Leica LTM Choice Canon or Leica Summarit 50mm 1.5 ?

Leica M39 screw mount bodies/lenses
Personally, I would choose the Summarit. That is because I own a number of Nikkor 5cm/1.4's, Zeiss-Opton 50/1.5's, and J-3's. The Summarit gives a low-contrast alternative. And it is balanced on the Canon 7 and M3.

But I own both. Use the Canon 50/1.5 on a Leica CL, the M-Mount Summarit on an M3, and an LTM Summarit on a Canon 7.

Summarit on the Canon 7, Wide-Open and at F4.
 
Maybe stupid and general answer: It depends. I'd go for the one that's in best mechanical and optical shape. Leica optics tend to have softer coating, and hence might have more swipe marks, giving the lens a lower contrast. But any lens of this vintage are well into their middle age, and condition might vary very much from sample to sample. If possible, check them before buying or else get a generous possibility of returning the lens if not satisfied.
 
Condition is important. I had the two Summarit's cleaned of haze, both perform quite well. The Canon 50/1.5's can also run into problems. Oil quite often hits the surface behind the aperture and can either : haze it; damage the coating; mar (etch) the glass. The latter two are bad. Polish and recoat. I cleaned one 50/1.5 for a forum member that lost part of its coating on that surface when I cleaned it with an ammonia based cleaner. Better to have it gone than hazed over. It was pretty much unusable beforehand.
 
Last edited:
I think I may have the lens that Brian mentioned. Just used it on a trip to Atlantic City. Took a number of shots on the Boardwalk, several with camera pointing into the sky, or toward the sun. No sign of flare, pics with good contrast and great color. The Canon is a nice lens, period. It was cross-pollinated on the trip, being mounted on an M3. They got along fine.

Harry
 
That is the one. Part of the coating came off nicely, no damage to the glass. It looked good on my test shots as well. Extra "Character" in the lens..
 
Well, I'm no help since I've never used the canon 50/1.5 and am very happy with my summarit. i do believe the bokeh of the summarit is quite pleasant (see Brian's shot wide open). once serviced by Golden Touch, the summarit came into its own so I think it's important to eliminate any haze or fogging. the sharpness & contrast improve when you stop the summarit down, imho, making for an interesting all-round lens. good for portraits wide open and good stopped down for everything else.

but i do want to try a canon 1.4 or 1.5. anyone want to trade one for my well-worn DR?
 
Hello Jon,

I prefer the Summarit myself, although the Canon is a wonderful lens as well!
If you, or anyone else is interested, I have an almost mint Canon 50, f1:4 complete with the S-50 hood, I may be willing to sell. The glass is mint, not a mark. It will help fund the purchase of my Type l Rigid, 50 f2, another lens I never should have sold.

Cheers,
kf,
 
I have neither, but I have the J-3 adjusted by Brian. It is an excellent performer. I prefer the 50mm lenses with max aperture 2.0.
 
back alley said:
i'm putting the canon 50/1.5 on the cl and going out shooting with it tomorrow.
Click to expand...



I put mine on my M3 last week, and had a ball. Just a nice lens, and reasonably small and light as well. Handles very nicely on the M3.

Harry
 
Zeiss had the Sonnar design for their 50/1.5 well protected by patents. So Leitz had to license the Xenon/Summitar design from Taylor, Taylor, and Hobson, but it wasn't really as good a design as the Sonnar. The Canon 50/1.5 is a very faithful clone of the Sonnar.

The Sonnar has only 6 air to glass transitions, the Xenon/Summarit has many more. Even with coating in the Summarit, contrast and flare are issues.

The Sonnar design is ghastly expensive to manufacture, making each of the two three-element groups is a challenge.
 
I'd go with Jerevan, generally. For myself, I had a Summarit for 17 years but did not use it because it gave only flare, flare and more flare. Wasn't possible easily to have it set right (assuming that that could have been done). Used a Serenar 50/1.8 instead. Fine lens. Zeiss and Japanese glass and coatings were markedly more robust than those of Leitz.
 
I do not have a Summitar, but will throw my hat in the ring for the Canon 50/1.5. Right now my favorite 50mm lenses are the Rigid Type 1 Summicron, Canon 50/1.5 and Nikkor 50/2, all exceptional lenses.
 
rover said:
I do not have a Summitar, but will throw my hat in the ring for the Canon 50/1.5. Right now my favorite 50mm lenses are the Rigid Type 1 Summicron, Canon 50/1.5 and Nikkor 50/2, all exceptional lenses.
Click to expand...

Rover: I agree with you about the Nikkor 50/2 and the Rigid Type I Summicron lenses. They are superb indeed.
 
I have a summitar which I really like. It has a lovely character, which is what draws me to the Leica glass in general. I've seen many photos from the Canon 50 that I really like. For me, it has a lovely quality that sets it appart from the other fast Canons. Look for some examples of each lens with the search feature of this site in the gallery. You can more easily judge once you see what they will deliver. I agree with the comment about how important it is to find a good sample of the lens glass. Or, do the search on Flickr.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom