Strangeluv
Christer Johansen
I can get this for a decent price, but to be honest, I know absolutely nothing about this lens.
Is there anything I should know before I purchase? Pros and cons?
Please share your thoughts, and pictures if you like.
I will be using it on an M8.
Thank you.
Is there anything I should know before I purchase? Pros and cons?
Please share your thoughts, and pictures if you like.
I will be using it on an M8.
Thank you.
Richard G
Veteran
Beautiful lens but one practicality is the smoothness of focussing. I found mine was noticeably stiffer to focus in vertical orientation. Very annoying. I would need to send it for service. Mine was stolen and now I have the ZM Sonnar I've gotten over that. If I was getting a 1962 Summilux again I would want to try the lens rather than buy it unseen online. I did very much like the proper all metal hood, that came off, reversed and went on again with one rapid pinch and swivel.
helen.HH
To Light & Love ...
One of my All Time FAVORITES
I have a 'Set' on Flickr that You can Peek at
to get a Visual Feel of it....
Cheers- H
I have a 'Set' on Flickr that You can Peek at
to get a Visual Feel of it....
Cheers- H
Ronald M
Veteran
Soft to 5.6 or 8 and has lots more distortion than any Leica 50 ever made. It has little coma as a strong point making it ideal for night shooting with light sources in the frame.
The 1959 `Lux was sharper in the center and had less distortion. The 'improved" model
in 1961 has more even sharpness across the frame but never achieves the center sharpness of the original at wide stops.
Many swear by this lens, but my comments are from personel experience and confirmed by Gunter Osterlough book on Leica. I never bought one because I could not find one I like. The new 1.4 is an absolute gem and miles better than this.
The 1959 `Lux was sharper in the center and had less distortion. The 'improved" model
in 1961 has more even sharpness across the frame but never achieves the center sharpness of the original at wide stops.
Many swear by this lens, but my comments are from personel experience and confirmed by Gunter Osterlough book on Leica. I never bought one because I could not find one I like. The new 1.4 is an absolute gem and miles better than this.
RichC
Well-known
I completely disagree, and so does the Leica lens expert Erwin Puts!
The pre-asph 50mm is an excellent lens, albeit the current asph 50mm has more contrast and resolution. However, in no way can the pre-asph be called “soft”! Also, the pre-asph 50mm has the advantage of being extremely flare-resistant.
It’s my favourite lens - I wish all my lenses were this good! Never selling it, and most certainly not replacing it with an asph version!
Erwin Puts says of the pre-asph 50mm that it “performs as a Summicron (III) lens opened up one stop”. As for distortion: “absolutely zero”. Generally, he describes the centre performance as noticeably better than that at the edge.
This is what Erwin Puts wrote when he compared the pre-asph lens with the asph:
“If you are familiar with Dutch painting, one could say that the older Summilux paints like Rembrandt, whereas the new one paints like Vermeer. This is an especially apt comparison, as both painters lived in the same period. Rembrandt is famous for his atmospheric and emotionally charged paintings. Vermeer, on the other hand, has been called the first optical painter, as he painstakingly captured the finest possible detail with his brushes and used special techniques to bring specular highlights to life.
On a more quantitative level ... the new design is almost four stops ahead of the previous version [at f/1.4]. This is an incredible result, given the fact that the older Summilux got very high praise in the past for its performance.
Comparing photographs from the two lenses, the difference in resolution and contrast extends, not surprisingly, to out-of-focus areas. This can lead to the bokeh in some photographs taken with the aspherical Summilux appearing harsh and over-dominant.”
Dick Gilcreast wrote in 1998:On a more quantitative level ... the new design is almost four stops ahead of the previous version [at f/1.4]. This is an incredible result, given the fact that the older Summilux got very high praise in the past for its performance.
Comparing photographs from the two lenses, the difference in resolution and contrast extends, not surprisingly, to out-of-focus areas. This can lead to the bokeh in some photographs taken with the aspherical Summilux appearing harsh and over-dominant.”
“[T]he 50mm f/1.4 pre-aspherical Summilux is still perhaps the best compromise between high speed and portable size – and definitely, if price enters the equation. Excepting the aspherical Summilux, only the full-stop-faster f/1 Noctilux has slightly better edge performance at f/1.4, but at the expense of considerably greater size and weight. Any one of these lenses from 1968 to the present makes an excellent all-purpose 50 mm lens for amateur or professional.”
In short, the asph 50mm is razor sharp, probably one of the sharpest lenses you can buy, but there’s more to lens than ultimate sharpness. It may be technically better than the pre-asph 50mm, but the pre-asph is no slouch.Having compared photographs from the two lenses on my Leica M8, I prefer the pre-asph: in practice, the extra performance of the newer lens had little impact and was often indiscernible except below f/2. But what was obvious was the very high contrast and harshness of the asph lens - its images seemed sterile and lacking in emotional impact compared with pre-asph images.
ampguy
Veteran
I'd have to agree with RichC, in many cases it's too sharp for portraits of older folks, at least in my case with very old parents. I can show photos, but let me know what types you like, I have thousands from this lens.
Damaso
Photojournalist
A great lens. It has a long throw, which some people like for critical focusing. It also only focuses down to 1 meter. If you can get a good deal, snap it up, you can always sell it for as much if not more than you paid for it...
swoop
Well-known
I own one and currently have it for sale in the classifieds. I just switched from the 'lux to a 50mm 'cron v5. It's not a bad lens and comparing the two the 'lux has a smoother bokeh and lower contrast.
The only negatives for me are the long focus throw which made focusing slow, and the 1m minimum focus distance. Which isn't horrible but when it gets in the way it's very annoying.
What I prefer about the 50mm 'cron is the short focus throw, the lighter weight and smaller package and the shorter minimum focus distance.
Why I switched is because at the end of the day I often end up at f2 or 2.8 because I'm often close to my subjects anyway and rarely use f1.4 because the DOF is too narrow.
The only negatives for me are the long focus throw which made focusing slow, and the 1m minimum focus distance. Which isn't horrible but when it gets in the way it's very annoying.
What I prefer about the 50mm 'cron is the short focus throw, the lighter weight and smaller package and the shorter minimum focus distance.
Why I switched is because at the end of the day I often end up at f2 or 2.8 because I'm often close to my subjects anyway and rarely use f1.4 because the DOF is too narrow.
Strangeluv
Christer Johansen
Thank you all for your thoughts and feedback. You sure didnt make it any easier tho 
Looks like most of you really like this lens, and looking at the shots, I understand why.
The only really downside is the the 1m minimum focus distance. And for me, that could be a dealbreaker tbh. I already got the Canon 50mm 1.2 and the 1m focus distance is one of the reasons why I want to replace it........
Need to think about this.
Btw, wonderful shots Helen. Really enjoyed you set on flickr.
Looks like most of you really like this lens, and looking at the shots, I understand why.
The only really downside is the the 1m minimum focus distance. And for me, that could be a dealbreaker tbh. I already got the Canon 50mm 1.2 and the 1m focus distance is one of the reasons why I want to replace it........
Need to think about this.
Btw, wonderful shots Helen. Really enjoyed you set on flickr.
Last edited:
Cron
Well-known
you own a Canon RF 1,2/50 - if size matters, go for the Summilux pre-asph;
if not, the Canon is a very nice lens as you know
if not, the Canon is a very nice lens as you know
Strangeluv
Christer Johansen
Size isnt that much of an issue. And tbh, estethically I think the Canon looks pretty darn good on the M
Cron
Well-known
oh yes ... it really does!
hteasley
Pupil
I use one on my M8 and I love it. I have a lot of shots in my gallery here with mine.
cam
the need for speed
Thank you all for your thoughts and feedback. You sure didnt make it any easier tho
Looks like most of you really like this lens, and looking at the shots, I understand why.
The only really downside is the the 1m minimum focus distance. And for me, that could be a dealbreaker tbh. I already got the Canon 50mm 1.2 and the 1m focus distance is one of the reasons why I want to replace it........
Need to think about this.
i have the v.!! and love it madly! it was my first "real" lens and i will never sell it.
however, the 1m distance annoys me as well...
the last pre-asph version of the 50 Lux does away with this limitation and will focus down to .7m. the bokeh, etc. is not quite as sweet, but it's a very good compromise if you need the close distance yet prefer the look of the pre-asph.
edited to add: my avatar was taken the first night with my Lux
Damaso
Photojournalist
Get the v3 if the 1 meter distance is a problem. The downside is that lens is more expensive and harder to find...
helen.HH
To Light & Love ...
Lovely of YOU to say...Thank YOU Dr. STRANGELUV
oh and speaking of Avatars ...Mine was shot w/ the 50 Lux as well
Cheers- H
Last edited:
cam
the need for speed
helen.HH
To Light & Love ...
Thanks Cam...We THINK Alike !
I just got in the mail Today an Old Nikkor
Tokyo version / 50 1.4 / screwmount
with close Focusing
Can't wait to see how it draws & what Differences
between it and the Lux
I just got in the mail Today an Old Nikkor
Tokyo version / 50 1.4 / screwmount
with close Focusing
Can't wait to see how it draws & what Differences
between it and the Lux
Last edited:
nobbylon
Veteran
The first one I had wasn't great wide open. I think it had been cleaned and serviced and it had altered something along the way. By f2.8 it was magical but wider than that a bit hit and miss. Maybe it was my focusing and the shallow dof? The one I have now is an amazing lens. It's never been opened up, always had a filter on from new and is sharp even wide open. I like Summicrons but the 50 lux II is just one of those lenses that really stand out. The 1 meter focus is really not a big issue on a 50.
If I could only have 1 50 it would have to be the lux.
If I could only have 1 50 it would have to be the lux.
Last edited:
nobbylon
Veteran
I just checked my records and I sold that '89 lens on here for exactly what I paid for it, in the box with papers and hood for £450!!! approx 2 years ago. Try finding one for that now!