Upgrading from 50 hex to 50 cron ???

[EtoileFinder]

I'm a cheap b****** who want the best for is money when buying gear, that's why I bought an 50mm Hex as my first and only 50mm lens. Like a lot of persons, I love this lens. But lately, the idea of getting a 50 cron is haunting me . The Hex is sometimes compared with the 50 cron 4th versions some persons said, but I never try the 50 cron, so I'm a little bit skeptical. Comparing pictures tacked by both lens, I think that the cron have a little bit more contrast and I love contrast.

I just want to know if some of you had regrets by selling there 50 Hex or had experienced this same non existential and superficial question as me and how do you resolve it. I don't want to collect lens, I just want to find to right lens for me. Finally, is the 50 Hex performs so close to the 50 cron that it will be a waste of time for me to get a 50 cron.

 

[sepiareverb]

You're right about the little bit more contrast from the Summicron. As well, in big enlargements (16x20") the Summicron shows some finer detail, but only slightly more. I shot these two lenses side by side for a time and decided to keep the Summicron (and in fact I got a second).

 

[M. Valdemar]

It's more of a sidegrade or a non-grade.

If anyone can see the difference in actual images produced by either lens in a blind test, I'll write them a check for a million dollars right now. Heck, I'll even pay it in real money, like Euros or Kreugerands.

You will realize no practical difference, in fact, the Konica may be better.

I suspect it's having something with the Leica name on it that's pulling your chain.

 

[Freakscene]

> You will realize no practical difference

I sold my third version IV Summicron and bought a Hexanon because the Summicrons flared a lot in situations where there was angled light outside the picture area (and yes, I used a hood - in fact I tried all sorts of hoods as "fixes"). In this regard pictures are different and you are likely to notice it.

The reason I went through a series of Summicrons was that I kept thinking it was the individual lens that flared; after 3 I am fairly sure that it is the design and that they all do it. I'm still not sure if it's flare or an internal reflection. I suspect internal reflection seeing as hoods didn't help much. There is this solution:
http://photo.net/leica-rangefinders-forum/0073Im
but I have problem with needing to apply a cardboard 'fix' to a lens that costs over a grand new.

If you want more contrast, use Photoshop or a 0.5 grade harder B&W filter.

Or buy a Zeiss ZM 50 Planar. They don't seem to flare either.

Marty

 

[awilder]

I agree with the flare issue. Resolution and contrast tests I've done with both lenses indicate the current 'cron version to be only slightly better but secondary reflections and flare can be an issue in adverse lighting especially wide open. The multicoating and fewer plano surfaces of the Hexanon or Planar help somewhat. If flare is a really big concern, consider the Zm C-Sonnar as it's design minimizes flare.

 

[lewis44]

I've had two 50 Hex's and all of the Summicron versions. I ended up with the tabbed Canada 50 Summicron and a Zeiss 50 C-Sonnar.
Each fits what I want and have there own specific benifits.

I don't think there is much difference between the Summicron and the Hexanon with the exception of the Summicron, last version. It does have more contrast than it's older brothers, but not much difference from the Hex.
I happen to think that the Hex is every bit the lens as the Summicrons, including build quality and it seems to flare less.

I don't think you will acomplish much switching, except satisfying your curiosity, which may be necessary. It was in my case and I would be satisfied with either

 

[EtoileFinder]

I suspect it's having something with the Leica name on it that's pulling your chain.

Yeah.., Vlademar you may have spotted the cause of my conundrum (is it the right word to use ?). It is the reputation of the 50 cron that intrigue me, and I say to myself maybe I'm missing something here.

 

[Krosya]

I used a Rigid Cron, current cron, Planar - sold them all and kept Hex. FOr me Hex is the best - Best image quality/signature, best build, best handling. So, if you feel like spending some money - just send it to me and keep Hex. 😉
Now, if you want to try something different - save some money and try Summilux or Nocti. But for the 50/2, - you really cant go better than Hex as an overall/everyday lens. For some unusual look/signature and same speed 50mm you could try Summitar or/and CV Heliar Classic. Or even Elmar (which will be 2.8).
But whatever you do, I'd advise to keep Hex.

 

[BigSteveG]

keep the Hex. Save more and get a proper 50mm Summilux lens. It's more practical solution.

 

[sepiareverb]

Yeah.., Vlademar you may have spotted the cause of my conundrum (is it the right word to use ?). It is the reputation of the 50 cron that intrigue me, and I say to myself maybe I'm missing something here.

I'll take it back then, you won't see the difference. You don't really even need the Hexanon, go for a Jupiter, you could even get another stop!:bang:

 

[aizan]

i'd go for a planar to replace my m-hexanon. i'd never get a summicron because of the bokeh and flare issues.

 

[ferider]

Easy to rationalize your GAS:

Keep the Hex (outstanding lens), get a late Summilux pre-asph. It can do stuff the Hex cann't and vice versa.

Cheers,

Roland.

 

[jja]

I've gone down this road, more than once! My first RF lens was a Hex. I sold it b/c I was curious about the 'cron, and regretted selling the Hex b/c I was not gaining much, except occasional flare. Along the way, I've owned many 50mm lenses, including another 'cron (latest), and have returned to Hex because it delivers images on par with the Summicron.

Yes, there are differences between the lenses. I've tried them together with the same camera, film, and subject, and awilder is right on--Summicron will deliver slightly more contrast, but "more" does not necessarily mean "better." I will also defer to Alan's other conclusions on the 'cron, because he has done extensive testing, but to me the differences between these lenses are not significant enough to warrant trading the Hex for a 'cron.

If I were looking for a different 50mm Leica, I would do what Roland has suggested, try out the last pre-asph. Summilux. That is a sweet lens, my current favorite.

 

[kevin m]

But lately, the idea of getting a 50 cron is haunting me .

Then it's an exorcism you need. 😀

The Summicron's well-documented problem with flare is a deal-breaker, particularly considering it sells for a premium relative to the Hexanon. You may or may not EVER see a difference in resolution, contrast, etc., between the two lenses (and such pixel peeping is usually a waste of time, anyway) but you WILL see the flare when it pops in and the most inopportune and unpredictable time and ruins a shot.

 

[awilder]

The flare issue with the latest 'cron only rears it's ugly head if the point source of the offending light is very bright and located within the frame or even just outside the frame. OTOH, if the overal lighting is very bright but no point source of very bright light exists, the current 'cron does just fine. To demonstrate, please review my sample images in this post about two thirds down shown here: http://photo.net/leica-rangefinders-forum/00DV0F .The glass for both lenses was clean and free off any haze. lnterstingly the current tabbed 'cron was clearly just a little better mainly because it was free from any veiling flare compared to the older 'cron. This gave better color saturation and shadows stayed nice and dark without veiling flare filling them in. Some find the characterisic technically better while others like the diffuse trace veiling flare to make B&W printing easier or to give that older classic look to the image. For comparison, here's a link of my test shots where the sun just outside of the frame creates those nasty secondary images on the modern tabbed 'cron: http://photo.net/leica-rangefinders-forum/00DoRO

 

[jja]

Click the link below for a sample of three different 50mm lenses, each shot at F2 (viewing as slide show may be most useful). The lenses are M-Hexanon, Summicron current, and Summilux pre-asph. All shot on the same film, same time of day (more or less), under similar lighting conditions.

The most difficult part of this test is in the scanning and post-processing. I tried to be minimalist in my post-processing, to conserve the character of each lens. As time permits, I will add sample photos at other F-stops, and perhaps add one more lens.

Click here:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/10229578@N00/sets/72157606175749801/

 

[infrequent]

judging by the photos in the above link, the 50/2 Hexanon will be even more irresistible to many!

 

[awilder]

Nice images. The Summicron appears sharpest followed by the Summilux and the Hexanon comes last. These results aren't surprising and follow my own tests that I've done in the past.

 

[infrequent]

@awilder - judging by those images and because they are on the web all one can really confirm is that there is very little difference between all three lenses. but perhaps you know different.

 

[Krosya]

Nice images. The Summicron appears sharpest followed by the Summilux and the Hexanon comes last. These results aren't surprising and follow my own tests that I've done in the past.

Are you serious? If anything - they are the same. The way I see it - the only difference is in slight contrast and bokeh variations. As far as I can see from the web images - Neither one is less sharp than the other. When I tested Hexanon againsat 2 Summicrons (rigid and current) and Planar ZM - Summicrons were behind. So, all this means - there are slight sample variations as well as possible focus errors/camera calibration variations to say for sure. So, what I did (and this is what I recommend for other to do) when selecting one of these - go with the one that you prefer signature/contrast/bokeh better and ergonomics. Lens that feels comfortable is the lens that is used more often.