Sell other lenses for one 50 Summilux?

R

rich815

Guest
I'm find myself, in the name of simplicity and perhaps better performance, considering getting a type 2 Summilux 50/1.4 by selling my 50/2 Summicron DR, 50/2 Summitar and 50/1.5 Summarit. (The DR works fine but has an issue which would have those three lenses selling for about what a decent condition type 2 Summilux would cost). I slowly bought these lenses over the last couple years as I found good deals and do not regret having owned them and gotten experience with them. But now, having decided (as discussed in another thread) to keep and start using my MP more (Luigi half-case on the way!) that with the 50/1.4 Summilux on an MP you really "cannot go wrong" and it sure would simplify things. I like the "classic" look of the Summarit and Summitar (not love, but like a lot) and really find the DR to have gorgeous character. What are people's opinions on look of the Summilux vs. the DR? Any thoughts on taking this route?
 
Rich, if you want to meet sometime I can lend you my summilux and you can take it for a spin. It's the recent version with the same lens formula but closer focus mount. Beware though, once you try it I think you'll have to have one.
 
To stay on-topic, I'll move my response from the other thread to this 1:

I have the Type 3 'lux in LTM (the 1999 version where they sadly went retro on the minimum focus distance, too) & I would say that it has more of a 1960s-70s look than the DR's 1950s look, i.e., less flare & more contrasty than the '50s lenses but less contrasty & not as sharp wide-open compared to the modern ASPH designs, w/very smooth boke (I think 1 of the reasons why many people like the 75/1.4 is that it's like a stretch version of the pre-ASPH 50/1.4). I believe Leicaphiles would say it gives the classic "[Walter] Mandler look."

rich815 said:
I like the "classic" look of the Summarit and Summitar (not love, but like a lot) and really find the DR to have gorgeous character. How's the look of the Summilux vs. the DR?
Click to expand...
 
Must be a common affliction

Must be a common affliction

Noticing the 50mm Summilux Type 2 at KEH for less than a kidney, I am wondering the same thing. I currently own 51.9mm ;) DR Summicron and 50mm 1.4 Nikkor S.C lenses. Both are in better than excellent condition. I purchased the Nikkor in the 70s. I'm either the second or no worse than third owner and only recently started using the lens. Needless to say, the Nikkor is in better condition than any lens it's age has a right to be in. These are the only lenses I own that would fetch enough money to partlially offset the cost of the Summilux. Alas, I can't see myself parting with either one.

I suppose my question is this: Sell the Nikkor to buy a Summilux? I realize the Nikkor lens has it's quirks, but it is a nice lens. Very compact too for a 50/1.4.

Oh, and I have a Canon 50/1.4 S.S.C. lens for the Canon EF. It is way better than my skills and only cost $50.

Most days I reckon I have 2 very nice fast 50s. Somedays I reckon maybe, just maybe, that the Summilux might make me forget the first two.

What say ye?
 
venchka said:
Noticing the 50mm Summilux Type 2 at KEH for less than a kidney, I am wondering the same thing. I currently own 51.9mm ;) DR Summicron and 50mm 1.4 Nikkor S.C lenses. Both are in better than excellent condition. I purchased the Nikkor in the 70s. I'm either the second or no worse than third owner and only recently started using the lens. Needless to say, the Nikkor is in better condition than any lens it's age has a right to be in. These are the only lenses I own that would fetch enough money to partlially offset the cost of the Summilux. Alas, I can't see myself parting with either one.

I suppose my question is this: Sell the Nikkor to buy a Summilux? I realize the Nikkor lens has it's quirks, but it is a nice lens. Very compact too for a 50/1.4.

Oh, and I have a Canon 50/1.4 S.S.C. lens for the Canon EF. It is way better than my skills and only cost $50.

Most days I reckon I have 2 very nice fast 50s. Somedays I reckon maybe, just maybe, that the Summilux might make me forget the first two.

What say ye?
Click to expand...

I had similar quarrels with myself. I solved them by buying a C-Sonnar instead and keeping the other lenses :) In contrast to you I have long given up on my 2007 new years resolutions ,...
 
It' HARD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It' HARD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

ferider said:
I had similar quarrels with myself. I solved them by buying a C-Sonnar instead and keeping the other lenses :) In contrast to you I have long given up on my 2007 new years resolutions ,...
Click to expand...

Thanks, Roland. I did buy some filters last week. I couldn't be TOTALLY GAS free for a whole year! :D :eek: :)
 
I hesitate to throw this out because I've never sat down and made side by side comparisons, but I do have both the DR and the last pre-ASPH 'lux, which is optically identical to the E43 (1961 or so forward) version (the mount and coatings changed over the years, but the optics are the same). I'd say that (1) after you get to f/2.8 or f/4 and (2) once you get a meter or two away from the subject, the pre-ASPH Summilux and the DR/Rigid Summicron are not really very different. In other words, if you are worried that you'll lose a look you like with the DR by getting the Summilux, I don't think the difference in most cases is all that great. YMMV....
 
JNewell said:
I hesitate to throw this out because I've never sat down and made side by side comparisons, but I do have both the DR and the last pre-ASPH 'lux, which is optically identical to the E43 (1961 or so forward) version (the mount and coatings changed over the years, but the optics are the same). I'd say that (1) after you get to f/2.8 or f/4 and (2) once you get a meter or two away from the subject, the pre-ASPH Summilux and the DR/Rigid Summicron are not really very different. In other words, if you are worried that you'll lose a look you like with the DR by getting the Summilux, I don't think the difference in most cases is all that great. YMMV....
Click to expand...

Thanks for your thoughts on that. Any difference in the ergonomics, or "feel" in how the two work in terms of focus and aperture ring feel and access, balance on the camera, etc.?
 
i had the summilux 50, a beautiful coating and was a gorgeous piece of glass, but it just wouldn't lock into my m6 mount. then when i was showing it off to one of our respected contributors here, he pointed out that it was after all a 40 year old design (not that that is bad) and said the 50 Nokton is a better lens, albeit larger. what is the price difference? long story short, i returned the 'lux and put that grand toward my then new m7. and i still have too many 50s, including the Nokton.
 
50mm Summilux, Version 2, at f/2 or f/2.8:

attachment.php



...and at f/8 or thereabouts:

attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • 014.jpg
    014.jpg
    85.9 KB · Views: 0
  • 024.jpg
    024.jpg
    71.3 KB · Views: 0
I have a version 2 Summilux and a rigid Summicrom. Not too much difference as someone pointed out with the DR but the extra stop and the better ergonomics of the Summilux gives me a preference for that lens over the rigid.
 
Thanks for your thoughts on that. Any difference in the ergonomics, or "feel" in how the two work in terms of focus and aperture ring feel and access, balance on the camera, etc.?
Click to expand...

OK, this is all IMHO, YMMV, etc.

Ergonomics - focus ring issue. I love my DR but IMO the focusing ring section is too small for best use. Both the E43 and E46 Luxes (as well as most other Summicrons) are better IMO. I'd even say that my ancient collapsible Summicron is better than the DR in this respect.

No preference on the aperture ring on the DR vs the Summilux.

The E46 Summilux has a very steep focusing helix, 90 degrees from 0.7m to infinity, IIRC. The E43 and the DR are probably more like 180 degrees. I was nervous about the short throw on the E46 I eventually bought but have come to like it. However, I really think it's mostly what you get used to and I don't even find going back and forth between long and short throw confusing...the human animal is pretty adaptable...but I am not trying to photograph sports or infants...

Balance...though I love the craftsmanship and feel of the all-brass chrome mounts, they are *heavy.* I briefly owned a black paint (all-chrome) E46 Summilux and hated how it balanced on the camera, and though I wouldn't say I hate how the DR balances I would say that I prefer the way the later Summicrons and the black Summiluxes balance. This, again, is totally personal preference and you may easily disagree; I know several here who will and that's great - you do have the choice! :)
 
I agree w/peter_n on the ergonomics. I used to have a DR (sold to Mitch Alland), & currently have a Rigid from the same era, & prefer the more modern Leitz/Leica lenses.

I guess it depends on whether you like or mind the focus tab & infinity lock on the DR/Rigid. While I'm not exactly bothered by the old focus tab & infinity lock on the DR/Rigid, I don't find them to be very useful either (I do like the bigger focus tabs on the newer Leitz/Leica wides, however) & prefer using the barrel. FWIW, I've found the aperture rings on the Leitz/Leica lenses from the 1950s-80s to be more secure than those on the newest lenses, which tend to be a little loose for my taste, but don't know whether there's a significant difference between your DR &, say, a '60s or '70s 'lux.

As far as weight/camera balance, I like the weight of the classic lenses & the chrome versions of the modern lenses when shooting @ slow speeds, but like lighter black versions if I'm carrying the equipment for long periods of time.

rich815 said:
Thanks for your thoughts on that. Any difference in the ergonomics, or "feel" in how the two work in terms of focus and aperture ring feel and access, balance on the camera, etc.?
Click to expand...
 
I have a late model Summilux 50mm from circa 1999. I've used in the rainforest, other low light conditions as well as to get some reach beyond celebrity bodyguards. I like it alot for portraits. After I saw what it did for portraits I was sold on it. Its now one of my two street lens, the other is a 35mm Cron IV.

On travels I aslo include my 21mmVC because i like to get some grand landscapes on occasion.

Selling other lenses? Only you can know your economic condition and what it can tolerate. In my case, generally I only retain what I use.
 
Last edited:
tajart said:
he pointed out that it was after all a 40 year old design and said the 50 Nokton is a better lens, albeit larger. QUOTE]

Not nessarily true. "Better" in terms of what? Certainly not better construction.
While the 50 Nokton did some good work for me and I like it, I found I preferred Summilux egronomics and rendition quality.
Click to expand...
 
Rich,

First of all, I'm glad you decided to keep the MP.

I would go with the Summilux. The extra stop is very handy to have, both in terms of speed and dof control. In your hands, I'm sure you would put it to good use.
 
Okay. After careful consideration...

1) Buy, or plan to buy, a Summilux.

2) Liquidate the Summaritars immediately to partially fund the Summilux.

3) Keep the dual-range Summicron so you can make your own comparisons before casting it off.

Funds permitting, of course, but based on your initial post, that's what I'd recommend.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom