Leica 50mm Summicron worth it?

[Benjamin Marks]

I think I have more 50s than any other lens. I just love the focal length and I have been seduced many times by the notion that a special, special lens will make my photography special. Spoiler: it won't. But don't let that stop you. Find a lens you enjoy using, learn its quirks and limitations (they all have their own) and then make your art!

Here are some boring photographs that show some of the differences between some of my 50's.

Here's the scene:

https://flic.kr/p/8ati1t

Center crop with an Opton, wide open:

https://flic.kr/p/8athkt

Center crop with a Summitar, wide open:

https://flic.kr/p/8awxkG

Center crop with a Summicron IV, wide open:

https://flic.kr/p/8athGR

With a Summilux Asph, wide open:

https://flic.kr/p/8athWM

Wiith a Heliar/3.5 wide open:

https://flic.kr/p/8awxDd

And here is the page if you want to see these boring photos side by side:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/14501597@N06/

As you can see, the Summicron is nicely balanced for flare control, sharpness, color rendition, etc. The Summilux Asph is "better", but also twice the cost. The Opton is "worse" but probably could use a good cleaning. I think the Heliar wide open is as sharp as the Summilux, but its smaller maximum aperture probably masks some faults and its slow speed means that it is not apples-to-apples anyway.

So having said all this let me give you my advice: buy the Summicron. It is an itch you need to scratch. Forget about "worth it" as a criterion. No one here can answer that for you. Until you try this legendary lens you will not be satisfied that you have walked the walk. If you don't like it, resell it. I very much like mine. But I own both a modern Sonnar and a Planar and switch between them when the mood takes me.

BTW, my favorite? A 45/2 Planar for a Contax G which I had converted to M mount. Man that thing can render a teacup like nobody's business. But the very listing of it as a choice should tell you I am nuts. Buy the Summicron. Love the Summicron. Leave the Summicron.

By the way, you will notice in the general link above that even the Opton performs pretty well stopped down to f:4 . . . just sayin.

 

[Rob-F]

The rigid is the same as the DR, just without the close-up mechanics. Classic Leica lens. That's what I'd go for.
Bicycle by Vic Stewart, on Flickr

If the intention is to do black and white, I will second this recommendation. I think is is stunning for B&W. I keep a Dual Range around for this purpose.

As to V. 3 vs. IV, I have used both. I prefer the Version 3, just because it has a longer focus throw and therefore a longer DOF scale. Most of my shots involve near-and far relationships, with everything in focus, so I rely on the DOF scale to check if I'm stopped down enough. The version 3 has a more detailed scale. The IV may be better optically--but how much better can it be? I have no problem with the performance of my version 3.

 

[Richard G]

.....and my version IV 50 Summicron with which I took some wonderfully sharp pictures on FP4 in 1986 when I bought it second hand on a holiday, I discovered nearly 30 years later back-focussed wide open close up by a couple of centimetres! So a particular copy could disappoint if you knew better than me what you're doing.

 

[Jan Pedersen]

.....and my version IV 50 Summicron with which I took some wonderfully sharp pictures on FP4 in 1986 when I bought it second hand on a holiday, I discovered nearly 30 years later back-focussed wide open close up by a couple of centimetres! So a particular copy could disappoint if you knew better than me what you're doing.
__________________

I bought mine a couple of year later and just discovered the same problem. I never really warmed on the lens with my M6 and now i know why. Leica NJ received it for calibration yesterday.

 

[lawrence]

Lawrence,
does this problem you found apply when entending/using the built-in lens hood especially on those bright days that you encountered ?
John

John

I always extended the lens hood, however my guess is that the it wouldn't make much difference for two reasons:

1. The hood is quite short relative to the focal length of the lens, so it's probably of limited usefulness
2. Veiling flare appears to be due to the general brightness or contrast of the scene rather than to light shining directly on the front element of the lens

Lawrence

 

[rbrooks]

I don't get the veiling flare on my version iv cron. It flares but in situations where you would expect it to, e.g. strong sun just slightly out of frame. I don't use the hood as it adds size and one of the strengths of the cron is small size. Mine is the silver chrome version.

On the M240 it's easier to nail focus than my pre-asph lux. However, the lux has a slightly more pleasing rendition.

Also note that the depth of field in the fore ground is very short when compared to the back ground. So it's sometimes advisable to focus on someone's eyeglasses frame or nose, or the closest of the two eyes, etc...

 

[Richard G]

I don't get the veiling flare on my version iv cron. It flares but in situations where you would expect it to, e.g. strong sun just slightly out of frame. I don't use the hood as it adds size and one of the strengths of the cron is small size. Mine is the silver chrome version.

On the M240 it's easier to nail focus than my pre-asph lux. However, the lux has a slightly more pleasing rendition.

Also note that the depth of field in the fore ground is very short when compared to the back ground. So it's sometimes advisable to focus on someone's eyeglasses frame or nose, or the closest of the two eyes, etc...

Maybe yours back focuses too! My science teacher bought a new 35 Summicron in the '70s. An element was reversed and it was unusable and sent straight back. It happens.

 

[pepeguitarra]

The sum micron 50/2 collapsible is another very good lens. If you find it without cleaning marks, etc.

Harpist at the Rotonda by Palenquero Photography, on Flickr

 

[raid]

I always use a lens hood on my RF lenses unless the front glass is recessed and I don't quickly find a suitable lens hood for the lens as I am about to take photos outdoors.

Whatever people here have posted about the Summicron vs. Canon sounds reasonable to me. My Canon 50/1.4 lens happens to be an excellent example. There really is not much to complain about. I started out with Leica by getting a Rigid Summicron with my M3, and I stuck with it. My photography does not require that I sell off the V1 to get V4 or V3 or .... I use what I happen to own, and I have quite a few excellent 50mm RF lenses at my disposal. In the end, it is a matter of personal preferences that will decide which lens is best for you. Not all modern lenses are "best" for what I like to see in my images. This belief (in my case) has kept me from buying a 50mm Summilux, even though a large proportion of users have praised this lens a lot. Instead, I got a Pentax Takumar 50/1.4 adapted to M mount. It allows me to continue use such a wonderful lens on a Leica digital M. After years of seeing praises about the DR, and even though I know that optically it is identical to the Rigid, I bought a DR. I have not used it since I have bought it. I may use it with a film Leica and after I get the matching eyes for it. It is unique for Leica. I like using the Zeiss G 45/2 Planar adapted to M. Now this is a great lens indeed. I may use it during my Wetzlar visit to make a point to the Leica CEO. There are non_Leica lenses that are wonderful.

 

[noisycheese]

Leica 50mm Summicron worth it?

Yes.

I have never bought a Leica M lens - new or used - and ended up regretting it.

 

[rbrooks]

Maybe yours back focuses too! My science teacher bought a new 35 Summicron in the '70s. An element was reversed and it was unusable and sent straight back. It happens.

It's not backfocusing as the sharpest plane is truly where I've focused. It's rather that the depth in front of the plane where there is the appearance of focus is very short. Behind the plan the relative appearance of focus is much longer.

I'm going to play a bit more with my lux and learn it's focus idiosyncrasies, as I prefer the rendering to the cron.

 

[richard_l]

Summicron 50 v5

 

[wayben]

Great picture Richard!!!

 

[David Hughes]

It's not backfocusing as the sharpest plane is truly where I've focused. It's rather that the depth in front of the plane where there is the appearance of focus is very short. Behind the plan the relative appearance of focus is much longer.

I'm going to play a bit more with my lux and learn it's focus idiosyncrasies, as I prefer the rendering to the cron.

Um, I can remember being taught years ago that most of the DoF is behind the subject and very little is in front of it. Looking at the DoF scale on lenses and lens tables I think a lot of other people think this. But I wonder if your RF is slightly out...

Regards, David

 

[Mjd-djm]

Thanks for all the great feedback. It's just one of those things... an itch to use a classic Leica lens on a classic Leica camera. Having said that I am happy with the Canon, I actually like the ergonomics a lot, and the IQ is very good. I guess for now I'll keep it and wait for a bargain Summicron to appear at which point I'll jump on it.

 

[Mjd-djm]

I've just actually been checking out some of the Zeiss 50mm Planar threads that were mentioned in the responses... and I've got to say the images look great. I might explore that avenue after all. it seems like lots of folk have lots of good things to say about it. Thanks all.

 

[richard_l]

I've just actually been checking out some of the Zeiss 50mm Planar threads that were mentioned in the responses... and I've got to say the images look great. I might explore that avenue after all. it seems like lots of folk have lots of good things to say about it. Thanks all.

Some people think the bokeh of the Planar 50 is not quite as pleasing as that of the Summicron. It's just a matter of opinion, I suppose. Also, the M mount (ZM) Zeiss lenses may be a bit overpriced. Personally, I like the IQ of the Planar as well as that of the Summicron. The color rendering of the Planar may be a bit more saturated.

Great picture Richard!!!

Thanks. However, I have to admit that it's hard to take a bad picture of a subject as photogenic as the Mabry Mill on the Blue Ridge Parkway in Virginia. They still grind grain there, by the way.

 

[wayben]

Thanks. However, I have to admit that it's hard to take a bad picture of a subject as photogenic as the Mabry Mill on the Blue Ridge Parkway in Virginia. They still grind grain there, by the way.

I'm always up for a good motorcycle road trip. Blue Ridge Parkway and Mabry Mill may be a good start.

 

[raid]

Some people think the bokeh of the Planar 50 is not quite as pleasing as that of the Summicron. It's just a matter of opinion, I suppose. Also, the M mount (ZM) Zeiss lenses may be a bit overpriced. Personally, I like the IQ of the Planar as well as that of the Summicron. The color rendering of the Planar may be a bit more saturated.



Thanks. However, I have to admit that it's hard to take a bad picture of a subject as photogenic as the Mabry Mill on the Blue Ridge Parkway in Virginia. They still grind grain there, by the way.

I used to drive over to Mabry's Mill whenevr I had the time during my 5.5 years studies at Virginia Tech. It was a lovely drive too.

 

[TRIago]

I have the Rigid and I honestly love it. It's so damn sharp wide open (in the center). That's my 50 of choice over any other, used or new.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk