Poll: What 50mm lens for BW for Leica M?

Poll: What 50mm lens for BW for Leica M?

  • Elmar 50 old

    Votes: 39 4.5%

  • Elmar-M (new)

    Votes: 45 5.2%

  • Summarit

    Votes: 43 5.0%

  • Summicron rigid/DR

    Votes: 194 22.5%

  • Summilux pre-asph (version1/2)

    Votes: 125 14.5%

  • Summicron tabbed/current

    Votes: 120 13.9%

  • Summilux ASPH

    Votes: 88 10.2%

  • Zeiss Planar

    Votes: 79 9.2%

  • Zeiss Sonnar

    Votes: 77 8.9%

  • Konica M-Hexanon

    Votes: 51 5.9%
  • Total voters
    861
These kinds of results are always (slightly) interesting to read, but....

Isn't this like asking who is the most beautiful woman in the world?
Or, if you go to a party and look around at the floor — isn't everyone wearing different shoes?

It's all a matter of personal taste, context, and situation.

I've bought a few lenses mentioned in this thread, based on forum comments, and their associated images. But, i've never achieved the same results in my own usage. The particular imaging qualities i thought i was buying were never effectively replicated in my own shots. I've bought "high contrast" lenses, and gotten low contrast results.... I've bought "great bokeh" lenses and then not been impressed by the bokeh in my own shots.... And, then, if you fall out of love with a particular film, or go from shooting in Brazil in the summer to New York in the winter.... Too many variables. But, hey — part of the allure of the Leica-M platform is in the playing around with all these variables. Trying something vintage. Trying something new. Trying to make your prints glow like Doisneau's. Trying to separate yourself and create your own look. And, once you think you have it, you get bored, or someone else gets better results with a 1979 f2 Ultimacron, and you gotta try that next.....
 
I kick myself for selling my first version 'lux. It gave a retro look that I liked.

I tried a old DR Summicron that was my least favorite Leica I've owned.
 
ferider said:
There is a list of lenses that are missing and that I feel are important:

In the M-mount bucket, there was an M-mount 50/2 collapsible.
There is also the 50/2 Heliar.

On the LTM Mount side, usable with adapter, there are
5+ lenses from Canon that many of us like, 3+ Nikkors, Jupiter 8 and 3, etc.
And of course the 2 CV screw mount 50s.

Best,

Roland.
Click to expand...

Thanks, Roland, just want to put in a plug for the Canon 50 1.4. Great lens with beautiful bokeh!
 
I voted for the "Summilux pre-asph (version1/2)" considering that I have the 1st version, then again, I have never used another 50mm on my leica, so I don't have any experience with the other lenses. I am pleased with the results that I get with the 1st version summilux, I like the "look/signature" that it has. I am aware that it is different than my other "more modern lenses". That said, I couldn't even afford a different lens if I wanted one.....I shoot mostly tri-x and I use a medium yellow filter on all my lenses (except the cv15mm)...here is an example with the 50mm

2232347432_889a59b1dd_b.jpg


cheers, michael
 
OK, here's a bizarre one for you. One of my favorite 50's (and I have ALOT of 50's, must be a sickness!) is the Anistigmat 50/3.5 on the "new" null series (O-Series). Similar to the Elmar but a bit sharper with a definitely different feel to it.

Pain in the rear to use on the Null Series I'd love it if Leica brought this baby out in an M-Mount (a slow 50 like the VC Heliar 50/3.5).

As for "regular" LTM or M-mount lenses I am right now pretty fond of an old Summarit I picked up for B/W, nice and soft low contrast image that I can juice up in post processing. Summicron, C-Sonnar, Elamr and Noct all have their places and uses.

Kent
 
I have a Planar and a Summicron (Rigid). You can see samples in my Mexico photoset (Planar) and my Jerusalem photoset (Summicron). Which one I pick up really depends on what mood I'm in. Decisions, decisions...

Planar...

2697513192_856a1da2a4.jpg


Summicron...

2697246875_96ec7df8c1.jpg
 
I'm voting for the latest incarnation of the Zeiss C Sonnar. I don't own one but think for black and white it looks a winner. I used to use a collapsible summicron for black and white and I loved the hell out of it until it fell apart. Now I shoot a new Summicron, and it's a beaut also, but I like a softer look for monochrome, and for that reason have only used it for colour work.

So, maybe I'd vote a tie between the old collapsible cron and the new Zeiss Sonnar. Hopefully I can properly try one out and report back about it soon.
 
A great many fantastic photos on this thread. I really like the look of the summitar at 5.6+, so I voted for it.

Edit: Woops, I voted for a summarit. I give up on the names...
 
Last edited:
My normals ....

My normals ....

I'm in the throws of GAS. There was no way I could afford a 50mm summilux, so I chose the 40mm SC 1.4 CV, not the same focal length, but then again, not too far off. ( and not the topic of this thread)

I shot a few rolls with it, and I found, as usual, the forums seem to be close, a nice sharp modern lens, should work well with my so far preferred Kodak 400 C41 B&W. However, it is modern.

GAS attack!! On the big auction site, I bought a 50mm collapsible, at the very bottom of the expected price range, and it's on its way. Details to follow.

Dave
 
Nando's Summitar photos are my favorite B/W human subject rendering thus far.

The J-3 is not a bad performer with the right film. This is Ilford Delta scanned by Ritz headquarters (as I cant scan B/W this grain free myself):

2218386153_0cf60acdc3_b.jpg
 
If, like me, you happen to be a total M newbie and now have your head in a spin just for reading this thread - then these 2 links might help.

Leica 50mm Summicron-M Lens Price & Information Guide
Leica Lens Reviews

As for me, I've just actually bought an M2 and now need to pair it with either a 35 or 50. From my readings so far it looks like 35/2.8 Summaron might be affordable, whereas an affordable 50 might be a "Rigid".
 
I think that the solution as shown by the numbers in the poll is to get the one that presents itself in the best condition at the best price. Sure, they might all have specific nuances that are a tiny bit different than the other, but none of them are bad lenses. Your biggest consideration should be price and/or aperture needs (some are faster, some only go to f16 instead of f22), and then things like size. I don't think any of them would treat anyone wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom