bertterp
Leica M8 & Fuji X-Pro1
Dear Forum members I have a problem to choose I want to spent about €1100,00 ($1650,00) for a 50 mm lens for my M8 the problem for me is that I can buy a brand new Zeiss Sonnar 50mm/f1.5 or a 15 year old Leica Summilux 50mm/f1.4 both the same price , but which one is really better? Or the better question is which one do you prefer and why?
Bert
Bert
---f
-
buy the Leica. If you don't you'll always wish you had.
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
Tough choice. The Zeiss Sonnar's closest focusing distance is 0.9m, and the Summilux...well, if it's the E43 version, has a closest focusing distance of 1m, and the E46 version 0.7m
Since I personally prefer to have that ability to focus closer, I would choose (and have) the Summilux E46. If I had the money, of course, I would also get the Sonnar.
Since I personally prefer to have that ability to focus closer, I would choose (and have) the Summilux E46. If I had the money, of course, I would also get the Sonnar.
sc_rufctr
Leica nuts
The Sonnar is a beautiful lens but if you buy it new it will loose value.
Leica M lenses are only going one way.
You have to think TCOO. (Total cost of ownership) Well I do anyway.
Leica M lenses are only going one way.
You have to think TCOO. (Total cost of ownership) Well I do anyway.
Phil_F_NM
Camera hacker
I bought a Canon 50mm f/1.4 and I'm saving up for the Summilux. Then sold the Canon 1.4 to try out the 1.2 which I love, but still saving up for that Summilux.
That's how I see the Zeiss lens. As a stopgap measure between now and the Summilux.
Phil
That's how I see the Zeiss lens. As a stopgap measure between now and the Summilux.
Phil
user237428934
User deletion pending
The Sonnar is a beautiful lens but if you buy it new it will loose value.
Leica M lenses are only going one way.
Both values go down but at different rates. Do you want to tell us that you can get more for a used Leica lens then for a new Leica lens?
huntjump
Well-known
Btw, whats the condition of the 15 year old Leica?
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
The Leica is a better general purpose lens. The Sonnar has a unique look, but the focus shift (which is very real, I have this lens) makes it a specialized lens not suited to all around use. I never use mine at f1.5 because my copy is set for accurate focus at f2.8 and below. I'd like to get a Summilux for low-light work but damn they're expensive!
The CV 50mm f1.5 Nokton is very good, I had one I sold and much regret doing so.
The CV 50mm f1.5 Nokton is very good, I had one I sold and much regret doing so.
thegman
Veteran
I'd probably go with the Leica. They'll both lose value, but the Leica a little less so I think. You could get a used Sonnar, and save a fair bit of money though. Can't comment on the imaging characteristics of either lens, but I'm sure they are both great, better than any of us here are photographers.
user237428934
User deletion pending
You can send the lens away and get it corrected for f1.5 but I don't know what that means for shooting with the bigger apertures.
I think there was a Nokton 1.5 vs. Sonnar thread somewhere in rff and a lot of members considered the sonnar a special lens that is not so optimal as a one and only 50mm lens.
I think there was a Nokton 1.5 vs. Sonnar thread somewhere in rff and a lot of members considered the sonnar a special lens that is not so optimal as a one and only 50mm lens.
maddoc
... likes film again.
I once had a Summilux (E46 version, latest pre-ASPH), sold it to get a Noctilux and never looked back. Last year, I also tried a Nikkor Millenium (50/1.4) and a ZM Sonnar 50/1.5 in S-mount, both with - different - Amedeo adapter. The ZM Sonnar could have easily become my all-time favorite 50mm lens if I wouldn`t still have the Noctilux. I did not observe any focus-shift, so the problem might exist but it did not bother me at all. The Millenium Nikkor was a tad better performer but has to high contrast for my taste. The Summilux pre-ASPH @ f/1.4 and in close focus was not very convincing ...
I've just started using the Sonnar and love it... but also have the Planar. I'm not sure I can rely on the Sonnar for everything.
Frontman
Well-known
I've tried a few lenses by different makers, and I ended up getting a Summilux. It is a great lens, and it looks good on my M. I've done a lot of low-light shooting with it this week, and I'm looking forward to seeing the results.
Richard G
Veteran
I had the E43 Summilux. Heavy. Beautiful lens, very versatile. It was stolen and for years I've thought of getting another, but probably never will now because I've got the Sonnar. At 5.6 and above it is very sharp and more contrasty than the Summilux, but still a lot of character, not cold ever. At 2.8 and below it is quite stunning. I'm using 100 ASA film more just so as to have those wider apertures more in play. And the C is for compact as well as classic - a very neat package. I've hardly used the Summicron since getting it. This is Tri X 1/60s at f1.5.
Niece's wedding by Richard GM2, on Flickr
Niece's wedding by Richard GM2, on Flickr
Last edited:
mfogiel
Veteran
I have the Summilux and 2 C Sonnars (Yes), one optimized for wide open and the other for f2.8. As an everyday carry around lens I use the Summilux, but the Sonnar is a unique portraiture lens well worth having in your arsenal.
sc_rufctr
Leica nuts
Maybe I should have been clearer. I only buy mint second hand Leica lenses.
If you can find the right Leica lens used then you'll never loose money.
(The OP is considering a second hand Leica lens as opposed to a new Sonnar)
If you can find the right Leica lens used then you'll never loose money.
(The OP is considering a second hand Leica lens as opposed to a new Sonnar)
Last edited:
jljohn
Well-known
Well, I would choose the summilux, without a doubt, but a fifteen year old lux (e46) at that price these days must be really really beat up (or something is amiss). A 30 year old lens (type 2) maybe. For your price, you could get both zeiss 50mm lenses. The f/2 for general use and the f/1.5 for working at 1.5 and for portraits. Heck, you could probably get one new and one used or buy both used and have some money left over.
The Meaness
Well-known
Save up for the 'Lux ASPH.
I wouldn't do that myself, but based on these two options it sounds like you're compromising. I love the sonnar, but if you want the 'Lux ASPH nothing will do until you've tried it and satisfied that curiosity. I am psychoanalyzing too much, so sorry if I'm off base there
I know the focus shift is real in the sonnar, but I have never noticed it, and I shoot wide open fairly often for portraits. That may be because I have only used the lens on the R-D1 and M8, and because of the crop I am rarely shooting at 1m.
I think the big two questions for the sonnar, as far as results are concerned, are:
1. Do you shoot wide open and around 1m?
2. Do you like the soft/creamy sonnar 'look'?
if you answered 'no' and 'yes' then go jump all over the sonnar without hesitation. I bought my LNIB sonnar for $800 and never looked back.
However, if you want the lens to have a consistent look at all apertures and like to shoot wide open around 1m, the 'Lux will suit you better. There are other reasons too (like the 'Lux has it's own distinct character), but that is a place to start.
Good luck!
I wouldn't do that myself, but based on these two options it sounds like you're compromising. I love the sonnar, but if you want the 'Lux ASPH nothing will do until you've tried it and satisfied that curiosity. I am psychoanalyzing too much, so sorry if I'm off base there
I know the focus shift is real in the sonnar, but I have never noticed it, and I shoot wide open fairly often for portraits. That may be because I have only used the lens on the R-D1 and M8, and because of the crop I am rarely shooting at 1m.
I think the big two questions for the sonnar, as far as results are concerned, are:
1. Do you shoot wide open and around 1m?
2. Do you like the soft/creamy sonnar 'look'?
if you answered 'no' and 'yes' then go jump all over the sonnar without hesitation. I bought my LNIB sonnar for $800 and never looked back.
However, if you want the lens to have a consistent look at all apertures and like to shoot wide open around 1m, the 'Lux will suit you better. There are other reasons too (like the 'Lux has it's own distinct character), but that is a place to start.
Good luck!
Save up for the 'Lux ASPH.
I wouldn't do that myself, but based on these two options it sounds like you're compromising. I love the sonnar, but if you want the 'Lux ASPH nothing will do until you've tried it and satisfied that curiosity. I am psychoanalyzing too much, so sorry if I'm off base there
I know the focus shift is real in the sonnar, but I have never noticed it, and I shoot wide open fairly often for portraits. That may be because I have only used the lens on the R-D1 and M8, and because of the crop I am rarely shooting at 1m.
I think the big two questions for the sonnar, as far as results are concerned, are:
1. Do you shoot wide open and around 1m?
2. Do you like the soft/creamy sonnar 'look'?
if you answered 'no' and 'yes' then go jump all over the sonnar without hesitation. I bought my LNIB sonnar for $800 and never looked back.
However, if you want the lens to have a consistent look at all apertures and like to shoot wide open around 1m, the 'Lux will suit you better. There are other reasons too (like the 'Lux has it's own distinct character), but that is a place to start.
Good luck!
Great advice...
Benjamin Marks
Veteran
The lenses draw differently. If you are only going to be able to afford one, then you should choose the one whose look you prefer. Chris mentioned the focus shift. Can you work around that? If not, the choice is clear.
When trying to make and apples-to-oranges choice, it is going to be difficult for anyone giving advice that is not based on his/her own preference for either apples or oranges.
One practical solution if you can't try before you buy. Buy the Summilux. Shoot with it for a year. If you don't like it, you can likely get your money back out of the lens and try the other (or another).
When trying to make and apples-to-oranges choice, it is going to be difficult for anyone giving advice that is not based on his/her own preference for either apples or oranges.
One practical solution if you can't try before you buy. Buy the Summilux. Shoot with it for a year. If you don't like it, you can likely get your money back out of the lens and try the other (or another).