Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!

SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Planar or Summicron?
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Wed Sep 10, 2014 2:36 pm    Post subject: Planar or Summicron? Reply with quote

Contax Zeiss Planar 50/1.4 or Summicron 50/2 1st version?

Which one do you choose for full frame and why?

Very Happy Very Happy Very Happy


PostPosted: Wed Sep 10, 2014 4:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Are you thinking of rangefinder or reflex Summicron? I guess the reflex version, but even so chosing one over the other is dependent more on your photography than on the lenses themselves. If you're doing low light pictures or are a differential focusing fan, then it makes sense to go for the wider aperture. For close work in good light, then the Summicron R would be the more appropriate choice. The early 1950s first version rangefinder Summicron has its virtues, but can only be used on mirrorless cameras and its closest focus is 1 metre, so it more or less disqualifies itself here !

I hope this isn't going to become one of those 'Leitz vs Zeiss' competitions . . . if my interests included both the sorts I mention, then I'd get both lenses if I could afford them. Neither will disappoint, both will please, but in different ways.


PostPosted: Wed Sep 10, 2014 4:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm referring to Leica R summicron and I dont' want to start a war Very Happy
I'm just willing to know some different opinions


PostPosted: Wed Sep 10, 2014 4:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Good question.
In serious doubt, take two.

Cool

I'm not kidding.
Saw the other day some pics from another forum member from Germany - doesn't remember who anymore - a copy of Contax 1.4 Planar which can drive you crazy!
But, last week I bought a Summicron 2/50 absolutely MINT which had performed incredibly well - as expected.

Conclusion: more contrast and "screaming" colors = Planar
A bit less contrast and a Aristocratic bokek, with incredibly well balanced color palette = Summicron (which have the very wellcome behaviour too of not clip the shadows due to its less contrasty character.

Built impression (at hand) = Had a Planar in my hand sometime ago and seems to me that Leica Summicron is "au pair", but my impression it's a little bit heavier (maybe more metal?),


Cheers,


Renato


PostPosted: Wed Sep 10, 2014 4:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I had a summicron-R 50/2, but was stolen this summer along with the nex5n

I've recently found a Planar 50 1.7 that isn't bad at all, but from 1.7 to at least 2.8 suffers from CA and softness, at f4 become really good.
I really love the "3D effect" of this lens and colors too, and I can argue that the 1.4 is a better version of the 1.7, maybe better at larger apertures.

On the other hand the summicron-R 50 is still the best 50 that I've tried so far

Since I've just bought the A7 I can't afford to take them both Very Happy


PostPosted: Wed Sep 10, 2014 5:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I see, the prices of both are similar in these days.
If you can find a scratch, coating marks and fungus free Summicron - due to the fact that the coating of the Leica is not as near as hard compared with the HFT Planar coating, if I hadn't any of both lenses, I would probably buy the Summicron first (but my choice could also be tinted by the fact that I have a pair of Leica UV filters and retaining rings for Series VI filters, Elcam VIa and b close-up lenses, 2 lens shades, etc...).

But with any of them you'll be very well served,

Cheers,

Renato


PostPosted: Wed Sep 10, 2014 5:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

My friend go for a Zeiss Planar HFT 50/1.4 .


PostPosted: Wed Sep 10, 2014 5:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Summicron 2/50 sample (bad light, handheld),

Serrote, our dog by Renato__ Salles, on Flickr

_MG_5402DV2014 by Renato__ Salles, on Flickr


Renato


PostPosted: Wed Sep 10, 2014 6:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Others to consider that are cheaper but top level:

Konica Hexanon 1.7/50 first version
Minolta MD 1.7/50 late versions with the improved coatings
Topcon RE Auto Topcor 1.8/58
KMZ Zenitar M2S 2/50 (plasticky but superb optics)
CZJ Pancolar MC 1.8/50

The MC Pancolar is really impressing me on my a850.



PostPosted: Wed Sep 10, 2014 6:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hello

a very fast test with contax planar 1.4 Vs summicron R 3 cams :

https://www.dropbox.com/s/8uvrdon8fs979fz/cz_vs_leica_50mm.zip?dl=0


PostPosted: Wed Sep 10, 2014 7:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

calvin83 wrote:
My friend go for a Zeiss Planar HFT 50/1.4 .


hft? the one in rollei mount? why?


PostPosted: Wed Sep 10, 2014 7:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
Others to consider that are cheaper but top level:

Konica Hexanon 1.7/50 first version
Minolta MD 1.7/50 late versions with the improved coatings
Topcon RE Auto Topcor 1.8/58
KMZ Zenitar M2S 2/50 (plasticky but superb optics)
CZJ Pancolar MC 1.8/50

The MC Pancolar is really impressing me on my a850.



I have a minolta 50 1.7 but its performance wide open are not comparable with the summicron R and what I'm looking for is a lens that is at top even wide open

I've seen your Zenitar M2S shot and that lens is on my buy list Wink


PostPosted: Wed Sep 10, 2014 7:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

thebbm wrote:
Hello

a very fast test with contax planar 1.4 Vs summicron R 3 cams :

https://www.dropbox.com/s/8uvrdon8fs979fz/cz_vs_leica_50mm.zip?dl=0


thanks Exclamation


PostPosted: Wed Sep 10, 2014 8:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

About Rollei ,many people say that the Rollei Planar HfT 50 1.8 also sold under Voigtländer Ultron is the best Planar of those times , better than the C/Y. Difficult to judge such statements. This lens is not difficult to find.


PostPosted: Wed Sep 10, 2014 8:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well, let me say something "undiplomatic": get any of the lenses, as it does not depend of them
- it does depend on YOU and your skills in using them. Both lenses are far better then any average
user will ever be able to get out of it. So get any one, don't look back and show what you are able to do
with it. 99% it is never the lens that fails... Wink


PostPosted: Wed Sep 10, 2014 8:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

memetph wrote:
About Rollei ,many people say that the Rollei Planar HfT 50 1.8 also sold under Voigtländer Ultron is the best Planar of those times , better than the C/Y. Difficult to judge such statements. This lens is not difficult to find.


I have just CLA'ed one of this lens this weekend. For what I can see in few test shots, is a very sharp lens with beautiful colors. Have to test more deeply for a better opinion,

Renato


PostPosted: Wed Sep 10, 2014 8:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

kds315* wrote:
Well, let me say something "undiplomatic": get any of the lenses, as it does not depend of them
- it does depend on YOU and your skills in using them. Both lenses are far better then any average
user will ever be able to get out of it. So get any one, don't look back and show what you are able to do
with it. 99% it is never the lens that fails... Wink


true, but as many of us we're here also beacuse we love to have and try differente lenses isn't it? Razz


PostPosted: Wed Sep 10, 2014 8:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Rick1779 wrote:
kds315* wrote:
Well, let me say something "undiplomatic": get any of the lenses, as it does not depend of them
- it does depend on YOU and your skills in using them. Both lenses are far better then any average
user will ever be able to get out of it. So get any one, don't look back and show what you are able to do
with it. 99% it is never the lens that fails... Wink


true, but as many of us we're here also beacuse we love to have and try differente lenses isn't it? Razz


Yes, and it is the wrong route. The skills are not in the lens, but in the photographer, despite what all the industry tries to tell us.
But it is so much easier to blame the lens, right?

You're from Italy, so allow this example: give a Lamborghini or Ferrari to any average driver and see what they will do with it.
Do you expect excellent driving results? Of course not, they rather wreck these wonderful cars. But with lenses everybody thinks
they can - funny, isn't it? Just the danger and damage is quite less Twisted Evil

But I should be quiet, this is not what people like to hear...


PostPosted: Wed Sep 10, 2014 8:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I agree Klaus, learning to enjoy the finer things in life isn't done overnight. I like expensive single malt whisky, it's taken a long time to fully appreciate it. I'm still practising with wine and lenses. Laughing


PostPosted: Wed Sep 10, 2014 8:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

kds315* wrote:
Well, let me say something "undiplomatic": get any of the lenses, as it does not depend of them
- it does depend on YOU and your skills in using them. Both lenses are far better then any average
user will ever be able to get out of it. So get any one, don't look back and show what you are able to do
with it. 99% it is never the lens that fails... Wink

+1

I had both lens I think, and Summicron 1.4 too. I kept Planar , Planar did over perform well f2.0 Leica, 1.4 Leica cost was 1000 USD for same or may little better performance than Planar which is 300 USD max , my Planar was 30 USD due fungus ...


PostPosted: Wed Sep 10, 2014 9:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I chose my lenses based on character more than anything else. My favourite 50's are the Sonnar 1.5/50, Sonnar 2/50, Biotar 2/58, Xenon 1.9/50, Topcor 1.8/58, Hexanon 1.4/57, Zenitar M2s 2/50, Pancolar 1.8/50, Primotar 3.5/50. Each of these has it's own unique character. If I had to pick a favourite it would be the Sonnar 2/50, it isn't the sharpest but it has the best character (to my eyes).


PostPosted: Wed Sep 10, 2014 9:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Few years ago, when I faced the same choice, I've chosen the first version of the Summicron R. The way it renders the image was more on my taste than the other options. I liked it more then the newer (and sharper) versions of the Summicron R, too. As you have already had one, you know what I mean. I don't have the Planar but the Summicron does it's job so nicely well most of the time that I don't feel like needing another 50mm. I have (and play with) a lot of other 50 mm lenses but when I only need to take one with me it always is the Cron.
Probably the Planar owners feel the same about their lens.
Both lenses are very nice, none will disappoint you, chose the one that renders nicer to your eyes.

If I was in your situation, with a stolen Cron, I'd get the Planar for a change and sell it latter if I feel that the Cron rendering was better.


PostPosted: Wed Sep 10, 2014 10:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Don't confuse the two Lloydy,you'll break your teeth. Very Happy

Using a lens is about the enjoyment it gives,the wonder of how it will treat the image,the challenge of capturing the image,mastering the camera and the lens to acheive the look you want....by intention not mistake... Very Happy It takes time and effort, trial and error,I would try both lenses,if you have the funds for both go for it.


PostPosted: Thu Sep 11, 2014 3:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Rick1779 wrote:
calvin83 wrote:
My friend go for a Zeiss Planar HFT 50/1.4 .


hft? the one in rollei mount? why?

Yes. The HFT version is pretty similar to the Contax version with less saturated color.

kds315* wrote:
Rick1779 wrote:
kds315* wrote:
Well, let me say something "undiplomatic": get any of the lenses, as it does not depend of them
- it does depend on YOU and your skills in using them. Both lenses are far better then any average
user will ever be able to get out of it. So get any one, don't look back and show what you are able to do
with it. 99% it is never the lens that fails... Wink


true, but as many of us we're here also beacuse we love to have and try differente lenses isn't it? Razz


Yes, and it is the wrong route. The skills are not in the lens, but in the photographer, despite what all the industry tries to tell us.
But it is so much easier to blame the lens, right?

You're from Italy, so allow this example: give a Lamborghini or Ferrari to any average driver and see what they will do with it.
Do you expect excellent driving results? Of course not, they rather wreck these wonderful cars. But with lenses everybody thinks
they can - funny, isn't it? Just the danger and damage is quite less Twisted Evil

But I should be quiet, this is not what people like to hear...

Picking the right equipment at the right time is an important skill for a photographer. Lenses are pretty like my companions IMHO. They have different personalities. The right companion can help me to get the result I want. If the result is not good, it is the sole responsibility of the photographer. If the result is good, the honor goes to both the photographer and the lens.


PostPosted: Thu Sep 11, 2014 6:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

There have been some lenses I've owned that weren't capable of producing an acceptable image (Viv S1 2.3/135, Komuranon 3.5/200 spring to mind) but those had faults and the vast majority of lenses I've owned were quite capable.

Besides, technical qualities are secondary to aesthetic. This image is soft as hell, taken with an old Sigma 28-70 zoom that will only work wide open on a digital eos. You could spend a while trying to find anything sharp in this vista, but I think it still works as an aesthetic piece: