slight
Member
Hello everyone!
Now here's a question that has been in my mind for some time. The thing is, I bought a Summicron 50 Dual Range a few months ago. It had medium internal haze when I got it (460 euros plus the goggles and a big, intact original leather case for the whole set!). At first I was very, very annoyed by flare which will totally bleach the whole picture; but after it returned from Photo Suffren in Paris for a complete CLA (160 euros), I was totally moved by its performance in black and white.
I'm not talking about how high the resolution is or anything technical, neither do I care. I simply love the vintage look it gives in B&W. After using it as my main lens for a while, I got curious and checked out some comparisons reviews on the web between such vintage lenses and newer asph lenses (35 asph, elmarit 28 asph, summilux asph, etc). And it struck me that I usually prefer the vintage lenses much more than the new ones!
Yes indeed the new asph is so much better in terms of flare control, their contrast are generally much higher. Old summilux tend to look "moody", while new asph looks like roaring with resolution and contrast. But I simply feel that the vintage lenses are so artistic! If I do want such modern rock style look, why don't I look into Canon or Nikon which are famed for such criteria?
So, I wish to hear your opinions. What lenses have you compared, and what is your preference?
BTW, one of my friend got the Leica new comer award 2011; he never used asph lenses, but old summaron, summicron jupiter 12 etc. Yes he indeed admired the new elmarit 28 asph because it simply has no visible distortion; but advanced technology doesn't make better art. I might buy it only for its compact size and hope its modern look won't get in the way.
Here's my beloved set. Added a cheap made in China clone vented hood for the cron, and another rubber hood for the makina recently
Now here's a question that has been in my mind for some time. The thing is, I bought a Summicron 50 Dual Range a few months ago. It had medium internal haze when I got it (460 euros plus the goggles and a big, intact original leather case for the whole set!). At first I was very, very annoyed by flare which will totally bleach the whole picture; but after it returned from Photo Suffren in Paris for a complete CLA (160 euros), I was totally moved by its performance in black and white.
I'm not talking about how high the resolution is or anything technical, neither do I care. I simply love the vintage look it gives in B&W. After using it as my main lens for a while, I got curious and checked out some comparisons reviews on the web between such vintage lenses and newer asph lenses (35 asph, elmarit 28 asph, summilux asph, etc). And it struck me that I usually prefer the vintage lenses much more than the new ones!
Yes indeed the new asph is so much better in terms of flare control, their contrast are generally much higher. Old summilux tend to look "moody", while new asph looks like roaring with resolution and contrast. But I simply feel that the vintage lenses are so artistic! If I do want such modern rock style look, why don't I look into Canon or Nikon which are famed for such criteria?
So, I wish to hear your opinions. What lenses have you compared, and what is your preference?
BTW, one of my friend got the Leica new comer award 2011; he never used asph lenses, but old summaron, summicron jupiter 12 etc. Yes he indeed admired the new elmarit 28 asph because it simply has no visible distortion; but advanced technology doesn't make better art. I might buy it only for its compact size and hope its modern look won't get in the way.
Here's my beloved set. Added a cheap made in China clone vented hood for the cron, and another rubber hood for the makina recently
Last edited:
slight
Member
Pompidou center, Paris, Summicron 50 DR, M4p
slight
Member
Paris, 50 DR
slight
Member
Paris, metro. I believe the scratches are on the film itself, though I don't know how they got in there.
slight
Member
Voila.
Because 50 DR has such low to medium contrast, I can easily tune the picture into high contrast with a lot of details. I love that.
Last edited:
Austerby
Well-known
I prefer the older lenses. In the past I bought new the 75 Summicron, 50 Summilux ASPH and the 28mm f2.8 ASPH Elmarit. All of them were sold after a period of time - whilst recognising they were all phenomenally good lenses I found I prefered images from older Leica glass, or Zeiss lenses, and decided not to hold on to them.
My favourite lenses now include the DR Summicron, the Zeiss C-Sonnar and the Zeiss 21 f4.5 and 35mm f2.8 compact range.
By the way, though I do have an M8, I prefer film to digital and I suspect this may be related to my preference for older lenses too. I also like traditional films - eg HP5+ rather than Delta 400.
My favourite lenses now include the DR Summicron, the Zeiss C-Sonnar and the Zeiss 21 f4.5 and 35mm f2.8 compact range.
By the way, though I do have an M8, I prefer film to digital and I suspect this may be related to my preference for older lenses too. I also like traditional films - eg HP5+ rather than Delta 400.
Last edited:
slight
Member
Thank you for your reply!
I'm very lured to buy an elmarit 28 asph because of its size; but it may not be the look that I'm looking for...The Minolta G-Rokkor 28 3.5 is a very very good lens, I might have it instead; but that means I need to add another set of filters in my set (NIKON, MAKINA, LEICA), which is quite annoying too...
slight
Member
thank you JSU. i recently checked a summicron (current) in a photo shop. After searching for its performances on the web, I decided it's not worthwhile to trade in the build quality and handling feelings for a little bit improvement in rwsolution etc. The DR's build quality is simply impossible to beat, that makes it quite special.
Robert Lai
Well-known
I had a perfectly nice CV 35 f/2.5. It had a very modern, high contrast rendition. I also felt it was rather boring! So, I sold it - though in retrospect I don't think I should have. Now I have the 35mm Summaron 3.5. I'll soon find out if I made a mistake or not. I have the negatives, but I haven't scanned them yet.
Also, I recently picked up an 8-element 35mm Summicron (with M3 goggles). Then, this week I picked up a 35mm Summicron ASPH. I'll soon find out which one I like better.
Also, I recently picked up an 8-element 35mm Summicron (with M3 goggles). Then, this week I picked up a 35mm Summicron ASPH. I'll soon find out which one I like better.
bobby_novatron
Photon Collector
I love the look of the Summicron DR and lenses of that vintage. Nice photos in this thread!
rlouzan
Well-known
Hi,
My favorite Leica lenses are in the #2.2xx.xxx. I just love the color transmision, and deep blacks of both R and M lenses from the late 60s.
Regards,
Robert
My favorite Leica lenses are in the #2.2xx.xxx. I just love the color transmision, and deep blacks of both R and M lenses from the late 60s.
Regards,
Robert
raid
Dad Photographer
I have been mainly using old Leica (Elmar, Summar, Summarit, Summitar, Summicron) and Zeiss and Canon lenses for many years. Out of curiosity and the wish to try out for different looks, I then got the Contax G lenses,and the Heliar 50mm lenses (2.0and 3.5),plus the Lux 35/1.4 and 75/1.4. They are all wonderful lenses, and both types of lenses are great for photography. I have many lenses, but I use them all.
Some of my preferred lenses include:
CZJ 5cm/1.5 adapted to LTM by Brian Sweeney. This is a very sharp lens that works well for B&W and for color. An alternate lens would be 5cm/1.5 in Contax mount, and then use an Amedeo adapter for M mount.
I love the rigid Summicron 50/2. It has very high resolution with medium contrast.
Both Heliar lenses are great lenses. Some people "hate" the bokeh of the 50/2. I like it. In fact,I have chosen the 50/2 as my 50mm travel lens for this summer.
The Nikon 5cm/2 is a superb lens overall,and so is the Canon 50/1.4. The Elmar 50/2.8 is superb, but slow.
There are so many amazing 50mm RF lenses round to choose from.
Some of my preferred lenses include:
CZJ 5cm/1.5 adapted to LTM by Brian Sweeney. This is a very sharp lens that works well for B&W and for color. An alternate lens would be 5cm/1.5 in Contax mount, and then use an Amedeo adapter for M mount.
I love the rigid Summicron 50/2. It has very high resolution with medium contrast.
Both Heliar lenses are great lenses. Some people "hate" the bokeh of the 50/2. I like it. In fact,I have chosen the 50/2 as my 50mm travel lens for this summer.
The Nikon 5cm/2 is a superb lens overall,and so is the Canon 50/1.4. The Elmar 50/2.8 is superb, but slow.
There are so many amazing 50mm RF lenses round to choose from.
RichardB
Well-known
I have appropriate sets of Leica lenses for my M3 SS and ASPH lenses for my M7's.
35mm Summicron RF(Goggles) to 35mm Summilux ASPH at F2.0, not much different to the eye at 5x mag. Sold Summicron as collectors like this lens.
90mm Chrome Summicron (Canada) to 90 Summicron ASPH, not much different at 5X. The Chrome lens is absolutely beautiful and matches the chrome M3 but I never use either anymore.
I have a 50mm DR Summicron and the only new 50 I have is not an ASPH but the 50mm f2.8 M lens. Not much difference but I never use either anyway as the DR does not focus on one M7 body but does focus on the other. Not worth the time and effort to have the M7 adjusted and I just don't use a 50mm anyway.
Have 21mm ASPF and 75mm ASPH Leica lenses which along with the 35mm Summilux ASPH are the lenses I use. On the whole I use the newer ASPH lenses because they represent the current pinnacle in 35 lens performance and I really don't want to get into the subjective side of photography but vastly prefer to operate with the best that there is in equipment.-Dick
35mm Summicron RF(Goggles) to 35mm Summilux ASPH at F2.0, not much different to the eye at 5x mag. Sold Summicron as collectors like this lens.
90mm Chrome Summicron (Canada) to 90 Summicron ASPH, not much different at 5X. The Chrome lens is absolutely beautiful and matches the chrome M3 but I never use either anymore.
I have a 50mm DR Summicron and the only new 50 I have is not an ASPH but the 50mm f2.8 M lens. Not much difference but I never use either anyway as the DR does not focus on one M7 body but does focus on the other. Not worth the time and effort to have the M7 adjusted and I just don't use a 50mm anyway.
Have 21mm ASPF and 75mm ASPH Leica lenses which along with the 35mm Summilux ASPH are the lenses I use. On the whole I use the newer ASPH lenses because they represent the current pinnacle in 35 lens performance and I really don't want to get into the subjective side of photography but vastly prefer to operate with the best that there is in equipment.-Dick
j j
Well-known
You talk a lot of sense Raid. It makes such a pleasant change from the "which lens is best" affliction.
tj01
Well-known
Hey, let's start a thread for our Summicron DR .
Michiel Fokkema
Michiel Fokkema
I like sharpness and wide open performance. Therefore I prefer the latest if I can afford them.
Cheers,
Michiel Fokkema
Cheers,
Michiel Fokkema
jack palmer
Well-known
You don't want to get into the subjective side of photography but yet you make the very subjective statement that you "only want to operate with the best that there is in equiptment". You must mean the "best" in your opinion? Although I can't even imagine what the "best" means when it comes to photography equiptment. I've see some really impressive photos take with a cell phone. Are they the "best" too? Many older lenses were considered the best in their day. The latest offerings are just the newer best. Chasing the best in photography equiptment is like chasing the horizon, the closer you get, the more it recedes. Use what you like and what works. And...Slight I really like your photos especially #1.
Last edited:
MCTuomey
Veteran
I like your photos - lovely tones - thanks for sharing them.
I think Sean Reid would second your appreciation of lower contrast lenses, especially for harsh extremes of light. The new leica and zeiss lenses seem to "go to black" quickly.
Me, I prefer the ASPH lenses but I really can't afford them. In any case, I'm very pleased with my zeiss glass, both digitally and on film. Having a 50 sonnar and a 50 planar gives me flexibility, modern v "vintage."
I think Sean Reid would second your appreciation of lower contrast lenses, especially for harsh extremes of light. The new leica and zeiss lenses seem to "go to black" quickly.
Me, I prefer the ASPH lenses but I really can't afford them. In any case, I'm very pleased with my zeiss glass, both digitally and on film. Having a 50 sonnar and a 50 planar gives me flexibility, modern v "vintage."
Last edited:
peter_n
Veteran
I also have both types of lenses. Of the older type I use a 35 Summicron v.1, a DR Summicron like yours and a Summicron 90. I prefer the look of the older lenses but I also have a 35 Summicron ASPH that is not harsh at all in rendition and is really a wonderful lens. I'm waiting for a reliable digital M to come out and have 24, 35, 50 and 75mm ASPH lenses ready for when that happens.
Tim Gray
Well-known
I have more modern Leica lenses (50 ASPH and 28/2) than older ones (75/1.4). I like them both. I will say I like the handling of the newer lenses a lot more than the long focus throw that the 75 has.
I would love to get a chance to shoot the 50/1.4 pre-ASPH side by side with the ASPH to see which I really prefer. As it stands now though, I'm not getting rid of a lens that I really like to try out something I might not like...
I would love to get a chance to shoot the 50/1.4 pre-ASPH side by side with the ASPH to see which I really prefer. As it stands now though, I'm not getting rid of a lens that I really like to try out something I might not like...