Better than Summicron?

[redisburning]

the Summicron-R E55 is closer to the v4/5 M summicron than some of you are implying.

http://www.cs.wustl.edu/~loui/photodobest.html

you can also compare Leica's MTF graphs; these two lenses are quite similar in design.

 

[sevo]

authoritative yes, but maybe incorrect for all lens copies 🙂 (Ken Rockwell on his web-site and Roland Vink on photo.net http://photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00Fyur).

But that is the urban legend category, both by authors and means of propagation - neither refers to anything better than "everybody knows" or "the Internet says". Does anyone know a more definitive statement from Nikon themselves?

Mind, it might be possible that they single-coated some E-lenses, but given that the EM sold for more than better equipped Chinon camera kits with all-multicoated lenses, it seems strange publicity to save on such a (by that time) penny affair.

At any rate, my chrome ring E has a blue/red sheen coating that looks exactly like the coating on the multi-coated AF 50mm (and many of my other AF Nikkor primes) - which would make at least some E lenses MC, other than that legend has it.

 

[ferider]

the Summicron-R E55 is closer to the v4/5 M summicron than some of you are implying.

But you would agree that it is different to M-mount v3 and DR, correct ?

 

[Tejasican]

Roland,
I'm not looking for a lens. I am actually rationalizing down my film stuff at the moment. I'll keep a couple of fixed rangefinders and at least one SLR. I am happy with my 50mm Summicron-R and for most of what I shoot it gives me what I consider better results on film for the reasons I mentioned. Is it really $400 better than my Zuiko or Nikkor stopped down to f2? I'm not sure so I'm likely to hang onto the lens until I decide where I am going digitally.

Someone in another thread, also in the SLR forums, mentioned that there were better lenses than the Summicron so I was interested in opinions on what people might consider superior to it and why - knowing that the answers would all be purely subjective.

Overall curiosity is the main driver here.

 

[redisburning]

But you would agree that it is different to M-mount v3 and DR, correct ?

yes,

we will note than the v1-3 M summicron and v1 R summicron do not represent the most current formulas.

I dunno the E55 summicron-R goes for about 4-500 dollars in decent shape, which I think does accurately represent the amount better than cheaper lenses it is. other not super speed lenses in this price range are the C/Y 50/1.4 planar, Zuiko 50/2 macro, Leica and Contax 60/2.8 macros (a bit slow and a bit long) and the AF lenses. I feel it does belong here.

In my opinion if you want to do better, you pay the size, weight and price penalty of the 50MP.

 

[helen.HH]

helenhill--Love the third image in your post. Fantastic shot!

Hello AAlfano
Oh Cool, pleased you Like IT !
Thanks Much 😉

 

[semilog]

I've never met a Bad 50 ...😱
Their ALL Great but my personal favorite is the 50 summicron v3
That 50 always leaves me with a big happy grin 😉

Agreed, Helen. The DR/rigid and V3 have the best rendering of all Summicrons.

I had a v. IV that, while razor-sharp, rarely rendered in a pleasing way, and after a decade of indifference, I finally sold it. I now use an M-mount converted Pentax FA 50/1.4 and I like it vastly better than I ever liked the v. IV Summicron. The older Super-Takumar is similar and perhaps even better but can't readily be converted to M-mount.