Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/03/02
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I hope the following is a practical rather than theological question. Sitting around recovering from the flu while reading all this "favorite lens" talk got me thinking. Many years ago, I owned a Dual-Range 50 Summicron. Which I stupidly sold, along with my first M2, in my post-college poverty. I've been using a 1980s (fifth version) Summicron with focusing tab in the last several years. As I understand it, this has the same optical formula as the current 50 'Cron. It is my favorite lens most of the time. Every so often I get exasperated with the tabbed "Cron, because it seems like if there is a specular highlight in the outer 1/3 of the frame, there will be a flare spot in the opposite corner. I don't recall the DR Summicron doing this, although I do recall occasionally getting veiling glare from contre-jour light. I use(d) the vented hood with either lens. I don't have any direct comparisons between the lenses, but it seems to me that the current formula 'Cron is better wide open for available light shots--crisper. But for everything else, the DR has a lovely quality that I can't quite describe. I can sense this quality both on Tri-X and Kodachrome. Can someone enlighten me? And if somebody has comparison pictures taken with each lens that might show the difference, please post them. I have a feeling that the difference may be somewhat analagous to the reason why I couldn't bear to sell my pre-Asph 35 Summicron even after buying the 35/1.4 Asph. I still use the older lens unless I know I'm going to need f/2 and f/1.4. --Peter