All Hail the Leica Summicron 50mm f2 lens (version 5)

kshapero

kshapero

South Florida Man
Local time
7:47 PM
Joined
Mar 27, 2006
Messages
9,952
I have tried alternatives, Zeiss, Voigtlander all probably just as good or very close, but I have nothing that holds in the hand as nice as the current 'Cron 50mm lens. Built in hood with just the right amount of give. Whether in or out, it just stays that way. The lens is sharp as a tack. This is a forever lens, I'd say.

1714940735785.png
 
I've never shot the 'cron V5. How are the ergos with gloves? My CV Lanthar 50/2 is a great shooter with gloves on.

53699915467_8d0c996a5d_o.jpg
 
It's great.
I sold a Rigid and an Elmar and end up with this one.
Even I sometimes miss the Rigid, the B&W shots from the v5 are just top notch.
 
I am way behind you in terms of Summicron 50mm lenses. My most current 50mm Summicron is a Rigid version from many years ago.
Will I ever move forward and get a Version 5? Who knows. If Santa Claus is active and we get showered with goodies, then maybe one day I will get a Version 5 Cron.
 
Rigid Summicron 2006.
This lens is a high resolution lens with medium contrast.
Is the V5 a high contrast lens?

1714951813134.png
 
I've been happy with the integral hoods on the 90 Elmarit M and the goggled 135mm. Although the lens is brilliant, I personally never cared for the integral version on the 50 (I had one but went back to the prev version)...My 12585 rigid hood has saved many 50 Summicron from a hard knock over the years.
 
Jaime M said:
It's great.
I sold a Rigid and an Elmar and end up with this one.
Even I sometimes miss the Rigid, the B&W shots from the v5 are just top notch.
Click to expand...
How do you compare the results with the V5 and the Rigid Cron?
 
kshapero said:
I have tried alternatives, Zeiss, Voigtlander all probably just as good or very close, but I have nothing that holds in the hand as nice as the current 'Cron 50mm lens. Built in hood with just the right amount of give. Whether in or out, it just stays that way. The lens is sharp as a tack. This is a forever lens, I'd say.

View attachment 4837195
Click to expand...

What's with the stick on dot, it's so ugly...
 
raid said:
How do you compare the results with the V5 and the Rigid Cron?
Click to expand...

Well, the easiest would be to say that the contrast in the v5 is way more noticeable in color. What I miss from the rigid is the wide open classic rendering b&w.
Sorry Raid, but as I write, I see that those are fully subjective observations, don't know if that helps.
 
I expected the contrast to be higher in the more current Summicron. The perceived sharpness will be higher too. Is it needed?
Thank you Jaime.
 
Interesting M2: no preview lever or M2 engraving.

I have had the version four since 1986. Used it for over 25 years before I discovered it front focused by a whole centimeter. No wonder my friends loved the shots I took of them. I like the ergonomics of the version 4. It works well on my Monochrom or M6, but was best on the M4-2, a slightly lighter M. For ten years it was my only lens. So I had nothing to compare it to. It behaved perfectly and the architectural shots were sharp. I was hardly ever close focussing. The FP4 negatives from Florence where I bought it are superb. It was a Leitz lens: I just took it for granted.
 
raid said:
How do you compare the results with the V5 and the Rigid Cron?
Click to expand...

Not quite what you asked, but I have some obliquely relevant experience you may find of interest ...


I have three 50mm Leica lenses - an uncoated f/3.5 Elmar LTM, a collapsible Summicron LTM, and a Summicron V3. I use the LTMs on a IIIf body as well as an M2 or M5 with an adapter ring, and I used them only for shooting monochrome film. Both Summicrons have been CLAed within the last year.

The uncoated Elmar is the most different for obvious reasons. When shooting into specular highlights or bright surfaces, it has a kind of ghostly "glow" that can be harnessed to great aesthetic effect. The lens is otherwise very sharp when stopped down even a little, and definitely has a kind of classic look to it.

The two 'crons are harder to compare. They both have superb rendering power and excellent contrast. The V3 is somewhat apparently sharper stopped down than the collapsible LTM 'cron but it's not really night and day. There is definitely a subjectively different look to the older lens but I couldn't tell you why, exactly.

I chose the V3 because everything I read said that the difference in optical performance between the V3, V4, and V5 was minor at best, at least for film.

The one problem I have noted is that when shooting directly into a bright light source, the LTM collapsible 'cron has some secondary reflections that cause the flare pattern to appear in the shape of the aperture blades. It's really weird. Even a CLA didn't fix that. It's not a showstopper as I rarely shoot directly into the sun - especially with a rangefinder camera, since I don't want curtain burns!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top