How good is Elmar 50mm f2.8 (old) ?

[Vics]

Erwin Puts compares this lens very favorably with the Summicron v.II (rigid) stopped down. "Compared to the Summicron (I) There is an interesting difference in fingerprint. The Elmar has the edge in the center of the poicture and the Summicron is better in the field. At 1:8 we find very fine imagery (as good as the Summicron (II) from 1957)." Erwin Puts, The Leica Lens Compenium.

 

[pb908]

Check this thread, then this and you'll love it. Coating look modern and hold well after 50 years.

very nice picture Biel !!!
I really surprice that I didn't see any circular shape bokeh that most old leica lens have.

 

[pb908]

and thanks to all replies, now I know that this lens will perform as I expected. really I am amaze the way this lens render the background, it is not all about sharpness !

 

[peterm1]

Actually I too am pleased to hear all of this.

A few weeks ago one came my way at a reasonable price so I grabbed it.

But as I had also just bought a Voigtlander 50mm Nokton f1.1 and have been experimenting with that (and captivated by it) I have not really given the Elmar a proper test.

I had read that that the early Elmar 2.8 was less sharp than its modern counterpart but as I am not one who values sharpness above all else that was never an issue. I always felt it would be great for portraits if nothing else.

I can see from the photos posted on these threads that it has a true "classic" rendering (which should not be a surprise given its vintage) and that will be delightful. I will try it this weekend and if I have any luck with decent shots post some here.

If I have time I may try to post a few comparison shots with my Summitar of similar vintage.

 

[David Hughes]

Trouble is, we are talking about Leica lenses and so the expression "less sharp than" means far better than anything else except another, newer Leica lens. I'll make an exception for the 30's 3,5cm Elmar which is just so-so, imo.

Not that I'm complaining as it means I get them "less dear than" something newer.

Regards, David

 

[Rico]

I really enjoy the classic Elmar 50/2.8, awkward aperture ring and all. The b/g blur is sublime, and it improves on the 50/3.5 by having 15 aperture blades instead of ten: defocussed points are virtually circular at all f-stops. The low weight wins over my Summilux v2 chrome every time. Contrast is moderate overall. Image below @ f/5.6:

 

[rogerzilla]

IQ looks very similar to the old Red Scale 50/3.5. Nothing wrong with that. As an only lens, or a travel lens, Leitz (or Max Berek) had it just about right when they came up with the Elmar. Its only weakness is low light.

 

[Brian Legge]

I just picked up a copy here in the forums. I've loved the results I've seen with this lens here for a while and couldn't pass up an opportunity to see if it worked for me.

Here are a few shots from my first roll with it:

 

[Erik van Straten]

Leica M2, Elmar 50mm f/2.8 v1, Tmax400.

Nice lens and no distortion at all.

Erik.

 

[jja]

I'm about to receive a ca. 1957 50/2.8 Elmar, along with a IIIg, and I'm excited to shoot this combo!

 

[Bruno Gracia]

which one is purely better between cron collapsible and this little gem?

 

[jcb4718]

It's plenty sharp enough and it handles well. I have 3 'Tessar like' lenses: the LTM f2.8 Elmar and 2 Vito B's, one with an f3.5 and the other with an f2.8 Color Skopar. The f3.5 lens is very sharp indeed but looking at a photo-as-a-photo I don't think you would see any sharpness difference between the 3 lenses. I can usually tell which-was-which in the way they show out-of-focus (OOF) backgrounds, particularly foliage. My f3.5 has slightly more pronounced 'swirly' OOF background. My Elmar has a slight tendency to mince background OOF foliage. My f2.8 Color Skopar deals with OOF foliage best. That said, they are all good lenses.

 

[jondotkom]

Elmar Magic.

Elmar Magic.

The 2.8 Elmar? The collapsible nature, and having to chase the aperture ring when focusing, was initially perplexing, but I adore it for all its quirks. It's delightful. And performance is quite fine as well, a nice mixture of sharpness and vintage glow. This shot is wide-open.

M2, 50mm Elmar 2.8

 

[jondotkom]

And It Does Color Too!

And It Does Color Too!

A rare color shot (I really should shoot more color!), but again, a nice mix of sharpness and vintage glow.

m2, 2.8 Elmar, Velvia 100

 

[__jc]

My "lens du jour"

My "lens du jour"

The f2.8 early M-series Elmar is a delight to use and I've been using my 1965 model pretty much consistently for some time now. Yes, sure, it has its little idiosyncrasies - don't we all - but once you learn that they are part of its charm it is a hard lens to put down.