Newbie - old 'Cron or older 'Lux

[robster180]

Hi

I'm relatively new to RFF, I've contributed to a few threads, uploaded to my gallery space but not formally introduced myself and am now puzzled over my next lens so let's do this all in one

I've recently bought my first Leica (M6) and own just one lens (Zeiss 35/2 Biogon) and shot my 1st efforts on holiday in HK last month
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showgallery.php?cat=7299
and absolutely love my new toys having come from years of Nikon's excellent F range!
I studied photography at Uni but now work as a Designer for a large agency here in London, working in all types of medium from onscreen stuff to TV ads

Anyway I'm toying with the idea of buying a 50mm Leica lens (as that is why I bought into brand for it's glass) so my query lies here...

At which point does the quality of a used Summicron surpass the point of an older Summilux? Or are all Summilix's superior to all Summicron's despite age? Which will give me more bang for my buck?

Thanks in advance

Rob

 

[MikeL]

Welcome Rob!
Just my experience with both, if you don't need the extra stop of the pre-asph summilux, the summicron is a better deal. But, on the samples I've had I found the summilux is really nice and smooth wide open (Gabriel here has some great photos with the summilux wide open) and more resistant to flare. But you pay for it. From f2 and above I'm pretty sure I couldn't tell the lenses apart. Others may have different experiences, but those are mine.

 

[kevin m]

The Summicron is better corrected. More resolution and contrast wide open. But IMO, the Summilux is a better lens for shooting people. It has a very pleasing look wide open, with a sharp center and soft corners with a very natural looking transition between the two, with none of the OOF weirdness of a Sonnar design or the Noctilux. (It's sweet-spot is between f1.7-f4.0) And, unlike the Summicron, it's nearly flare-proof. A 'lux will cost you more than a Summicron. An older, e-43 version might be had for $600-800 in nice shape, while the later e-46 will probably cost you a bit over a grand at today's prices.

And here's a dirty little secret: The Konica Hexanon 50 is a near clone of the Summicron for half the price.

 

[former member]

Both series of lenses changed their optical formula and their "look" dramatically over the past half-century. Best to look at examples posted with the lenses in their various incarnations.

Personally, I favor the collapsible Summicron. I like the older, lower-contrast look. The Type I Rigid Summicron is sharper, but still has the lower-contrast of the classic Leitz glass. In the 60s, Leica moved toward increased contrast that was popular.

 

[peter_n]

Go look at the results of both lenses at flickr and make your own mind up about which look you like best.

 

[mfogiel]

robster180,
If you go to this flickr group:

http://www.flickr.com/groups/m-mount/

you can see lots of photos taken with various lenses from Leica, CV, Zeiss and others.
FWIW, if you have the 35 Biogon altready, you might be disappointed with old Leica glass. In my opinion for general shooting you'll be better off with the 50/2 Planar or CV 50/1.5 Nokton. If you want the vintage Leica look, get the Nokton 50/1.5 and put a dirty UV filter on - the result is going to be pretty close. ;-)

 

[Tom A]

A couple of years ago I would have suggested the Summilux as a 2nd lens (mainly due to the speed), but today I would say that the money would go towards either a Zeiss C-Sonnar 50f1.5 or, if you dont need that extra stop, a Zeiss Planar 50f2. Both of these lenses are better allaround than the older Summiluxe's and the Summicrons! None of them are as good as the Summilux 50mm ASPH, but then you can forget the budget!
An other outstanding "speed" 50 is the Nokton 50mmf1.5. It is sharper than the Summilux (pre-Asph versions), particularly in the f1.5-f2 range. It is also the great bargain of all time for this speed of lens.
The reason I suggest the C-Sonnar 50f1.5 is that you will get the same tonal range and "definition" as you get with the Biogon 35f2. The ZM line of lenses is quite exceptional in its capacity for rendering tones the same across the line. I use ZM's from 18mm up through the 50's and all that changes on the negatives is the angle of view - the quality of the image remains the same. I have tried the 15 and 85, but not sufficiently to state that they follow the same model.
If you decide to go the Summicron way, avoid the latest version as it a/ lacks a focussing tab and b/has a hood that collapses at the sligtest provocation and leaves the front element unprotected. Of the Summicron's that I have, my favourite is a 60's Summicron DR. It is a bit "flat" in its rendition, lower contrast than the later versions, but it is tack sharp. It is also built like the proverbial brick outhouse! The later Summicron's (1980 onward) are considerably lighter, but also more fragile. Particularly the aperture blade control which is prone to breaking or simply not working properly. The DR has a brass "driver" for this and the later ones has a "polycarbonate" (A.k.a. plastic) one!
The earliest Summiluxes were very soft wide open. We should remember that this lens evolved from the 30's Xenon and the later Summarit's and it was an old design already in the late 50's. Leica was forced to produce it as both Nikon and Canon had produced 50f1.4's that were superior to it by 1960. It was later changed slightly and the coating was upgraded and it did remain in production for almost 40 years without any major upgrades. It is an interesting lens, but I would never rely on one as a mainstay. It is a lens you pull out for flattering portraits or vintage look stuff. It does scream 60's when shooting Tri X, but you might not want to have that look all the time! It is one of the best looking of the 50's, particularly with the old "crinkle" finished hood on it, but looks does not pictures make!

 

[robster180]

wow, thanks everyone! especially with the lens examples Chikne.

The flickr site looks like it might answer a few aesthetic questions so that's a great resource for me too - thanks!

From what I've seen in the used market I can pick up a Leitz Lux from 1959 for around £550 or a more recent up to date model of the Cron for around the same, So I think what I'm ALSO trying to find out is does the price of the older 'Lux justify it's price through optical ability or collector valuation? Please forgive my ignorance if I'm beginning to sound daft now

 

[peter_n]

does the price of the older 'Lux justify it's price through optical ability

Only you can decide that Rob. Sharpness isn't everything. Personally I would take a Summilux over a Summicron any day, but that is just my personal opinion. The more modern lenses can be painfully sharp, but who needs a dermatology lesson every shot? That goes for the older rigid/DR Summicrons too. Also you need to assess lens ergonomics, some of them can be awkward to use, and I include lenses with tabs in that category. You live in London so you have plenty of opportunity to drop into a dealer and find out what you're comfortable using. So in addition to checking out flickr, I suggest you drop into Classic Camera or RG Lewis, whatever and try for yourself... 🙂

 

[MCTuomey]

if you like your biogon 35's image quality and you're concerned about value, take tom's advice and go with one of the zeiss 50's or alternatively the cv nocton. (i'd go for a f1.4-1.5 model to have the speed given your 35 is f2, but that's me). once you've got a 50, exhaust yourself with those two lenses and then see whether you have a clear interest in what vintage or modern-look leica lenses might do for you.

 

[venchka]

You may also want to keep your eyes wide open for a nice clean scratch free Nikkor-S.C 50/1.4 or one of the fast Canons, either 50/1.4 or 50/1.2. I don't know about UK prices for these lenses, but $300-$400 USD would net you a good to great copy of any one of the three. That's consrvative too. Really good deals could be less.

 

[former member]

The Summarit cost much less than an early Summilux, and is worth considering. It will need to be inspected for haze, and probably will require a CLA. It is highly under-rated. Wide-open, it is a 1st-rate portrait lens. At F4, it is quite sharp- close to the Type I Rigid Summicron.

This lens set me back $125, and cleaned up well for an $80 CLA. A good Summarit with a recent CLA can be found for under $300.

 

[robster180]

Thanks once again for everyone's who's contributed with informative feedback! I'll start by asking a few questions to those who intrigued with their replies

Kevin M - Thanks for the tip off on the Konica Hexanon 50, is this an easy lens to come by? Are they still made new or something that I'll have to keep my eye out for?

Tom A - Thanks, you've probably answered in the most concise fashion some of the things that I've wanted to learn about but was afraid to ask. I'm surprised to hear of the slight inferior materials used in some models of the later crons, as well as the fragility of the product and flimsy hoods? Is this a well known problem or would anyone beg to differ?

Peter N - In terms of WIW from Leica glass it's the razor sharpness that I'm hankering after, on personal terms I'd rather have the sharpness there in the 1st place and take away in post production if needs be

I don't wish people to reference the "bang for buck" quote as a need to be tight on the purse strings, So let's make this a bit more fun and put the cat amongst the pidgeons...we'll say I have £500/$1000 or thereabouts, again this is down to personal preference but where would you put your money...New Zeiss Sonar, Used latest Cron, Konica Hexanon, or an older model Lux (version?) A.N.Other? a justification for your choice would be great but not essential

 

[mfogiel]

robster180
The answer is simple: for good contrast and maximum sharpness get the Planar - Leica has some good lenses, but they are few and excessively expensive. The Planar is currently the best 50/2 lens on the market at any price.
Here are a few examples:
http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=1472535041&size=l - f5.6
http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=1893940244&size=l - wide open
http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=2050468061&size=l - f4.0
http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=1715606659&size=l- f5.6
http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=1096255141&size=l - wide open

 

[peter_n]

I would agree. If you're after sharpness then the rigid/DR Summicron is a good solution, especially if you like black & white film. It's a bit short on contrast but is excellent value, I think mine was well below $300.

 

[Vics]

Boy! I LOVE my DR Summicron! Bought it at KEH for $465. It was listed in BGN condition, and the glass has some need for a CLA, but as a B&W shooter, I think it's the best I've ever used. Low to medium contrast and very good resolution of fine details. Very "sparkly" rendition of metal surfaces. I can't comment on anything but that one and the collapsible 'cron. The DR is quite heavy, though, so if you go that way, I'd get a rigid. It's the same lens without the near focusing ability.
Good luck,
Vic

 

[peter_n]

Yes the DR has a lot of brass on the top of it, I think to interface with the goggles. It's much heavier than the rigid.

 

[venchka]

What would I do with $1,000 for a new 50mm lens?

That's a tough one. Since I have a 1950s Nikkor 50/1.4 and a 1961 DR Summicron...hmmmmmmmmmmm

I think I have a nice pair of lenses already. If somebody MADE me buy another 50mm lens, I would go for the Konica M-Hexanon 50/2.0. Why? Because it's a very good very modern lens. I already own three other Konica lenses and they are first rate. I expect the 50 would fit right in with the 28mm & 35mm Konica lenses I have now. Oh, and with any luck at all, I might have $500-$600 left over.

 

[maddoc]

Lot's of good advices here and I second Tom's opinion about the Zeiss Planar 50/2.0, if you are into sharp pictures and favor more the "modern" lens signature it would be the best choice. (I don't have this lens but had the Zeiss Biogon 25/2.8 which was a really sharp lens)

I had a Summicron Rigid and now have a Summicron Rigid II (vs 3). The aperture ring of the latter is ... not what I would have expected from Leica, it feels "plastic". The Summilux 50/1.4 (E46) is really good for portraits and renders OOF beautifully. I had the Nocton 50/1.5 before and sold it, harsh OOF and colors were on the cold side. Stopped down (f/4 downwards), the Summilux 50/1.4 pre-ASPH is tack sharp too. Sure, the ASPH version is a class above and really shines when shoot wide open.

 

[Hacker]

The CV Heliar f2 is cheap and good.