elmar 50 vs summicron 50

[shaaktiman]

hola,

it's funny. since i switched to leica from voigtlander glass on my 50 the quality of my photos have really improved. My 1 leica lens really does have a signature look to it.

BUT, and it's a big but, I can't fit my camera in my coat pocket with my summicron 50 like I could with my cv 35. So I'm lookin' at the collapsible 50s. Can anyone tell me what kind of differences they've noticed between the 'micron 50s and the elmars? Can I expect to lose that gorgeous creamy bokeh and highlights with an elmar?

[jano]

I was preparing to ask similar question, too.. looking forward to answers

[Huck Finn]

Check out the thread "Tribute to my ELMAR", which dates back to last March but received more comments 10 days ago on the 17th & 18th. Peter_N, in particular, has been raving about this lens for a couple of years now. It uses the classic & highly regarded Tessar design, which lends itself well to compact size, as for example on my 45/2.8 Nikkor Pancake.

Huck

[richard_l]

Here's a shot which shows the bokeh of the 50mm Elmar (latest version). http://www.rangefinderforum.com/phot...67/flowers.jpg

[celluloidprop]

From my readings, it's sharp but not quite as sharp as the current Summicron (doubtful that anyone could tell?). More of an old-school fingerprint, and the current generation is superior to previous f/2.8 Elmars.

[richard_l]

Originally Posted by celluloidprop

From my readings, it's sharp but not quite as sharp as the current Summicron (doubtful that anyone could tell?). More of an old-school fingerprint, and the current generation is superior to previous f/2.8 Elmars.

I'm not sure what you mean by "old-school fingerprint." It is very crisp and contrasty, too much so for some people who claim that the images look "brittle." It is contrastier than the latest Summicron, but not excessively so, in my opinion. http://www.rangefinderforum.com/phot...indows_rff.jpg

[FPjohn]

Hello:

I believe the Summicron was designed to give a two stop increase in a lens of Elmar level performance. My f3.5 Elmar 50mm gives more plastic images than my DR Summicron. Both are "sharp".
Current versions of the Summicron and Elmar can be expected to be more clinical. I do not have either one to comment on direct experience.

A good example of a red scale Elmar or Ist generation collapsible Summicron might satisfy you.

yours
Frank

[ray_g]

If you like the "signature look" of your current lens, why would you consider changing to another 50? The M was not really meant to be a pocketable camera - perhaps a small bag would be the easiest and most economical solution? It should also protect your recent investment.

[rich815]

I now have both the 50/2.8 Elmar m-mount from one generation back (about the 70's, not the latest one) and a 50/2 Summicron DR. I much prefer the feel and ergonomics of the 'cron but really love the signature of the Elmar (though the 'cron is by no means bad--in fact so far I love the images from it, but I only just got it, and am still finding its character).

This article, titled "50mm - Elmar-M vs M Summicron?" gives some good comparison:

http://www.nemeng.com/leica/012b.shtml

[peter_n]

Huck is right when he said I've been raving about it for a couple of years. I did stick my head up over the parapet at PN that long ago and survived, so emboldened, I kept at it.

Andrew Nemeth (link directly above) was one who I think originally wasn't so enthusiastic about the lens but has come around, Stephen Gandy still doesn't rate it (big time). But the times they have-a-changed and now it is OK to like the Elmar. I also have a Summilux and I think those two make an excellent pair. Apart from it's optical excellence the black Elmar only weighs about 170g so it makes a brilliant travel lens.

The Elmar fully extended and wearing it's lens shade is about the same length as a Summicron. Collapsed and without the hood it is of course considerably smaller but not as small as the earlier Elmars. If you shoot color it is slightly warmer than the Summicron and kinder to people because it is not as sharp. It is a good lens but then so is the Summicron. If you are looking for a size difference there isn't as much as you might think. You should drop into your dealer and try it for yourself.

[Flyfisher Tom]

Originally Posted by shaaktiman

BUT, and it's a big but, I can't fit my camera in my coat pocket with my summicron 50 like I could with my cv 35.

A little OT due to minor difference in focal length, but if you are looking for a similar bokeh to the 50/cron in an amazingly compact sized "normal" lens that will make it pocketable ... try a 40/cron/rokkor. Very sharp, great bokeh, and oh so small, easily pocketable. Anywhere from $200 to $350 depending on condition. cheers

[aterlecki]

One note of caution if using a CV body with a collapsible Elmar. Some versions of the 50mm Elmars cannot be fully collapsed in CV bodies and could therefore cause damage if forced. Be sure to investigate before buying if you're not using Leica M bodies.

[vrgard]

Originally Posted by Flyfisher Tom

A little OT due to minor difference in focal length, but if you are looking for a similar bokeh to the 50/cron in an amazingly compact sized "normal" lens that will make it pocketable ... try a 40/cron/rokkor. Very sharp, great bokeh, and oh so small, easily pocketable. Anywhere from $200 to $350 depending on condition. cheers

I wanted to second Tom's suggestion. I just picked up a 40mm Rokkor and it is a wonderfully small lens. Here's a pic taken with it on Thanksgiving day.

[richard_l]

The 40mm M-Rokkor is only about 2mm longer than the collapsed Elmar-M. It's a great lens, but it only comes in black.

While bokeh is not something I actively look for, the OOF renditions of the 50 'Cron, 50 Elmar, and 40 'Cron/Rokkor seem to be about the same to me, very smooth with nice round highlights.