Which one to take of the 50's?

[Thor]

Hi everybody,

since this is my first post, please allow me a bit of the typical "photographic introduction". About 1 year ago I sold all my equipment (mainly DSLR) besides my Hassi 503CW and bought a Zeiss Ikon with a Biogon 2/35. It was my first RF and I got infected by the RF-virus, followed by the black&white-coccus. 🙂 So far, I shot about 70 rolls (mainly b&w) with the ZI and recently invested in a wet darkroom together with a nice enlarger (with Heiland splitgrade system).

Now it's time to buy a second lens. 🙄 I came to the conclusion, that the "first second" lens should be a normal one - regarding my style of photography. Initially I thought of buying the new Zeiss C-Sonnar 1.5/50, but since I would not exclude the possibility of buying a M8 in the future (for color work), I thought of getting a Leica lens bit 6-bit-encoding, not to speak of the fact, that my everlasting dream has always been a MP (hopefully it'll come true someday).

Now I'm in a dilemma, since I simply don't know, if I should take the new Summicron-50 or the Summilux-50 Asph. The one stop more, that I get from the Summilux would be worth the money for me, since I like to shoot available light and my children. BUT: I would not like to pay the one extra-stop with less sharpness/contrast/resolution and I fear, that at f/2 perhaps the Summicron delivers the sharper picture with more contrast. This is at least, what a friend of mine told me. Is this true? Which one should I take?

Thanks and kind regards,
Thorsten

 

[Rafael]

Welcome to the forum Thorsten! You will certainly get a lot of answers to that question! Also, if you search the archives, you will find a great deal of discussion of these two lenses.

Again, welcome to the forum.

 

[Kyle]

The 50 Summilux ASPH is supposed to be a simply amazing lens.

I didn't read every reply, but here is a recent thread on the 50 'lux ASPH

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=32681

BTW, the Zeiss 50/1.5 ZM Sonnar is a great lens as well, and very compact for a 50 (especially compared to the 50 Summilux ASPH).

 

[venchka]

Buy Two!

Buy Two!

Welcome to our Assylum! 😱

Here is an impulse thought, off the top of my head, unsupported by anything scientific, purely a personal notion of mine, based on my ownership of one of the following:

1. Buy the Zeiss 50/1.5

2. Buy a nice Dual Range Summicron with goggles

3. Use both lenses for 1 year.

4. Use your savings over new lenses to fund your film & darkroom activities.

5. If at the end of 1 year you are dissatisfied with either #1 or #2, sell it and buy one of the new Leitz 50s.

Enjoy! 🙂

 

[back alley]

Welcome to our Assylum! 😱

Here is an impulse thought, off the top of my head, unsupported by anything scientific, purely a personal notion of mine, based on my ownership of one of the following:

1. Buy the Zeiss 50/1.5

2. Buy a nice Dual Range Summicron with goggles

3. Use both lenses for 1 year.

4. Use your savings over new lenses to fund your film & darkroom activities.

5. If at the end of 1 year you are dissatisfied with either #1 or #2, sell it and buy one of the new Leitz 50s.

Enjoy! 🙂

i just realized how bad i am...this sounds practical to me 😉

joe

 

[vrgard]

Yeah, does to me too, Joe.

Alternatively, buy an early fixed or dual range Summicron and/or a Canon 50/1.5 and do the same one-year test. Not only does it save money now, but it also has the advantage of being able to recover one's costs at the end of the one-year period if one does decide to sell either lens.

-Randy

 

[Flyfisher Tom]

BUT: I would not like to pay the one extra-stop with less sharpness/contrast/resolution and I fear, that at f/2 perhaps the Summicron delivers the sharper picture with more contrast.

Welcome Thor.

From photos and MTF charts, the 50lux-ASPH is the equal of the 50 cron with an extra stop. If sharpness & resolution are your main concerns, you have nothing to worry about.

Go for the 50asph if it is in your price point. Keep in mind it is a bit longer and heavier.

 

[quattro98]

Since it sounds like you can afford it, get the Summilux ASPH. This is a lens which is designed for amazing performance wide open. Personally, I see little reason to get a current Summicron when the Zeiss Planar is available for less. If you're patient, you can get any of these lenses, or the new Sonnar on the used market so if you want to change lenses later, you only risk a minimal financial loss.

 

[Ronald M]

The new 50 1.4 is a VERY heavy lens. I was shocked when I picked anM8 / 501.4 at a demo. Sensing my shock, the rep took the lens off and showed me where all the weight was.

Zeiss/Leica glass are both very nice, but different. Since you have Zeiss to start, keep going that way so everything matches.

 

[dcsang]

I know the ASPH is good.. but seeing as how just about everything before that (lux wise that is) seems to have the same optics since the 60's - are we totally limiting ourselves to just the ASPH elemented Luxes? By this I mean, is the quality of the image THAT much different as to warrant the ASPH over the non-ASPH? (of course I'm talking from a used standpoint here and not brand new - can't afford even a 50 cron ASPH new personally speaking) 😀

Dave

 

[Thor]

Thanks for your answers so far. Well, the Summilux Asph is a lot of money and would leave my bank account pretty empty, but I would really like to have the extra stop, even more, when you say, that this lens isn't inferior to the Summicron at all. ;-) So my only alternatives now are Summilux and Zeiss C-Sonnar, though the Summilux would exclusively have the 6-bit-codes. Are there any experiences in comparing the Sonnar with the Summilux?

 

[Magus]

Post deleted by posters request

 

[Krosya]

different lenses

different lenses

The new 50 1.4 is a VERY heavy lens. I was shocked when I picked anM8 / 501.4 at a demo. Sensing my shock, the rep took the lens off and showed me where all the weight was.

Zeiss/Leica glass are both very nice, but different. Since you have Zeiss to start, keep going that way so everything matches.

I was going to say the same thing - Leica and Zeiss deliver different look/feel to the photos, even more so wide open. So, I'm not sure if you can simply go by the speed of the lens. Just my opinion.

 

[Thor]

Thanks again for your answers.

Magus! I am honestly impressed by the huge amount of time you take to answer my question. Thank you very much! Of course you're absolutely right, that "it all" circles around fingerprints. To be honest, out of Hassy-times I know Zeiss as a manufacturer of great lenses that do a superb job, but I always adored the Leica fingerprint more. It has simply been a matter of available money and urgent buy-eritis, that I took the Zeiss Ikon for a first rangefinder. I absolutely do not want to bash the ZI... it does a great job and showed me, that I am a RF-guy, not a SLR one. Also the 35 Biogon is fantastic. But in the back of my head I never stopped thinking of buying a black-painted MP "some day" and getting my hands on summilux's and -cron's. Perhaps this is the reason, why I make me thinking, that I need these 6-bit-codes, which is normally bull**** since I just made the huge step away from "digital photography and the hurry of it".

Getting the C-Sonnar would only save money (and make my wife happier 😉), but I would still long after Leica-lenses. So when I'm honest to myself, I only can't decide between the Summilux and -cron. I spent hours on Flickr, watching the same pictures (of both lenses) again and again, but I failed to define a typical fingerprint for each lens, cause there are mediocre and outstanding b&w- or slide-pics on both sides (technically speaking when regarding tonality, sharpness, bokeh, contrast, image-corners, "warmth" etc.). On the other hand I unfortunately never had the chance to compare prints of both lenses, since only one of my friends uses a single Leica-lens (the Summicron) and just scans the pictures and all dealers in an area of about 100 miles around my home either obtain Leica-stuff only after ordering or only allow to play a bit around with it without using it on the cam (more than ever shooting a roll with it) since they don't have "demo-lenses".

Nevertheless, Magus, your explanation helped me a lot. One thing I don't want is a "clinical" result. For this reason, I normally thought "Avoid the evil Apo's and Asph's". It calms me down, that you explicitly said, that the Summilux isn't a too clean performer, so I think, I will try to convince my wife to buy one of these. 😉

Warm regards,
Thorsten

 

[venchka]

If you loose the battle, or while you wait to find the "perfect" 50 Summilux, a 1960s vintage DR or Rigid Summicron at a good price is a very worthy lens. It delivers it's own unique character with few, if any, flaws. When that perfect Summilux arrives you can recover the cost of the earlier Summicron here at RFF in days. Maybe hours. Or minutes even.

 

[harmsr]

50 Lux ASPH

The first is M5 with Ilford FP4, second is M8, third is M5 with Acros 100, and the 4th is M8. I'm only on my laptop, with everything else on the network drives at home.

Clinical - I don't think so. The 50 Lux ASPH is my favorite lens period. It really does tread the fine line of crisp images with pleasing bokeh, fine details, and texture like no other.

Magus is much more eloquent than i am in writing on the forums, but we have discussed this many times before and agree on the 50 Lux ASPH.

Best,

Ray

 

[Magus]

Post deleted by posters request

 

[Magus]

Post deleted by posters request

 

[Rico]

If you loose the battle, or while you wait to find the "perfect" 50 Summilux, a 1960s vintage DR or Rigid Summicron at a good price is a very worthy lens. It delivers it's own unique character with few, if any, flaws. When that perfect Summilux arrives you can recover the cost of the earlier Summicron here at RFF in days. Maybe hours. Or minutes even.

Good advice! I certainly lust after the ASPH, but there's more to life than optical perfection. 🙂 Just received my first RF 50, a 1962 Elmar dual scale. Talk about the Leitz Golden Age: this lens exudes quality. If its image rendition visibly trails the modern offering, so much the better!

 

[Turtle]

I think you have answered your own question. You can afford the ASPH 'lux, want leica for the 6 bit encoding and want a fast aperture. The 50 asph is the only one to meet those criteria. You lose nothing with the fast lens except for compactness. It is never going to be as small as a cron. I have read many reviews on both and the consensus seem to be that the cron is no sharper at any aperture, is more susceptible for flare, but is smaller and cheaper. Therefore teh lux asph is as good or better in all respects but is bigger and dearer. Some claim that the lux still has a slight edge in performance at f2/2.8. Certainly, the asph is a big leap forward from the pre-asph 50 'lux and by all accounts very noticeably sharper at wide apertures.

If I was after an f2 lens I would buy the planar every time for the prioce/performance ratio altho I know it has no 6 bit encoding (can one get it added?). whilst I agree that lenses can have certain looks, I do believe it is overstated by many as a stage in the creative process. If you are half decent in the darkroom, the opportunities here totally eclipse those preordained by the lens itself. Whilst some lenses might have a look that is different to one another it is rarely a case of 'this one has a horrid look', so in each case it is a bit of a non-issue to me. I fully intend to mix up Leica and Zeiss glass depending upon value, build, opportunity etc and feel quite confident that it will not affect my (B&W) imaging capability .....and that none of you would ever know what I had used if you were subjected to a blind test! Colour is a bit different perhaps, but even then....