david3558
leicaboss
Hi everyone,
I currently own the version 3 Summicron 50/2, the model produced in 1970. The lens was CLA'd by Youxin recently and works perfectly but I was wondering what people's thoughts were in regards to the Summicron 50/2 and the more modern Zeiss Sonnar 50/1.5. I've heard mixed reviews and I was hoping to get a more definitive answer here.
I really want a versatile lens and I honestly don't have much cash to spend on a bunch of lenses so I'd probably only want one per focal length. I wouldn't mind owning non-Leica lenses as long as they are optically superb!
Best,
David
I currently own the version 3 Summicron 50/2, the model produced in 1970. The lens was CLA'd by Youxin recently and works perfectly but I was wondering what people's thoughts were in regards to the Summicron 50/2 and the more modern Zeiss Sonnar 50/1.5. I've heard mixed reviews and I was hoping to get a more definitive answer here.
I really want a versatile lens and I honestly don't have much cash to spend on a bunch of lenses so I'd probably only want one per focal length. I wouldn't mind owning non-Leica lenses as long as they are optically superb!
Best,
David
Steinberg2010
Well-known
If you already own it it's probably best to keep it, you'll only regret selling it, and then pay more when you buy it back...
~S
~S
david3558
leicaboss
S,
Thanks for the reply - the reason I ask is because I haven't tried the Sonnar and the more I read about the Summicron V3, the more I am wondering if it is even a good version. My particular copy is great - the condition is good and Youxin Ye said it was optically perfect.
Just wondering the characteristics of the lens.
David
Thanks for the reply - the reason I ask is because I haven't tried the Sonnar and the more I read about the Summicron V3, the more I am wondering if it is even a good version. My particular copy is great - the condition is good and Youxin Ye said it was optically perfect.
Just wondering the characteristics of the lens.
David
Matus
Well-known
Based on what I have read the C Sonnar is a bit of special lens as it changes character from wide open towards stopped down. On top of that there is some focus shift some have no problem with and some will just hate it. If I were to get a 50mm lens with some portrait intentions the Sonnar would around the top of my list.
EDIT: hang on - did Leica ever produced a "bad" summicron? The question is - do you like what the lens delivers to you? If not - what it is that you would like to be better or different?
EDIT: hang on - did Leica ever produced a "bad" summicron? The question is - do you like what the lens delivers to you? If not - what it is that you would like to be better or different?
Steve Bellayr
Veteran
I have both. Nothing wrong at all with the Summicron. There is a difference. The Zeiss has a softer rendition more like the 1950's but that is only because...and here I a guessing...it was introduced during that period. The Nikon 50mm f1.4 is a Sonnar lens and is very similiar to the Zeiss. The focus shift is at wide open and minimum focal distance. It you are taking a photo of someone at 10 feet away...full body...which I do at f1.5...it does not matter if the point of perfect focus is the eyes or nose. I use mine under low light, indoors, black and white, where it is hard to focus accurately anyway.
Shade
Well-known
I agree that I dont think there is a bad version of a leica lens, but there might be characteristics that you may dislike. The sonnar is a great lens and especially good for portraiture and pop up colours. The cron renders the images differently. Neither are better, they are different. The only better thing about the sonnar is its faster speed.
david3558
leicaboss
What about the Summicron V3 compared to the others?
David
David
The Meaness
Well-known
The question with the C Sonnar is what do you want it for? If you're looking for a consistent look through the whole range of apertures, avoid it! I love it because 1.5-2 is very pleasing for portrait, but still has a modern look:
M8 + 50/1.5 @ f2 (also with some veiling flare from my filter):
Stopped down it gets more modern
M8 + 50/1.5 @ f8 or f11:
I don't know why you're interested in the sonnar, make sure you consider that there is the difference in "character" between f1.5-f2 and f2.8 on. Also there is the focus shift issue you have probably already read about to consider.
For me, using the lens on the M8 reduces the effect of the focus shift normally, as using the lens with the cropped sensor (becomes 67mm fov) makes me stand back a little more. This flattens the field and gives me a little more room focus-wise. YMMV.
M8 + 50/1.5 @ f2 (also with some veiling flare from my filter):
Stopped down it gets more modern
M8 + 50/1.5 @ f8 or f11:
I don't know why you're interested in the sonnar, make sure you consider that there is the difference in "character" between f1.5-f2 and f2.8 on. Also there is the focus shift issue you have probably already read about to consider.
For me, using the lens on the M8 reduces the effect of the focus shift normally, as using the lens with the cropped sensor (becomes 67mm fov) makes me stand back a little more. This flattens the field and gives me a little more room focus-wise. YMMV.
david3558
leicaboss
I think the main reason is because the Sonnar is small but offers a fast aperture, perhaps I can consider Voigtlanders?
david3558
leicaboss
I think the main reason is because the Sonnar is small but offers a fast aperture, perhaps I can consider Voigtlanders?
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
The Voigtlander 50/1.5 Nokton is a very good lens. Sharp at all apertures, no focus shift, and it is uniformly sharp across the whole frame. If you really need the f1.5 aperture, I'd get it. If you don't, save your money and stick with the Summicron.
The Sonnar is a unique lens, but not a good general purpose choice. I have one and I almost never use it. Once I got to know its signature, I decided that I didn't like it for most of my work. The focus point shifts as you change aperture, so at some f-stops, the image will be out of focus even if it shows in focus in the rangefinder.
Some of them are calibrated for accurate focus at f1.5. They give out of focus images at other apertures, though stopped down several stops, the depth of field will cover the error.
Some of them, like mine, are calibrated for f2.8. These give out of focus images at f1.5 and f2, but perfect focus at all other apertures. I find this much more useful, but the lens is effectively an f2.8 lens, not a 1.5. A lot of guys here will tell you they've worked out systems for focusing then leaning in or out to make sharp images at the apertures that their lens is not calibrated for. I despise guesswork, I need gear that "Just Works" so I don't bother with such kludges.
Used at the apertures your Sonnar is calibrated for, it is a sharp lens and has nice bokeh. However...it does NOT give uniform sharpness across the whole frame. For portraits that's fine, but I do a lot of architectural photos. If I photograph the front of a building, the center is sharp, then it gets progressively soft as you move toward the edges, and that is very ugly for that kind of subject. Even stopped down to f5.6 or f8, it does this. That is why I basically quit using mine. I use my Summicron instead for 99% of my work. If you photograph buildings or landscapes, you'll hate the Sonnar. If you do portraits and are willing to shoot only at the apertures it is sharp at, you'll love it.
If you want a general purpose 50mm lens, stick to the Summicron unless you REALLY need the 2/3 stop that f1.5 gives you, then get the 50mm f1.5 Nokton (not the f1.1 Nokton, it has focus shift issues like the Sonnar and has ugly bokeh).
The Sonnar is a unique lens, but not a good general purpose choice. I have one and I almost never use it. Once I got to know its signature, I decided that I didn't like it for most of my work. The focus point shifts as you change aperture, so at some f-stops, the image will be out of focus even if it shows in focus in the rangefinder.
Some of them are calibrated for accurate focus at f1.5. They give out of focus images at other apertures, though stopped down several stops, the depth of field will cover the error.
Some of them, like mine, are calibrated for f2.8. These give out of focus images at f1.5 and f2, but perfect focus at all other apertures. I find this much more useful, but the lens is effectively an f2.8 lens, not a 1.5. A lot of guys here will tell you they've worked out systems for focusing then leaning in or out to make sharp images at the apertures that their lens is not calibrated for. I despise guesswork, I need gear that "Just Works" so I don't bother with such kludges.
Used at the apertures your Sonnar is calibrated for, it is a sharp lens and has nice bokeh. However...it does NOT give uniform sharpness across the whole frame. For portraits that's fine, but I do a lot of architectural photos. If I photograph the front of a building, the center is sharp, then it gets progressively soft as you move toward the edges, and that is very ugly for that kind of subject. Even stopped down to f5.6 or f8, it does this. That is why I basically quit using mine. I use my Summicron instead for 99% of my work. If you photograph buildings or landscapes, you'll hate the Sonnar. If you do portraits and are willing to shoot only at the apertures it is sharp at, you'll love it.
If you want a general purpose 50mm lens, stick to the Summicron unless you REALLY need the 2/3 stop that f1.5 gives you, then get the 50mm f1.5 Nokton (not the f1.1 Nokton, it has focus shift issues like the Sonnar and has ugly bokeh).