Ok, so I got another M body and three lenses wasn't quite enough anymore. I'd been looking at the 21-24 lens choices, a beautiful 24 ASPH came up which I tested and snatched up. Now I have the Heliar 15/4.5, 24/2.8 ASPH, 35/2 ASPH, and 90/2.8. I have an urge to buy a 50, for me kind of a mild telephoto these days as the 90 is too long a lot of the time (and don't talk to me about the 75/1.4 'Lux ... not right now, please).

Leica's got the long established Summicron-M 50/2, Summilux-M 50/1.4, the magical, dark-sucking Noctilux 50/1 and the collapsible Elmar 50/2.8. I'm ruling out the fabulous Nocti for the moment for reasons similar to the reasons for the 75 'Lux (sheer dollars).

I'd like to know what people using the other 50s have to say about them. Before this, I had an older Summicron-M 50/2 (separate hood) which was a darn fine lens... how does the current model compare?

thanks Godfrey

-- Godfrey DiGiorgi (ramarren@bayarea.net), February 26, 2001

Answers

So you are for a fifthy, we can see you donīt own any fast lens, this could be the oportunity to get a summilux, a noctilux seems too much for me unless you need it, but on the other hand if you donīt need that speed the latest summicron is by far the best image maker of the four, the same design as the previous one,but with a buildin hood that I find very handy (I own one), on the elmar I can only say it looks pretty on the camera but soft and slow to use.

-- RWatson (al1231234@hotmail.com), February 26, 2001.

The current 50 Summicron is apparently the same optically as the previous version and is very sharp as you would know having owned one. I find it useful for half body shots such as the ones I recently took of the neighbours twelve year old girl on a swing under their big old oak tree.

The 50 focal length has a nice perspective to it and the Summicron 50/2 also has a very nice out focus rendition. I can't speak for the Summilux version or the Elmar however for the price you really can't go wrong with the Summicron. Personally I would consider a near mint condition used one prefably the model before the current version because of it's focussing tab. I have heard that the Summicron has the edge in contrast and sharpness over the Summilux and Elmar; whether this is really true or not I don't know.

-- matt veld (mahv@xtra.co.nz), February 26, 2001.

I also like the Summicron from the late 1980's to early 1990's with the tab. Expect to pay $550 to $600 for a near mint one. It is super compact, almost perfect optically, and focuses to .7 meters for decent close up capability. I am very pleased with the sharpness mine has a f2.0--superb even at the edges.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), February 26, 2001.

If I lost my gear tomorrow, after an M6, I would seek out a 50mm Summicron. I say seek out, because my preference would be for the next to latest model. It is optically the same as the latest version, but I really like the focusing tab and the snap on hood. I have this lens now, as well as a Summicron from the 70's without the tab, and for me the handling advantage of the tab makes my choice easy. As good as the non-tabbed lens is optically, it sit unused while my tabbed lens is fully employed.

I recon I can handhold the Leica M at least one shutter speed slower than an SLR, so I would think in real terms, the 50mm f/2.0 Summicron is as valuable for available light as my Nikon with 50mm f/1.4... but it out performs the Nikon at those wide apertures. I might have used a faster lens if I had one for the Leica, but I put the money saved from buying the slower lens towards film and processing. I never felt I made the wrong choice... the Summicron is a legend. For a company with prices that defy belief, the Summicron is a financial deal that can't be beat when you compare price to performance.

-- Al Smith (smith58@msn.com), February 26, 2001.

...on the other hand...

I too am a big fan of the focusing tab. However, I was really surprised at how easily the current 50 Summicron handles without the tab. The action is really easy and smooth (without being sloppy), it has a good knurled ring, and it has a short stop-to-stop rotation. I would have to say it's as easy and quick to focus by sliding my finger along the bottom of the focusing ring, as it is with the tab version.

The only real difference for me - aside from price - is whether you want a pull-out hood or a separate clip-on hood. Even there both have their own advantages.

The Summilux doesn't focus quite as easily. Try them both yourself before deciding whether you need that extra stop.

-- Ken Shipman (kennyshipman@aol.com), February 26, 2001.

Definitely the Summicron, in fact *any* Summicron from the 11817 (1969) onward. I own that one and the latest one, both superb lenses, the earlier one is much smaller but by the time you factor in the clip-on hood they're about equal. I don't care for focusing tabs in general (except on really short lenses that don't have room for a decent-width focus ring, so I'm glad neither of my 50's has tabs. As for the Summilux, I was very disappointed with it in comparison to the Summicron, and it's heavier still. The Summicron @ f/2 with ISO 400 film gave me sharper and more contrasty images than the Summilux @ 1.4 on ISO 200 film, and a bit more DOF to boot.

-- Jay (infinitydt@aol.com), February 26, 2001.

I sought out the previous version summicron over the current version for two reasons -- the tab AND the rigid hood. I do like using the tab to focus, however Ken makes a good point re focussing the new version without the tab. I like the rigid hood because I believe it offers better protection for the lens when the camera is hanging off your shoulder.

Jack

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), February 26, 2001.

Thanks for all the input!

After due consideration, the Summicron-M 50/2 is the right choice for me. Several folks seemed to feel that the 'Lux version wasn't as good a performer, and the supposed size/weight savings of the Elmar just isn't much (nor is the price all that much lower!). f/2 is quite fast enough for me. Heck, it leaves me an excuse to buy a Noctilust when I'm flush ... a whole TWO stops faster!

I've been buying all my lenses new/almost new now, and I personally kinda like the lack of focus tab on the latest along with the built-in hood (I remember that the rigid hood on my old one was a bit of a pain to stow when you wanted to put the lens cap on). So I've ordered a new, black 50/2.

My piggy bank is screaming. Sorry, Piggy. ;)

Godfrey

-- Godfrey DiGiorgi (ramarren@bayarea.net), February 26, 2001.

Note the Freudian slip--Noctilust--meaning, "I am lusting after a Noctilux". Sorry, but we therapists notice these things. Godfrey, you made a good choice. Until you have a Summicron, you haven't seen what your Leica can do.

Best Wishes,

-- Bob Fleischman (RFXMAIL@prodigy.net), February 26, 2001.

Hi all, I have a question since I'm also looking for a 50mm lens to complement my current 35mm Summicron. From reading the posts, I'm poking around trying to find a previous version 50mm Summicron, who knows where can I find the serial number for different generations of Summicron 50? Is 32xxxxx belong to the last Summicron without built-in hood? Are all made in Canada or Germany? Many thanks!

-- Freddie O. (lu7979@yahoo.com), February 26, 2001.

Try this site: http://www.imx.nl/photosite/leica/overview/listm.html

-- matt veld (mahv@xtra.co.nz), February 26, 2001.

Thanks, I tried Erwin's site earlier but it has only one version serial number listed. No luck for the rest found in cameraquest site.

-- Freddie O. (lu7979@yahoo.com), February 26, 2001.

The last run of the 50's with the focusing tab were made in Germany, and these were only made for a fairly short time. They seem to be rare and command a higher price. The ones made in Canada right before that seem to be nearly identical looking. The earlier ones from Canada have the tab more rounded outward instead of the dished out style. I never found a list of serial numbers that gave the cut off on the different styles. Mine is 3436XXX and is a fairly late Canadian one.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), February 26, 2001.

Godfrey,

You'll love your new 50 Summicron! I have this same lens and am really happy with it. I've also used the previous model, but prefer the newer version, without the tab & with the built-in hood. Enjoy and many happy photos...

-- KL Prager (www.pragerproperties@worldnet.att.net), February 26, 2001.

"Noctilust" wasn't much of a Freudian slip .... I'd love to have one, even if I would only rarely use it. I just am not willing to try to pay for one right now. ;)

-- Godfrey DiGiorgi (ramarren@bayarea.net), February 27, 2001.

Get a nice, clean f:3.5 Elmar. (If it was good enough for Oskar Barnak, it ought to be good enought for the likes of you and me.)

-- Bill Mitchell (bmitch@home.com), February 27, 2001.

If English was good enough for Jesus Christ, then it's good enough for me!

Did Barnack actually take any pictures?

Rob.

-- Robert Appleby (laintal@tin.it), February 27, 2001.

One might theorize that he was the last Leica designer to do so.

-- Bill Mitchell (bmitch@home.com), February 27, 2001.

One interpretation I have read concerning Barnack's motivation was that he was a hiker, and wanted a camera he could take along on nature walks. Another interpretation, though, which I have also read, is that he was assigned a project to develop a test fixture for 35mm motion picture film. I kind of like the first one better.

-- Bob Fleischman (RFXMAIL@prodigy.net), February 27, 2001.

Godfrey,

I would stay away from the Noctilux (unless you plan on doing alot of available darkness photos) since it is expensive and is currently the heaviest M lens. That said, if you don't need the extra stop of the lux then the Cron is probably your best bet. I am also looking (casually now) for a 50. Currently, my outfit is 24, 35, 75 and a 50 would round things out. My first choice for a 50 would be the Cron because of price, and the stealth factor. That "toy" lens scares people less than the huge glass area of a Noctilux!! However, I admire the style of David Alan Harvey from the National Geographic society who preachs a "minimalist" style that relies more on the photographer training his/her eye to spot that "decisive moment" (kinda like HCB). One of the main reasons that I moved over to Leica M.

Cheers, and happy shooting!

John

-- John Chan (ouroboros_2001@yahoo.com), February 27, 2001.