Summicron 50mm Rigid - what should I expect?

P

Paddy C

Unused film collector
Local time
1:48 PM
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
848
I was looking for a 50mm to use on my Zeiss Ikon, and, for some reason, became enamored with this lens. Perhaps it's the age of it, the build, the aperture blades...a voice in the back of my head tells me I should have bought the C Sonnar. But I've bought one from the 'bay. Looks to be in very good condition and the seller appears to be honest (100% rep and over 1500 transactions).

At any rate...what should I expect from this lens? How does it perform wide-open and stopped down? I'm going to be using it for (hopefully) "keepers" right away and won't have time to test it. Mostly portrait-type shots I expect and always black and white.
 
Take a look at what Roland and I put together for the 50mm lenses comparisons. The rigid Summicron did very well indeed in the comparison with some of the finest 50mm around and from the past. It is a classsic lens and it is a lens to enjoy and admire.
 
If it is as they say, similar to the DR, it will be very nice. Wait til you hold it! Aside from it's mass, the lens is sharp wide open, as sharp as any other 50 stopped down, and has pleasant bokeh, imo. I think you're going to enjoy it. Let us know when it arrives and share your pics from it.
 
Rumours are the DR and rigid have the highest center resolution of any Leica 50 ....

Personally, I think it's the Leica Bokeh king (well, maybe next to the 75 Lux).

Cheers,

Roland.
 
Summicron Rigid - good choice

Summicron Rigid - good choice

I try to avoid the two extremes (f/2 and f/16), but around the middle (f/4, f/5.6, f/8) the Rigid Summicron is probably as good as it gets. I've found it to be a 'polite' lens, in that it doesn't impose any particular signature on your images. So, the subject is important in itself. (Unlike, say a Summar, which does add a certain character to what otherwise might be boring images.)

My Summicron Rigid has been attacked by bugs in India (neccessitating the replacement of the back four elements) and whacked between a chair and a door in Ireland (necessitating an internal re-build). I could probably have bought the lastest Summicron for the cost of the lens and its repairs, but I wouldn't be without it.

I hope you enjoy using it.

Best - Seán.
 
RFluhver said:
..... The problem is according to this site, http://www.antiquecameras.net/50summicronmlenses.html, this version is not well-regarded.
Click to expand...

Actually, what I wrote about this lens is:

"Many refer to this model as the Summicron Third version ( or sometimes as Rigid II ). Change to a six element design in 5 groups. The design emphasis on this lens was for higher contrast with slightly less resolution. This was the opposite of the previous versions. Vignetting 1.8 stops. This lens is the least popular of all the versions, but for probably no good reason. Since the later version provides performance improvements, and the previous versions feature medium contrast and high resolution ( ideal for B&W shooters ), this version is the "odd man out" of Summicrons. Close focus to .7 meter. Serial #'s 2,269,251-2,915,800. E39 Filter."

thanks
Dan
 
erik's photo suggests the rigid's typical moderate contrast, in my experience. nice grays, nice gradations, full blacks, contained highlights. what it can't show is its bokeh and portrait ability, of course. i agree with what roland said. the only 50s that best its bokeh that i've used are not really comparable, the non-leica sonnars: the canon and zeiss 50/1.5s.

it is simply a great all-around lens. i miss mine ...
 
Not the best photo, but check out the bokeh:

555308816_sX45G-XL.jpg
 
S M O O O O T H

My lens feels really like a Leica lens in all aspects. It embodies what I personally view as a Leica first class lens.

Yes, there are other excellent 50mm lenses out there, and I have a few 50mm lenses that suit my photography quite well.

The old 5cm 1.5 Zeiss Jena Sonnar is a great lens after all these years. The Canon 50/1.5 and 501/.4 are excellent lenses. The Heliar 50/2 and 50/3.5 are rather special lenses too.

It is great that there are so many excellent 50mm lenses available.
 
Sean Moran described it as well as I can.

Only the very middle is sharp at 2.0. This circle of sharp definition expands with each design generation. The DR is the same lens with only the exact focal length being the ones that came out 52.00 mm so they matched the DR mount. The others were fitted to different mounts depending on exact focal length, 50 to 52 mm. The optics were not made with the precision available today so they differing mounts. All the lenses of the era were the same special fitting. The last 4 digits of the serial are inscribed on the black baffle inside the lens mount so it they do not match you have something cobbled together which probably will not work. The lens unit unscrews to reveal the baffle. It is designed for user removal for use on different accesories.
 
I have the DR version. It is my oldest lens (1963) but also the best by a considerable margin. It is stunningly sharp. Leica M2, Ilford FP4+ (from a tripod), Kodak HC-110.

3206152004_5a933aea05_o.jpg
 
So the lens finally arrived today. Upon initial inspection it looked as promised, but the flashlight test revealed what looks to me to be haze on the element behind the aperture blades.

I have no experience with this so, although I'm pretty confident it is haze, I have no idea if it is a little or a lot, relatively speaking. It does not appear to be fungus. Just looks cloudy/unclear with the light shining through.

I could return it as there is a 7 day return policy.

But I'm wondering if I should keep and see how it works, possibly sending it off for a cleaning at some point. From what I've seen, clean examples of this lens don't seem to come up often. On the other hand it may bother me that I paid a good price and that it wasn't properly described.
 
if the price reflects what you got, then i'd have it CLA'd. if you were made to believe that the lens had no haze, then i'd negotiate a price reduction or send it back.
 
MCTuomey said:
if the price reflects what you got, then i'd have it CLA'd. if you were made to believe that the lens had no haze, then i'd negotiate a price reduction or send it back.
Click to expand...

I paid $514, which I thought a good price for a clean specimen (the seller did describe some flaws which I was fine with, but mentioned specifically that there was no haze, fog or fungus).

Because I've seen very few that are really clean I'm having a hard time figuring out a fair price. A mint one sold in the high $800s at about the same time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom