Hexanon 50mm verses Summicron Collapsible 50mm

[Keith]

The Hexanon 50mm f2 is as new with no haze, dust or marks ... the Collapsible Summicron is from 1954 and has some nicks and cleaning marks on the front element and a little internal haze.

Identical images with alternate lenses were all shot at f2 as rapidly as possible with identical shutter settings using my M2. They're a little contrasty sorry due to my inexperience with developing Acros for the first time! No sharpening was applied ... thye're pretty well straight from the scanner!

I'll be curious to see if you can identify which lens took which shots!

I'll be back to check opinions later.

[Keith]

And yes ... I did have to explain to the very obliging Kookaburra that he couldn't fly away until I'd changed lenses and taken another pic ... which is why he looks a litle puzzled!

[denmark.yuzon]

Great pics Keith. The hexanon is cheaper? If I have an interchangeable lens system, Id pick the hexanon. The hexanon in my Konica Auto S2 is very sharp, it made me lust over Konica/Hexanon items..

Im no expert, but honestly the only difference between the two is I think the hexanon has more contrast than the summicron. It is evident in the first two pic of the wooden bench and the bicycle wheel?

[fotomeow]

Goody, I love whodunnit threads: Well here goes .... putting my RFF rep on the line .....
Im mainly deciding based on the tonal/contrast range, the amount of detail in the shadows, and some of the foreground focus crispness. I have some experience with the collapsible Cron Ive had for a couple months, but have only read (good things) abouta the Hex. My guesses:
Pics 1-3: all the first ones are the Hex, all the second ones are the Cron
Do I get a sticker or a lollipop?

[Doug]

Hexanon first, Summicron second.

[gavinlg]

Hexanon 1st, cron 2nd in all of them... That hex looks like a really good 50.

[Nugard]

1 - cron.
2 - hex.
3 - hex.
4 - cron.
5 - hex.
6 - cron.

[braver]

The second shots all have more glow, and this to me says older lens design and perhaps some veiling lens damage like the haze and cleaning marks you mention. The others are definitely what I would expect from a modern lens like the Hex. One has more charm, the other has more oompf.

[t.s.k.]

Originally Posted by Doug

Hexanon first, Summicron second.

+1

Even in high contrast, the older lens shows its character.
The hex is more clinical, if not merely for the newer, cleaner glass.

[FrankS]

Agree. Hex first, Summicron second in each pair. The Summicron is a great lens, not even considering its age, that it holds up so well against a highly regarded modern lens.

[ampguy]

hex, cron in all series.

Cron has better shadow detail, less contrast, but could use a good cleaning to get rid of some flare in those shots.

[buzzardkid]

+1, Hex first, Cron second in all sequences.

Either that or your Cron is a very sharp specimen.

It happens, you know!

[Keith]

Not hard to pick obviously because everyone was pretty well on the money ... the Hex is a fine modern lens and the Summicron has it's own charms IMO.

I did think there'd be more difference than there turned out to be though ... that Summicron is no slouch for a slightly tired lens made in 1954!

When you zoom in on the full res scans you can really see the difference in sharpness and resolution ... particularly on that old cane chair in the first shot.

[flip]

Nice comparison shots. Quite illuminating. Thank you.

I rather wish there was as nice a comparison of the Hexanon 50's (2.0 and 1.2) at comparable apertures. I pawned my 2.0 (back-focus) to help get the 1.2. Always wonder what I'm missing.

[fotomeow]

Its clear both these lens have their own merits, and are useful in different situations. I figure that I would like to have 3 50mm lenses: an older Leica for that charm and low contrast, one sharp modern contrasty lens, and one lens which fits in the middle with some qualities of both.
Ive got a 1940 Summitar for the old lens, a Summilux for the middle lens, but havent picked up a modern lens yet. I suppose if I had to have only one lens it would be the Summilux, kind of a compromise b/w the Hex and collapsible Cron above.

[Nugard]

Wow... Hex suck... Never thought images made with hex would be like that...

[Savara]

Originally Posted by fotomeow

Ive got a 1940 Summitar for the old lens, a Summilux for the middle lens, but havent picked up a modern lens yet.

Go for the latest Summicron, or something ASPH if your budget allows.

[Keith]

Originally Posted by Nugard

Wow... Hex suck... Never thought images made with hex would be like that...

Like what ... 'suck' is such a non definitive criticism.

Elaborate on what you specifically don't like about the Hexanon!

[Nugard]

Originally Posted by Keith

Like what ... 'suck' is such a non definitive criticism.

Elaborate on what you specifically don't like about the Hexanon!

Ok... Look here... I don't know the right word in English, but I tried to show this effect on your pictures... The thing is, that hex seems to show some circular bokeh... Like old lenses like first version lux 50mm... I don't like such effect, and am pretty surprised by this pictures... Cause i expected better image quality from a modern lens, which is hexanon...



Here you can see it better.

[Nugard]

Or you just mixed up first two images...

[Krosya]

Originally Posted by Nugard

Wow... Hex suck... Never thought images made with hex would be like that...

Wow..this is like the most rediculous statement I have read in a long time!

[Krosya]

I suppose - it all personal preference, but Hexanon is sharper and has SMOOTHER bokeh, where is Summicron is softer (not soft, but softer) and it has a swirl in it's bokeh that Hexanon doesnt. Different - sure. Better - depends on what you like. But to say that Hex sucks?

[Brian Sweeney]

Astigmatism is more pronounced in the Collapsible Summicron, which is the aberration that produces swirly Bokeh. Keith's images do not bring out the effect.

Collapsible Summicron, wide-open at F2:






And one with a nearly-destroyed front element.


Bokeh is subjective. It is a by-product of the optimizations that go into a lens design. Some people love swirly Bokeh, and think clinically clean modern lenses are boring. Others want optical perfection.

[Tim Gray]

Both look nice. It's a toss up for me in the first picture as to which I like more. Part of me likes the Summicron since the background isn't as blown out, but at the same time, the background is a wee bit distracting. I like the Summicron shot of the bird - the swirl is kind of neat looking. And the Hexanon looks better to me on the bike. The fuzziness in the highlights on the Summicron make me feel like my eyes are dirty The shot is high contrast enough naturally that the Hexanon's ability to deal with it just looks cleaner.

But both are nice!

[furcafe]

You'd probably see much more of a difference if you had shot more contrasty scenes or anything w/a bright light source in the frame. With the 2 scenes you show here, I think you probably could have gotten similar results w/a good uncoated lens, like a Sonnar from the 1930s (I've done similar comparisons between the modern Zeiss 50/1.5 Sonnar & its uncoated & single-coated ancestors). Modern glass & coatings handle flare much better, of course, & whether that's an important concern depends on your photography. For me, charming character & boke are nice & all, but they can be overwhelmed by veiling flare, etc.

Originally Posted by Keith

Not hard to pick obviously because everyone was pretty well on the money ... the Hex is a fine modern lens and the Summicron has it's own charms IMO.

I did think there'd be more difference than there turned out to be though ... that Summicron is no slouch for a slightly tired lens made in 1954!

When you zoom in on the full res scans you can really see the difference in sharpness and resolution ...