Leica 50mm Summicron worth it?

M

Mjd-djm

Established
Local time
7:53 AM
Joined
Mar 25, 2016
Messages
157
Location
UK
View My Gallery
So, I've just got a Leica M2 after having sold my first one a few years ago. I bought the same lens I used back then... a Canon 50mm 1.4 LTM lens (Japanese Summilux) which actually performs very well. Maybe its just the GAS talking but I've got a real hankering to use a Leica lens and I'm leaning towards a 50mm Summicron... I'm a 50mm kind of guy.

So I've looked around in the UK for used Summicrons and I've found a couple of good options... A rigid summicron for £399, a type III for £499 and a type IV (with the focus tab) for £549.

Will I notice a massive difference in handling and IQ over my Canon 50mm 1.4? And out of the 3 mentioned above which would you recommend?
 
I have never used the Canon, but the Cron 50 is my favorite lens ever. I actually had a Cron 50 v5, then sold it to get a Lux 50 asph, but then sold it to get another Cron 50 v5. IMHO, the Cron 50 offers the best mix of price, size/weight, and speed. I have shot other versions of the Cron 50, including those mentioned in your post, and like them as well, especially v4. You can't go wrong with a Cron. (Disclaimer: I tend to like Mandler lenses--and not the newer Karbe creations.)
 
Optically, you will see less distortion with either Summicron, less flare, better corner resolution, less coma wide open, smoother bokeh at f2 and f2.8 and shorter min. focus with v3 and v4 Summicrons. But - depending on your copy - the Canon 50/1.4 can be astoundingly good, and even though you will get tons of praise for the Summicrons in this thread, the actual differences - in particular on film - are really small and shouldn't matter in practice.

Only you can decide, and for the good prices that you quote, try, and if you don't like the results, resell. I love my rigid, but in your shoes the v4 would be the best complement to the Canon, since it is the most different lens, IMHO.

Roland.
 
If you like the handling of the Canon, go for the tabless v3! That's my 'cron of choice, mostly because of the handling—I am not a tab man. It's also more affordable than the later versions, but I like its vintage rendering and touch of veiling flare...very "Mandler-y." I also like the clip-on reversible hood and notched cap: very handy and smart-looking, IMHO.
 
Oh, and, your Canon is superb, and faster to boot. So I wouldn't call the 'cron "better." But it definitely is different, and has a specific look. If you can afford it, it would be nice to have both.
 
In the last 50 years I've had a few Summicrons, v3 and older, and have been happy. The collapsible is my all-time favorite lens, and the one I use the most, but the Canon 50/1.4 (and I currently do own one) is a fine lens, as are all of the Canon RF lenses, so if I were you I'd get some other focal lengths before I'd double up on 50s. Me, right now I'd be looking for a Voigtalander 28/1.9 (another lens with the same draw as the collapsible Summicron, in my next used focal length), not another 50.

To put that , above, in perspective, in the Leica-fit line of 50s I've had five Summicrons, two Summitars, early and late, two 3.5 Elmars, two Canons (1.8 and 1.4), and a 1.1 Nokton. The only one I wouldn't buy again is a Summitar. I shoot mainly available light, mainly at the wide-open end, 50mm about 60% of the time. I've had a bunch of Leica lenses, and they've been fine, but in most specific focal lengths except for the collapsible, I've preferred a lens from a different brand, to the extent that I no longer even browse Leica on Ebay for fun. My first choices for RF are Canon of the vintage you already have and new Voigtlander.

If you absolutely have to have a Summicron, the V3 is probably the best buy, a good solid lens, as mabelsound says above. I don't think you'll find it offers anything beyond your Canon 50/1.4, though. My current line-up is collapsible, Nokton 1.1, Canon 1.4, and V3, in order of use.
 
I have a v3 but I honestly think if you are going to buy another 50 you should try a planar. I use mine over the summicron most of the time.
 
And now for a note of dissent! I have owned three Summicron 50s and I wasn't happy with them. I will leave the earlier ones aside and talk about the v5. I used this lens for many years before becoming convinced that it had a problem (which I suspect was not a problem just limited to my copy). Most of the time it was great, giving sharp beautiful results but in certain circumstances the results were less than perfect, lacking the tonal range that I wanted. Well the problem just had to be me, after all this was a Summicron 50 v5 so there couldn't possibly be anything wrong with it, could there?

Anyway, after some years I realised that the circumstances under which it gave poor results were always the same and that was when the light was bright. So I finally did some trawling on the web and -- surprise, surprise -- others had found the same problem. The upshot is that I think the Summicron v5 suffers from serious veiling flare in bright conditions. Of course it's a lovely lens in design and build quality however I would recommend another lens to you instead, namely the 50mm Zeiss Planar.

Whatever you eventually buy, I hope you enjoy it.
 
More modern Cron is less surprises with colors. If for bw, old ones are good.
To me it is Cron or J-3, the rest is in not worth it category.
 
In answer to the question that heads the thread, the answer has to be 'No'. It isn't worth it. You have a 50 which is very good. The rigid and the DR are heavy. I have the Summicron IV. It's ergonomically perfect. It does flare. I never use it without the hood. I agree with the Zeis Planar recommendation. Look at the Zeiss 50 Planar thread here on RFF. (http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=98280) As an analogy, if I already had the C Biogon Zeiss, would any 35 Summicron be 'worth it'? No.
 
I have the Summicron 50/2 in Collapsible, Rigid, and 5th version. I also have the Zeiss 50/1.5, 50/2, Nikkor 50/1.4. The one that seems the perfect one if the Ver. 5. However, the one I use the most is the Nikkor 50/1.4 and the one I really like to use the most is the 50/2 rigid.
PS: No flare in my crons either.

Thinking about it! by Palenquero Photography, on Flickr
 
For me versions 4 or 5 of the Summicron 50 are certainly worth having. My favorite lens is the v5 (with the built in hood), but the Zeiss Planar 50/2 ZM is also a winner and usually less pricey.
 
The 50/1.4 canon if very good.
The main difference that you will notice is the shorter focus throw and min focus distance of the modern (v3+) crons. But of course you give up a stop and a few hundred quid.
I think if you're happy with the ergonomics, keep the canon. You don't need a Leica lens, the beauty of the Leica mount is the prefect versatility to use a whole lot of lenses.
(Personally, I find the infinity lock annoying and don't like the really long focus throw - I find those two things make the handling too slow)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

K
50mm lens for the Leica CL (film)
Replies
13
Views
590
splitimageview
splitimageview
E
Slight focus resistance at 1–2m on my Summicron 50 V5 — normal?
Replies
4
Views
234
Endzeit
E
CandidChronicles
Old, cheap manual 50mm to pair to my Nikon Zf: Nikon, Canon..
2
Replies
28
Views
4K
wlewisiii
W
E
canon 50mm f1.5 Sonnar type on leica monochrom
Replies
1
Views
153
plexi
plexi
Jamie Pillers
One camera, one lens?
2 3
Replies
48
Views
2K
38Deardorff
38Deardorff
Back
Top Bottom