Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/12/04
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Hi, I foud this interesting post on the Olympus list (yes, I use both Olympus and Leica M) about the Summicron lenses. It is written by Mike Johnston, the editor of PhotoTechniques. regards, Mikael >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I should ring in again, then. I've used and tested a number of 50mm lenses for the Leica and my strong recommendation is to go with the current 50mm Summicron (in either mount, tabbed or untabbed). It is not a perfect lens (no lens is, and I especially have trouble at the 50mm focal length finding lenses I like) but the Summicron is a great all-around performer. Its main strength is superb consistency, both up and down the aperture range and from close to far focusing distances. This makes it MORE valuable as an all-purpose, general-use lens as opposed to one which will be used for special purposes. For lens connoisseurs, of which I regrettably am one, every lens has certain areas of performance one must learn to avoid--whether it is certain apertures that aren't as good (large or small), certain focusing distances, certain areas of the field (the corners maybe), certain types of flare (different lenses have different weaknesses in terms of the types of flare they can or cannot handle), or certain types of out-of-focus imaging. If one really understands a lens, one will come to recognize the lens's weaknesses and then learn not to present it with situations where its weakness will be apparent. If you are a connoisseur, unfortunately you also tend to learn a lens's strengths, too, and are then really only happy when presenting the lens with situations which match its strengths. This limits photography, so it is not entirely a desirable condition, but there it is. The Summicron is not quite as good as the Zeiss 45mm f/2 for the G camera at middle apertures and middle distances, according to John Kennerdell, who compared them for the magazine. It is not quite as sharp as some of the sharpest 50mm lenses, such as the Zuiko 50mm f/2 macro. It is not quite as impressive in its "bokeh" or out-of-focus characteristics (the quality of the blur) as the very best 50mm lenses in this regard, such as the Canon EF 50mm f/1.4. But it has advantages over all these lenses in terms of consistency. With it, you will get consistently very good performance at all apertures. Virtually all aberrations are at least decently (and some superlatively) well controlled at all apertures, the exception being a light bit of spherical wide open which I'd bet most non-experts will not have the ability to recognize. Flare resistance, although again not the very very best, is very well controlled for most all kinds of situations, although you will indeed see modest flare effects here and there. It is this consistency that makes the Summicron so good for normal all-around shooting. There are simply no big weaknesses to avoid, which means no nasty surprises no matter what you're trying to make the lens do. You can photograph freely--close up, far away; stopped down, opened up; with the light, against the light--go ahead. You can use all the apertures freely, including f/2 (one of my friends, Nick Hartmann, photographs in near-darkness more often than not, using the f/2 aperture very often). You need not be afraid of flare, or distortion, or coma. Added to the desirable performance characteristics are good handling characteristics, reasonable size and weight (in which way it scores over the Noct), and (for Leica) reasonable cost. For this reason I strongly recommend this lens as the best choice. The older 7-element lenses have _much_ more flare and are much weaker wide open; the stopped-down performance of the Summilux is less pleasing to me (it looks much more like a common Japanese lens of ten or fifteen years ago, very high resolution but not too contrasty, with poor out-of-focus blur at some apertures when focused close. This delicate, high-resolution look may be preferable to some, but not to me); and the tessar (Elmar-M) is critically slower and has a bit of an odd look. There are certain situations in which any of the alternatives might be perferable to the Summicron. I can make it look worse than virtually any of the other alternatives if pitted directly against the other lenses' greatest strengths. But the Summicron will easily exceed any of the other lenses at those lenses' weakest points. It is easily the best all-rounder, of current or historical Leica 50s. Incidentally, for lurkers reading this, if anyone wants to find a "Summicron on the cheap" I'd recommend experimenting with the Olympus Zuiko 50mm f/1.8. This lens has the same cross-section as the Leica Summicron-M and in many ways is remarkably similar to it. The biggest technical distinction I can find is that the Olympus lens is not coated as well--long a weakness of OM lenses, up until the most recent ones--so flare is a bit more of a problem. But in a 6/4 lens, with only 8 air-to-glass surfaces, this is not such a terrible problem--more a matter of degree. The biggest difference is that the Olympus can be purchased new for $110 and is very easy to find used for $35 or even less. It is not quite the Summicron-killer--higher quality control and better coating give the Summicron better contrast performance, and the Summicron is better built. But it is 85-90% of the Summicron and not a bad lens at all in its own right, and in character the two lenses are quite surprisingly similar. And at the price the Zuiko is practically a throwaway. Fun to play with. For fun, I intend to pit the two of them directly against each other (sometime) in a series of trials, and report my findings (somewhere). If you want a good Leica 50mm on the cheap, try to find an Ex+ or better DR (Dual-Range) Summicron _without_ the close-focusing eyes. These are usually very cheap, on the order of $250-$350 or so, specifically because they lack the eyes (they're $500-$600 with eyes), but they are very good. In direct comparison, the current Summicron just barely edges out the old DR. Although the DR shows more flare at the wide apertures, for most general shooting it is very good, and it costs half or even less of what a good used current Summicron will. Ironically, a DR without the eyes is cheaper than most so-called Rigid-Mount 7-element Summicrons, despite the fact that they're the same lens. The only difference is that the eyeless DR focusing mount is better built, and the original DR heads were subject to tighter QC! Otherwise the optical heads are the same, and indeed are interchangeable. Incidentally, don't think Leica is sleeping, either. I cannot say what I know, but perhaps it is enough to note that Leica never claims to have made their ultimate statement of any given lens type. - --Mike >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>