giulio stucchi
Well-known
m6, summilux 50 v2, tri-x 400, lc-29
m6, summilux 50 v2, tri-x 400, lc-29
002.16 by Giulio Stucchi, on Flickr
m6, summilux 50 v2, tri-x 400, lc-29
002.16 by Giulio Stucchi, on Flickr
Let's see your Leica 50mm Lux Pre-ASPH Photos!
- Thread starter Damaso
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 1K
- Views 432K
2WK
Rangefinder User
Erik van Straten
Veteran
Thank you, 2WK.
Just for fun I made a comparison-test picture @ full aperture with the Summilux pre asph 50mm f/1.4 and the new Nokton-M 50mm f/1.5 with my Leica M5 on Tmax400.
Summilux:
Nokton:
The differences are very small, the Nokton-M gives a bit "cleaner" image in my opinion.
The lightmeter of the M5 gave exactly the same measurement with both lenses.
Erik.
Just for fun I made a comparison-test picture @ full aperture with the Summilux pre asph 50mm f/1.4 and the new Nokton-M 50mm f/1.5 with my Leica M5 on Tmax400.
Summilux:
Nokton:
The differences are very small, the Nokton-M gives a bit "cleaner" image in my opinion.
The lightmeter of the M5 gave exactly the same measurement with both lenses.
Erik.
menos
Veteran
Now that's a really interesting comparison Erik, I would love to see some shots where typically the differences are even more obvious (highlights in the background, patterns that case double lines, etc.).
I would imagine comparing the Nokton to the later vII Summilux (including the latest pre ASPH E46) would show even less of a difference.
The norton looks really nice here.
It took me a while hunting the one dream sample of the 50mm pre ASPH Summilux (I knew I wanted one the moment I tried a vII some years ago and looked for the one ever since).
Here is why I really like the pre ASPH over the modern ASPH:
Look at what it does to the pattern in the background - it is not outrageous as with a Summarit or Summitar but not as clean as with a ASPH. And - I find it has just about the perfect contrast to my taste.
portrait - chinese by teknopunk.com, on Flickr
I love the smooth backgrounds from the pre ASPH:
Untitled by teknopunk.com, on Flickr
…*and I really like the tones, contrast and detail when used at f2 - f2.8 (my favorite with the pre ASPH Summilux):
worker lifting steel pipe by teknopunk.com, on Flickr
children - playing by teknopunk.com, on Flickr
I would imagine comparing the Nokton to the later vII Summilux (including the latest pre ASPH E46) would show even less of a difference.
The norton looks really nice here.
It took me a while hunting the one dream sample of the 50mm pre ASPH Summilux (I knew I wanted one the moment I tried a vII some years ago and looked for the one ever since).
Here is why I really like the pre ASPH over the modern ASPH:
Look at what it does to the pattern in the background - it is not outrageous as with a Summarit or Summitar but not as clean as with a ASPH. And - I find it has just about the perfect contrast to my taste.
portrait - chinese by teknopunk.com, on FlickrI love the smooth backgrounds from the pre ASPH:
Untitled by teknopunk.com, on Flickr…*and I really like the tones, contrast and detail when used at f2 - f2.8 (my favorite with the pre ASPH Summilux):
worker lifting steel pipe by teknopunk.com, on Flickrchildren - playing by teknopunk.com, on Flickr
Erik van Straten
Veteran
Thank you Dirk, you have the newer Summilux pre asph v2 that focuses to 70cm I think. I have the old one that only goes to 1m.
The Nokton draws different in the foreground, look at the tablecloth just in front of the small sign board.
I found out long ago that the pre asph Summilux only starts to give good contrast @ f/2.8. The Nokton gives more contrast at the larger apertures.
The weak point of the Summilux is the barrel distortion. The Nokton is better, but is not entirely free from it.
Erik.
The Nokton draws different in the foreground, look at the tablecloth just in front of the small sign board.
I found out long ago that the pre asph Summilux only starts to give good contrast @ f/2.8. The Nokton gives more contrast at the larger apertures.
The weak point of the Summilux is the barrel distortion. The Nokton is better, but is not entirely free from it.
Erik.
giulio stucchi
Well-known
I'm really ignorant when it comes to optical design but I'm pretty happy with the contrast at full aperture on my 'lux 50.
Mine is a v2 from 1986
Mine is a v2 from 1986
Erik van Straten
Veteran
Mine is about 25 years older. It is very probable that coatings or glasses have been improved in all those years.
A good test is to use color slide film and to make pictures at the same time from the same subject @ f/1.4, f/2, f/2.8 etc.
Erik.
giulio stucchi
Well-known
yep, I thought it could be related to the coating.
I comment on this as I noticed my copy is somewhere between your and the V3 from Dirk.
My V2 Is a recent acquisition (last October) and I was positively surprise of the rendering / contrast at full aperture.
Giulio
I comment on this as I noticed my copy is somewhere between your and the V3 from Dirk.
My V2 Is a recent acquisition (last October) and I was positively surprise of the rendering / contrast at full aperture.
Giulio
thremur
Member
m6, BP Summilux 50 E46 pre asph, Tri-X @1600, Diafine
thremur
Member
m6, BP Summilux 50 E46 pre asph, Rollei Retro 400s, RHS 1+7
giulio stucchi
Well-known
m6, summilux 50 v2, tri-x 400, lc-29
m6, summilux 50 v2, tri-x 400, lc-29
001.16 by Giulio Stucchi, on Flickr
m6, summilux 50 v2, tri-x 400, lc-29
001.16 by Giulio Stucchi, on Flickr
giulio stucchi
Well-known
m6, summilux 50 v2, tri-x 400, lc-29
m6, summilux 50 v2, tri-x 400, lc-29
001.16 by Giulio Stucchi, on Flickr
001.16 by Giulio Stucchi, on Flickr
m6, summilux 50 v2, tri-x 400, lc-29
001.16 by Giulio Stucchi, on Flickr001.16 by Giulio Stucchi, on Flickr
menos
Veteran
Yes Erik, my favorite aperture with the pre ASPH Summilux is f2.8. I find just everything really comes together at this aperture with this lens - perfect contrast, usable depth of field, beautiful tones and a background that is not entirely disguised.
I had a vII, made in the late 1980's before that and really liked what I saw with this lens but wanted the more usable features of the later E46 version (closer focussing, quicker focussing, easier available filters).
I cannot see any difference in optical quality between the late 80's vII and the two E46 samples I used.
I believe at least between these two generations of the pre ASPH Summilux the optical formula is identical and coating differences (there are, as one can see different colored coatings) are just not visible in the images.
The lens I use now is the black paint E46 with scalloped focussing ring - I believe it came first with some M6 special edition and was later sold in small numbers as a separate lens as well.
I tried the aluminum barrel versions as well which are comfortably more light weight but there really is a a difference in focussing indeed. The black paint focussing ring (and the one with the silver chrome as well) is just very, very smooth, allowing for very small, precise corrections, while the aluminum barrel samples I tried all felt a little bit hesitant focussing in fine increments.
The older 1m close focussing versions do not suffer from this as they do have a much longer focus throw, making them wonderful for very precise adjustments.
Here is a few from the 50/1.4 E46 black paint:
Untitled by teknopunk.com, on Flickr
granddaughter and grandfather by teknopunk.com, on FlickrHere is a curious one - with this shot I found out that at no aperture I could get the entire corners to sharpen up to the level, the center of the lens is sharp:
Suzhou Tower Department Store - facade by teknopunk.com, on FlickrThe corners always will show a little bit of softer detail than the center (both my black paint and the silver chrome E46 do show this, both lenses have been to Wetzlar for adjustments and 6-bit coding for digital cameras and they are good samples).
coelacanth
Ride, dive, shoot.
I currently have the Summilux 50/1.4 Pre-ASPH (E46) and Nokton-M ASPH.
This is like Erik did above, but with X-E1 as the body/sensor so they are about 75mm equivalent in 135 format. Lux at F1.4, Nokton at 1.5. my main use will be on film, but I haven't got time to run a test roll on Lux, and I don't have a full-frame digital to test the full image circle. Both images got identical adjustments on LR, but they are both shot at same shutter speed and ISO so technically Lux picture is F0.1 worth brighter.
Nokton was purchased new, and the Lux is from 2003 but seems to be pristine/mint condition with no noticeable defects of any kind. They both had B+W MRC UV filter.
(Left: Summilux 50 Pre-ASPH E46, Right: Nokton-M 50 ASPH)
This shows the full frame of the shot.
Larger image can be found HERE.
This shows the crop of focused area (obviously manual focused via EVF so not scientifically identical focus point).
This is a crop of mid-ground out-of-focus areas.
Quick observations:
Lux is slightly longer FOV.
Lux is softer at wide open.
They render not too far from each other, but there are differences in characters.
Lux has the bokeh not too crazy like Summitar, but still a classic lens rendering that may or may not be your thing.
For regular size prints coming from film M, I don't think the sharpness difference would make much of meaningful performance differences.
In short, I'd say
E46 Lux Pre-ASPH has a classic look with a modern touch. ('60s optical design with modern coating)
Nokton-M ASPH has a modern look with a classic touch. (modern optical design not overly corrected)
Looking forward to seeing the test roll with Lux in a day or two.
Edit:
After posting this, I figured it was a bit unfair on the sharpness observation for the Lux as the focus point was off-center. Here is a crop of reframed shots, the focus is right at the center of the frame.
I think the difference in sharpness is super minor, almost just the contrast difference. Of course this still means Nokton-M is sharper across the frame while Lux's sharpness falls off more quickly even on a cropped sensor.
This is like Erik did above, but with X-E1 as the body/sensor so they are about 75mm equivalent in 135 format. Lux at F1.4, Nokton at 1.5. my main use will be on film, but I haven't got time to run a test roll on Lux, and I don't have a full-frame digital to test the full image circle. Both images got identical adjustments on LR, but they are both shot at same shutter speed and ISO so technically Lux picture is F0.1 worth brighter.
Nokton was purchased new, and the Lux is from 2003 but seems to be pristine/mint condition with no noticeable defects of any kind. They both had B+W MRC UV filter.
(Left: Summilux 50 Pre-ASPH E46, Right: Nokton-M 50 ASPH)
This shows the full frame of the shot.
Larger image can be found HERE.
This shows the crop of focused area (obviously manual focused via EVF so not scientifically identical focus point).
This is a crop of mid-ground out-of-focus areas.
Quick observations:
Lux is slightly longer FOV.
Lux is softer at wide open.
They render not too far from each other, but there are differences in characters.
Lux has the bokeh not too crazy like Summitar, but still a classic lens rendering that may or may not be your thing.
For regular size prints coming from film M, I don't think the sharpness difference would make much of meaningful performance differences.
In short, I'd say
E46 Lux Pre-ASPH has a classic look with a modern touch. ('60s optical design with modern coating)
Nokton-M ASPH has a modern look with a classic touch. (modern optical design not overly corrected)
Looking forward to seeing the test roll with Lux in a day or two.
Edit:
After posting this, I figured it was a bit unfair on the sharpness observation for the Lux as the focus point was off-center. Here is a crop of reframed shots, the focus is right at the center of the frame.
I think the difference in sharpness is super minor, almost just the contrast difference. Of course this still means Nokton-M is sharper across the frame while Lux's sharpness falls off more quickly even on a cropped sensor.
Erik van Straten
Veteran
Thank you, both Suguru an Dirk for these wonderful tests. From Sugs test I would say the Nokton gives a sharper and more beautiful image. The Summilux is a superb lens too, of course.
On the long term we will see if the Nokton is mechanically as good as the Summilux. The Summilux has proven it's mechanically quality. Mine is from the early sixties and has seen a lot of use, but is mechanically still perfect.
Dirk, your copy of the Summilux seems to be remarkably free from barrel distortion. My example suffers badly from this, as can be seen in my picture above of the men in their white jackets. How is your opinion about this? Did you correct it maybe in PS or LR?
Erik.
On the long term we will see if the Nokton is mechanically as good as the Summilux. The Summilux has proven it's mechanically quality. Mine is from the early sixties and has seen a lot of use, but is mechanically still perfect.
Dirk, your copy of the Summilux seems to be remarkably free from barrel distortion. My example suffers badly from this, as can be seen in my picture above of the men in their white jackets. How is your opinion about this? Did you correct it maybe in PS or LR?
Erik.
menos
Veteran
Oh Erik, I am sorry I didn't mention this but yes, the photo of the shopping mall facade is corrected for distortion in Lightroom.
Out of the box, the Summilux does show enough barrel distortion to need correction for such photographs.
From this and the mentioned issue that the pre ASPH Summilux never really reaches same levels of sharpness across the frame I would not choose this lens as a lens for architectural photographs. It really is the classic reportage lens for low light conditions.
Sug, thanks for your test indeed. I find the out of focus rendering from the Nokton in your shots just ever so slightly smoother than the one from the Summilux - really pretty indeed.
I never have used a Nokton myself but do see that the pre ASPH Summilux indeed is not the sharpest lens there is (at least the late E46 samples with latest multi coatings are sufficiently sharp wide open (with a beautiful touch for living subjects) and it definitely is very sharp ones stopped down to f2 and f2.8 in the larger area in the center.
I sold my ASPH Summilux with floating elements some years ago, as I simply like the character of the pre ASPH Summilux so much better.
The ASPH really looks perfect by comparison - sharp all over the frame and the smoothest, most neutral background one could find but I find it does lack the bit of imperfection that gives the pre ASPH it's character.
The Nokton looks like an unbelievable great deal with second hand samples often priced below 500 USD. If on a budget or simply not willing to spend money for a Summilux, there is no doubt I would without hesitation try to find a nice Nokton.
A friend mentioned that when he tried the last issued Nokton version, he found a strange characteristic, where wide open the lens would not show a rather flat plane of focus but where towards the corners the best focus would be rather at a slightly further distance (this was seen on a Leica M Monochrom and M9, I am not sure how pronounced this effect may be on film).
Can you confirm this behavior?
In any case, I am really happy about my Summilux ;-)
portrait - gentleman with sunglasses by teknopunk.com, on Flickr
Out of the box, the Summilux does show enough barrel distortion to need correction for such photographs.
From this and the mentioned issue that the pre ASPH Summilux never really reaches same levels of sharpness across the frame I would not choose this lens as a lens for architectural photographs. It really is the classic reportage lens for low light conditions.
Sug, thanks for your test indeed. I find the out of focus rendering from the Nokton in your shots just ever so slightly smoother than the one from the Summilux - really pretty indeed.
I never have used a Nokton myself but do see that the pre ASPH Summilux indeed is not the sharpest lens there is (at least the late E46 samples with latest multi coatings are sufficiently sharp wide open (with a beautiful touch for living subjects) and it definitely is very sharp ones stopped down to f2 and f2.8 in the larger area in the center.
I sold my ASPH Summilux with floating elements some years ago, as I simply like the character of the pre ASPH Summilux so much better.
The ASPH really looks perfect by comparison - sharp all over the frame and the smoothest, most neutral background one could find but I find it does lack the bit of imperfection that gives the pre ASPH it's character.
The Nokton looks like an unbelievable great deal with second hand samples often priced below 500 USD. If on a budget or simply not willing to spend money for a Summilux, there is no doubt I would without hesitation try to find a nice Nokton.
A friend mentioned that when he tried the last issued Nokton version, he found a strange characteristic, where wide open the lens would not show a rather flat plane of focus but where towards the corners the best focus would be rather at a slightly further distance (this was seen on a Leica M Monochrom and M9, I am not sure how pronounced this effect may be on film).
Can you confirm this behavior?
In any case, I am really happy about my Summilux ;-)
portrait - gentleman with sunglasses by teknopunk.com, on Flickrmcfingon
Western Australia
Yes Erik, my favorite aperture with the pre ASPH Summilux is f2.8. I find just everything really comes together at this aperture with this lens - perfect contrast, usable depth of field, beautiful tones and a background that is not entirely disguised.
I had a vII, made in the late 1980's before that and really liked what I saw with this lens but wanted the more usable features of the later E46 version (closer focussing, quicker focussing, easier available filters).
I cannot see any difference in optical quality between the late 80's vII and the two E46 samples I used.
I believe at least between these two generations of the pre ASPH Summilux the optical formula is identical and coating differences (there are, as one can see different colored coatings) are just not visible in the images.
The lens I use now is the black paint E46 with scalloped focussing ring - I believe it came first with some M6 special edition and was later sold in small numbers as a separate lens as well.
I tried the aluminum barrel versions as well which are comfortably more light weight but there really is a a difference in focussing indeed. The black paint focussing ring (and the one with the silver chrome as well) is just very, very smooth, allowing for very small, precise corrections, while the aluminum barrel samples I tried all felt a little bit hesitant focussing in fine increments.
The older 1m close focussing versions do not suffer from this as they do have a much longer focus throw, making them wonderful for very precise adjustments.
Here is a few from the 50/1.4 E46 black paint:
Here is a curious one - with this shot I found out that at no aperture I could get the entire corners to sharpen up to the level, the center of the lens is sharp:
The corners always will show a little bit of softer detail than the center (both my black paint and the silver chrome E46 do show this, both lenses have been to Wetzlar for adjustments and 6-bit coding for digital cameras and they are good samples).
I have read that there is a lot of curvature of field with the Summilux so that could account for the lack of sharpness of a flat object, even if stopped down, Dirk. And maybe the coding you've had done to your lenses is changing the barrel distortion in software to answer Erik's question. I had a Summilux in 1993 on an M4-P, but sold it. I would like to get another similar one, but I'll have to find out what type it was from the serial number when I find a picture of it. I've got a slide of it somewhere...
Erik van Straten
Veteran
Thank you Dirk, for your comprehensive reaction. I too have the latest version of the Nokton, but I did not encounter yet the effect you discribed. When I see it, I will let you know, but maybe I will not see it, as I work only on film.
I can see that you are happy with your Summilux, your pictures are, like always, superb! And you are right that small optical imperfections have a charm all their own. I too love to work with old lenses. On film however these things work out differently. Maybe because of that I enjoy the use of modern optics too.
Erik.
mcfingon
Western Australia
Here's the shot I treasure as a good one from 1993 of my son at kindergarten. I shot at f1.4 and I think 1/30th second, and thought it would be a blur...
mcfingon
Western Australia
Here's the M4-P and 1981 Summilux I shot it with. Can anyone tell me what version of Summilux it is?
