C Sonnar 50/1,5 or Summarit 50/2,5

J

jac_kie

Newbie
Local time
1:03 AM
Joined
Jan 11, 2009
Messages
4
Hi
I plan to buy standard lens for my new R4A (have for the moment only Nokton 35/1,4) and consider 2 options as good value for money. So I would like to ask for your advice which one (C Sonnar 1,5 or Summarit 2,5) is better value for more or les the same price?
regards, Jacek
 
or other good choice?

or other good choice?

In addition to this thread question - I value compactness of lens while keeping colors quality, contrast and resolution on high level. Have you any other indications for standard lens apart from Sonnar and Summarit in this (1100 USD) price range?

Jacek
 
using a fast 50mm lens on a r4 will be a headache, so I recommend the leica option in this scenario. but a 50 does NOT play to the strengths of the r4; it is better for 21, 25 or 28 mm lenses. I;d get a wider lens for the r4 and then save up for a different body and a 50. best, thomas
 
Dear Jacek,

The Sonnar is my favourite 50 and the Summarit is my wife's -- they're pretty much the only ones we use any more, having got rid of both the 50/1.5 Nokton and 50/1.2 Canon -- but as already noted, an R4 is far from the ideal camera for a fast 50 because the effective rangefinder base length is too short and is not the ideal camera for any 50. The Summarit wins on contrast and resolution; the Sonnar on character.

Cheers,

Roger
 
Roger, out of interest now you have had both these lenses for a few years do you still feel this way? Also if you were only to choose one to use with black and white film on say a M3, which would it be and why? I appreciate there is a speed difference and a different look, but as I have not be able to see either lens and will have to order blind, I would value your comments. Thanks for any help you can offer.
 
Jacek,
If you are after an all round lens with first class imagery, the best choice (including cost considerations) by far, is the Planar 50/2 ZM. With the money saved, you could buy yourself a Bessa R3A for this lens . much better suited for the FL.

Here are a couple Planar shots

07111006 by mfogiel, on Flickr

FOOT, BIARRITZ by mfogiel, on Flickr
 
I have used a lot Sonnar but now I'm using the Planar. Really two diferent lenses.

If you are looking for special character, the sonnar is the winner.

If you are looking for really first class image quality, the Planar.

I don't know the summarit.

Another difference: minimun focus distance.

Sonnar: 0.9m
Planar: 0.7
Summarit: 0.8m

mfogiel, I like a lot your first photo! Which film did you use in this photo?
 
I had and loved the sonnar... and I think given the choice i'd go it again in a heartbeat.

the planar i've always enjoyed the images from (other people's work, mind you) but still haven't tried one.

If you like lenses with character - go the sonnar. Either way, enjoy what you get :)
 
Summarit is tiny - 10.5 mm shorter than my ''70s Summicron. I love the C Sonnar, but second Marek on the Planar as another consideration - that min focus of 0.7 being an important factor.
 
Summarit-M is the first choice for me.
I am a 50' man much more than 35 and use it on an M7 x0.58 (same league than R4).
I have an old Noctilux, had others, read all about C-Sonnar and maybe one day shall get one ; but for 4 years use mainly a 50 Summarit-M : a genuine STANDARD lens easy to use, well built (yes !) with all basic general qualities.
"Character" is not the first criterium, for the more general lens.
(prefer 0.58 because I love wide angle)
 
I think Shab is on the right track. I have two Sonnars, one in Nikon S mount and one in Leica M mount - -I am a fan of the lens. But if I were going for one 50, I would choose a less exotic performer first and fill in the collection later. I know the new f:2.5 Summarit by reputation only and think it would be a super first lens for someone who wanted a sharp modern optic. The 50 ZM-Planar is also a great choice, as is a used Summicron. My Sonnars are optimized for focus at f:2.8 -- their focus shift issues can be worked around, but there is a learning curve there.

Ben Marks
 
jac_kie said:
Hi
I plan to buy standard lens for my new R4A (have for the moment only Nokton 35/1,4) and consider 2 options as good value for money. So I would like to ask for your advice which one (C Sonnar 1,5 or Summarit 2,5) is better value for more or les the same price?
regards, Jacek
Click to expand...

I´d try to find a used Summicron first. Otherwise the C-Sonnar. Never liked the bokeh of the Summarit and with mine, setting the aperture was strangely rough.
 
Speedfreak said:
I´d try to find a used Summicron first. Otherwise the C-Sonnar. Never liked the bokeh of the Summarit and with mine, setting the aperture was strangely rough.
Click to expand...

Are you talking about the 2.5 Summarit (as opposed to the 1,5)? I'm not sure how the aperture could be rough on the 2.5 model...they are so new.
 
Just to take a different tack - given the short RF baselength of the R4 and that (I'd guess) a 50 is unlikely to be your most-used lens on the camera, why not think about the CV 50mm/f2.5 Color Skopar? Even after paying for adapter and lens hood, you can still buy one new-old-stock from the head bartender (www.cameraquest.com). It's very compact, well regarded and you can get it brand new more cheaply than those you've mentioned.

Just a thought...

...Mike
 
I will be using the 50 on an M3 not any other rangefinder. And 50mm has always worked for me, and I am happy with just one lens. I like to keep life simple, like me. :)

I will also just be using black and white film, acros 100 and tri-x (possibly a 3200 film too if I ever Ned it), both developed in rodinal (as long as I can get it). Again trying to keep the variables to a minimum, that way I can concentrate on taking pictures and not wonder what if all the time.

Thanks again forveveryone's advice.
 
Of the two choices, it depends on the conditions you like to shoot in (i.e. is the maximum aperture of the Summarit going to limit you in any way?)

In addition, as others have noted, is your preference for character (Sonnar) or technical quality (Summarit).

I would echo the suggestion from others to consider either the Zeiss Planar, which you can purchase new for around $780-800 from memory, or look for a second-hand Summicron (I bought my optically mint v4 around 2 months ago for $850). Minimum focus distance on these two are both 0.7, which for me is important.
 
Thanks Karl, but the min focus is not an issue with the M3, as these lenses all focus closer than the M3. Yes I understand a 2nd hand summicrons are good, though a bit like hens teeth. I do like the size of the summarit, does make everything to be very pocketable.
 
I think the Sonnar and the Summarit don't compare really. As others suggested a Planar might be the one for you. Also if you are looking for a lot of resolution and shoot a lot of b/w get a summicron DR or rigid.

I owned a Cron DR, loved it! It shined on b/w and slide .. not so much on C41. I had to sell it for the mamiya 7.
I recently came into the possession of a c-sonnar ZM (wasn't really planed, the price was just too good) - I love that one even more! It's magical for portraits in low light - thats pretty much the only reason I still have a 50mm.

Also (as others stated) if 50mm is your standard focal length, get another camera.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom