One 50 Is All I Want

It would be a nice idea if you could find someone in your
area that has the Summicron DR and give it a shot. I'd
be willing to meet you some place to use mine if you lived
in my area.

Nelson
 
I also tested a lot of 50mm lenses, but in sharpness and contrast (if we talk about f2) nothing surpasses the current Summicron! Ask your local dealer if you can test it for one day on an M8 and you'll be surprised. It has only one flaw (like other modern Leica glass): it is very heavy. If you talk about f 2.8 just buy - for only a few dollars - an Industar L/D 61!

btw the DR Summicron indeed is sharp but is not as contrasty as the current version.
 
The 50's choices are getting bewildering - to put it mildly. They are all very good - there are some minor differences in how they render our world when you shoot.
DR Summicron 50f2: Nice lens, very smooth rendition. Without the goggles slightly limited close focussing - with goggles you can get really close. Nice match for a M3 too. Look for the later #, above 1.900 000 as they did upgrade the coating slightly and improved the contrast.
Rigid Summicron version I: nice lens too, but can be a bit "flat" in contrast and the "infernal" lock can drive you to distraction. Can be dismantled though and the "catch" on the lens ground down.
ZM Planar 50f2 - better than the Summicrons, medium contrast, good close focussing and nice out-of-focus rendition. I call it the Summicron-killer. Good prices too. Need the hood as a bumper.
Zeiss C Sonnar 50mm f1.5: Disregard the hype re focus shift (all lenses have focus shift.) Gorgeous black/white lens - smooth as silk with great shadow separation too. It is my "standard" 50 these days, both on my M's and on my Nikon Rf's.
If you need good wide open sharpness, dont disregard the Nokton 50f1.5 - just because it is less expensive that the others it is by no means inferior in quality. One of the better lenses @ f1.5. Contrast is a bit higher than the non asphericals, but not high enough to cause problem in the darkroom.
Of course, all of these pale in comparison with the 50f1.4 Asph Summilux - but you can almost buy all of the others for the money you would have to spend for it. very "aggressive" contrast - almost looks "pixillated" in the out-of-focus areas. The only real competition for this lens is the Millenium Nikkor 50f1.4 and to some extent the C Sonnar 50f1.5.
I dont have enough experience to warrant an opinion on the Hexanon 50f2. From what I have seen, it looks good and the users tend to swear by it.
Have fun deciding. I am envious of the One Lens/One Camera. OK, in the words of JR Tolkien "One Lens To Rule Them All"!
 
Don't forget the Planar 45/2 Contax G conversion, although technically it's not a 50. It's arguably better than the ZM Planar.
 
I bought today my 20th. RF 50mm lens, so I cannot just say "Give me one 50".
I will get a Nikkor 50mm 2.0 Tokyo LTM.
 
we should have another thread "what's the least # of 50mms you need?"
I vote for 3: 50 1:1, 50 1:2, 50 1:3.5
 
Quite quickly, at any focal length, I tend to gravitate to one lens, or at most two. I'd go so far as to say that any more than two lenses at a given focal length is in many cases (not all) either historical accident, or affectation.

Tashi delek,

Roger
 
Roger Hicks said:
Quite quickly, at any focal length, I tend to gravitate to one lens, or at most two. I'd go so far as to say that any more than two lenses at a given focal length is in many cases (not all) either historical accident, or affectation.

Tashi delek,

Roger
Click to expand...

An affectation? Did you hear that Raid, it's an affectation!

Well, Roger. Don't be expecting a Christmas Card from me anytime soon.

Keled ihsat,

;)

For me actually, I'm looking forward to getting to know the signatures of my various 50mm lenses better over the coming years.
 
Last edited:
I'm happy with my Summicron 50/2. I usually push Tri-X a few stops if I need to take pictures in really low light. I love the size. I rarely need anything faster than f/2 so I don't think it's worth it for me to invest in an f/1.4 or anything that fast. Plus it adds size and weight, etc. etc..
 
FrankS said:
An affectation? Did you hear that Raid, it's an affectation!

Well, Roger. Don't be expecting a Christmas Card from me anytime soon.

Keled ihsat,

;)

For me actually, I'm looking forward to getting to know the signatures of my various 50mm lenses better over the coming years.
Click to expand...

Frank,
I respect Roger's opinions, and I have my own. Isn't life great.:)
 
After having Rigid and modern Summicrons, Planar ZM, J-3, and some other ones, I settled for M-Hexanon 50/2 (best of them all to my eyes), Canon 50/1.2 and I-22, which is 50/3.5. Hexanon being the most overall "universal" lens. The only other lens I'd prefer (I think, since I never used one is 50 Summilux ASPH).
 
RITskellar said:
Sharp and contrasty????

Why not the current version Summicron 50/2 which is sharp and contrasty, and a great size and pleasure to use. Alternatively, a Pre-ASPH version of the Summilux 50/1.4 (which I happen to have for sale in the classifieds). This is my favorite lens and have a couple of them.
Click to expand...

Well ... I used two own two different copies of DR Summicron lenses and found them both very sharp (for BW and color) and contrasty (better suited for BW than for color). Since the OP mentioned using BW and self-developing I recommended the DR Summicron. :)

About the 50mm Summilux pre-ASPH (which I also happen to have owned) ... it is neither that sharp (especially wide open and at f/2.0) and also not that contrasty. Very nice for portraits, though.
 
* like you said, there is nothing wrong with f2, if i didn't find the lux i would have went with a summicron and been just as happy, probably sharper too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom