maybe it's too plain or clinical or something.

I really would love to just have one lens. I travel quite a bit for research between NYC and South America (and next year I have a big trip to Europe as well) so I would prefer to only have one lens to carry with me. So I need a recommendation.

I am aware that the Type 4 Summicron is really great, but I really would like to keep some of that classic rendering of my old collapsible. I am also aware that between a collapsible in such good condition and a Rigid Summicron there's not that much of a different. So do you think that maybe I could achieve this with the Type 3? How does it render compared to the Ridigs and Collapsible? Is it good without being as clinical and "flat" as I sometimes think my Zeiss is?

I also have a 40mm Summicron C. If I should have a reference, I wish there was a 50mm version that rendered quite like it (maybe a bit sharper at f2 thought). In the past I have also used a Summaron f3.5 which drew the most beautiful pictures I've ever had the luck to shoot with, particularly in BW.

Thank you for any help in helping me decide.

 

[Erik van Straten]

I think you should try an Elmar-M 50mm f/2.8. It is like the Collapsible, but just a tad sharper at f/2.8.

Erik.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

I upgraded from CC to Elmar-M. Kinda modern classic lens. It was hard to believe it will do something special and above CC, but it does.

 

[Bille]

I am aware that the Type 4 Summicron is really great, but I really would like to keep some of that classic rendering of my old collapsible.

Have a look at these I found on flickr

Cron III
https://flic.kr/p/6EgkVy

Cron IV
https://flic.kr/p/nAmT9c

 

[raid]

I am very happy with the Rigid Summicron. It followed the collapsible Summicron, and it is a much better lens. It has very high resolution.

 

[pechelman]

I was also going to suggest the rigid.

have you seen these comparisons?
http://www.slrlensreview.com/web/entry/alternative-50mm-lenses-for-sony-nex-part1
http://www.slrlensreview.com/web/entry/alternative-50mm-lenses-for-sony-nex-part-2
https://www.flickr.com/photos/kiemchacsu/sets/72157651973454529/

as an out of the box suggestion (since you were asking about summicrons) maybe consider a CV 50/1.5? Has a bit of summilux\summicron mixed together. Renders a bit more modern stopped down but a bit more on the classic side wide open and approaching f2.8, but not as extreme as a ZM50/1.5. Definitely does color nicely as well as b&w.

 

[Redseele]

I was also going to suggest the rigid.

have you seen these comparisons?
http://www.slrlensreview.com/web/entry/alternative-50mm-lenses-for-sony-nex-part1
http://www.slrlensreview.com/web/entry/alternative-50mm-lenses-for-sony-nex-part-2
https://www.flickr.com/photos/kiemchacsu/sets/72157651973454529/

as an out of the box suggestion (since you were asking about summicrons) maybe consider a CV 50/1.5? Has a bit of summilux\summicron mixed together. Renders a bit more modern stopped down but a bit more on the classic side wide open and approaching f2.8, but not as extreme as a ZM50/1.5. Definitely does color nicely as well as b&w.

I have absolutely nothing against Voigtlander lenses. But I always had problems with it, from focus shifts to things I didn't like about their black and white renditions. I used to have a Nokton Classic 40mm and whilst it was great for color on BW it didn't have the micro contrast that I really like from all my Leica and Zeiss lenses. Maybe it's just that I really shoot primarily black and white.

The 50 1.5 is also a bit bigger than I like. I like small lenses, even the Summilux seems a bit too big. But of course I'm open to seeing if this really is a problem (it was a problem with a Canon 50 1.4 I used to have,mwhich didn't seem that nice in hand and it had a long throw focus).

 

[pechelman]

not sure I'd compare the 40 nokton to the 50/1.5, but no worries here. just thought I'd throw out the suggestion. While the nokton is certainly larger than the rigid, bear in mind that the length of the actual lenses is almost identical. Of course the outer diameters are different, but only about ~7mm different on diameter. The filter diameters would have you think otherwise (49 vs 39), but the knurled end of the rigid is built-up a bit more than the thinner wall thickness of the nokton filter.

Since the nokton comes with the hood, generally you see it compared that way, which I feel strongly skews the perspective that it is much larger. The nokton is noticeably lighter however.

From your response of wanting small size, primarily to shoot b&w, yet has a nice color rendition, with classic rendering, in 50mm, to me that is 100% rigid summicron. While the above shots were done on a sony, I think it helps show the differences between the rigid and collapsible in color and contrast. Also should help further ground your comparison since it includes the ZM Planar 50 which you also own.

 

[Erik van Straten]

The Rigid is a good lens at f/4, f/5.6 and maybe on f/8, but on smaller apertures it is flat and dull.

Most Rigid Summicrons suffer from haze. Having them cleaned does not bring back their quality from before they got hazy.

The Elmar-M is a much better lens that preserves "something" of the Leitz look of decades ago. Less distortion too.


Leica MP, Elmar-M 50mm f/2.8, Tmax400.

Erik.

 

[f16sunshine]

The Rigid is a good lens at f/4, f/5.6 and maybe on f/8, but on smaller apertures it is flat and dull. Most Rigid Summicrons suffer from haze. Having them cleaned does not bring back their quality from before they got hazy. The Elmar-M is a much better lens that still preserves something of the Leitz look of decades ago.

Erik.

I gave up on finding a good rigid or DR. All had issues. The front group being so easy to remove, I think overzealous opening and cleaning over the years has ruined most of them.

OP, I think the Planar might be your best option.
Since you like the Summicron C 40mm f2 you may also try the Minolta M Rokkor CLE version of that same lens.
The Multi coatings give a bit more contrast improving the appearance of sharpness at f2 and beyond when compared to the earlier single coated Summicron C version.
It's a very nice little lens of film or digital.

If not go for the V5 Summicron and see just how similar to the Planar it really is.
The biggest difference between these f2/50mm Leica and Zeiss lenses is the coatings.
The ZM Planar and V5 Summicron being the most comparable IMO.
In '08 I owned both and tested them on the M8 and film. I could not say there was a dramatic difference in images. Certainly a toss up.
I use the CLE M Rokkor and Color Skopar f2.5/50mm now only on film.
Both are great for B+W.

M Rokkor wide open on HP5 and Rodinal
Vika Margarita 🙂 by Adnan, on Flickr

 

[Bille]

The 50 1.5 is also a bit bigger than I like. I like small lenses, even the Summilux seems a bit too big. But of course I'm open to seeing if this really is a problem (it was a problem with a Canon 50 1.4 I used to have,mwhich didn't seem that nice in hand and it had a long throw focus).

The Summicron-C is significantly smaller than any Summicron 50. It does have a much shorter focus throw too. One lens you may want to consider is the discontinued 50/2.5 Color-Skopar (https://flic.kr/p/7TrQsa).

Middle-Left Cron III, Middle-right Summicron-C.

 

[Bingley]

I've got the version III summicron. Its reputation is that it retains some of the classic look in a more modern package (design, coatings, etc.), and I can't say that I disagree. My sample was formerly owned by Helen Hill, a member here, and if you look at the thread devoted to the version III summicron you'll be able to see photos from that lens and other samples of this version. My experience with the lens is that it is sharp without being clinical in the way the Zeiss Planar is sometimes described as clinical. Here's a sample:
Open House by bingley0522, on Flickr

 

[ferider]

The closest to your Summicron-C in rendering is the v3 Summicron.

I really would like to keep some of that classic rendering of my old collapsible

Which lens you should pick really depends on what you value, contrast vs. resolution, minimum close focus, maximum speed, center punch, etc.

Before last week, my favorite Leica-mount 50s were rigid Summicron (my "sharpest" 50 on the 240, but lower contrast), my classic 50/2.8 Elmar LTM, and the 50/1.5 VM Nokton.

I also like Sonnars, they have a real special signature, highlight the image center more than other classic lenses. Examples are Nikkor 50/1.4, Canon 50/1.5, and J-3 (if you find a good one).

Last week, I got a new favorite, a 1.1 Nokton, and I have to admit - next to it's available wide open speed - I'm stunned how well it performs closed down. It is very sharp at f4, perfectly usable for M240 landscapes ! (my measurements/sample confirm http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2014/06/comparing-rangefinder-and-slr-50mm-lenses-version-0-7, who show that the Nokton at f2 is better than the Planar). It's cool to have a great all-rounder, with the additional fast speed (including the wide open "center punch") when needed. But: the 1.1 Nokton is a big lens, not for you if you like small lenses.

Nobody can make the call for you, because the rendering and your available budget are subjective and there are too many choices. Maybe look at the flickr M-mount forum for image samples ?

Good luck,

Roland.

 

[Bingley]

I also agree with Andy's assessment of the M-Rokkor 40/2.0 and the CV Skopar 50/2.5. Both are exceptional lenses, and very compact, as Andy notes.

 

[teddy]

Okay, people are giving so many options but I would stick to your assumptions.

The Type 3 Summicron will give you best of both worlds when it comes to colour rendition. Not as contrasty as the type 4, and this helps with black and white. However you compromise on resolution. If you print, don't worry about it and just use the Type 3. If you like staring at monitor screens at 100% then get the Type 4. The trade off here is higher contrast from 2.8 up. Harsher bokeh. Great for colour. Too contrasty for black and white nuances.

If I had my way - I would just use the Summicron Rigid 50/2 or DR (Near Focusing) not because of it's higher resolution; but because it has superb black and white rendering.
Now, here is the trick. To get higher contrast with colour, over expose the negative by one stop or 2. You will get richer colour. Then use Lightroom or whatever you like and bump up the contrast. Try this and you will have gathered another quiver on your hat.

You might be able to increase contrast with the Collapsible 50 and E6 (slides), but this lens is low contrast heaven. It's special and I would keep it. Here is a shot with the DR Summicron and see how I have used Fuji Acros 100 (high contrast film) and increased the contrast in Lightroom. The shot was taken wide open which renders with low contrast.

Leica M3, Summicron 50/2, 81a Warming Filter, Fuji 160s overexposed 1 stop

Leica M3, 1957 Leitz Summicron 50/2 DR @ 5.6, Acros 100, Adonal 1:50

 

[f16sunshine]

Leica M3, 1957 Leitz Summicron 50/2 DR @ 5.6, Acros 100, Adonal 1:50

Wonderful !!

A little bit too much exposure... Great picture otherwise !

 

[teddy]

Here are two examples of the Collapsible and the DR Summicron with over exposure with negatives.

Leica IIIF, Leitz Summicron 50/2 Collapsible (1951), Leitz SL Filter,
Kodak Ultramax 400 @ ISO200

Leica M3, Summicron 50/2 DR, AGFA Vista Plus 200 @ ISO 100

Summcron 50/2 DR and over exposure

Colour intensifies as you overexpose, but I have chosen to control the saturation. The Collapsible is certainly more low contrast. Unfortunately I don't have an example of the Type 3 Summicron with me, the closest would be the Type 1 Summicron R below:

Leicaflex SL, Summicron R 50/2 (Version1), Fuji Xtra 200 @ 100 ISO

 

[teddy]

Wonderful !!

A little bit too much exposure... Great picture otherwise !

Blazing summer sun down in the Adelaide Hills can be difficult! 😛

 

[uhoh7]

What about a pre-asph lux?

You get the nice old school render, it's real fast, and it's a native M.

 

[Ronald M]

A rigid is no comparison to a collapsible. The coll is a very flat contrast lens that does not look good to F 4.

The modern 50 coll is a really fine lens with modern rendering. That and 50 ASPH 1.4 are my go to 50`s.