Leica good value 50mm recommendation for Canon 70D

[StillSanj]

Hello gang.
To keep the premise short, I've acquired a lot of good lenses and brands.
I would like to try a Leica!
I recently learned that some Leica lenses (-R?) can be used on Canon eos.
I am interested in what all lenses are compatible for canon for starters. Also, it seems like a summicron-R 1:2 50mm would be a good choice for "entry level" Leica. However, it seems there are multiple versions, some supposed to be better than others.

Does anyone have any suggestions or input as to what I should look for? I would really like a sharp lens around the $500-$600 dollar range and 50mm range. If there is a no-brainer that is a little more, feel free to pitch it. Speed would be appreciated but I imagine not at that price.

Also, I beg of you not to make it a Leicaphile vs "get something else Leica sucks!" Hijacking
Thanks in advance for any suggestions.

[scsambrook]

There are two optically differing Summicron-R 50mm lenses as well as some differences in the mechanical design of the first version which are not relevanr when used off the Leica SLR bodies. I had both lenses ar different times back in pre-digital era. so my user-experience is mostly based on what I found with colour reversal material.

Although the published MTF curves and technical descriptions (see in particular the writing of Erwin Puts) suggest substantial differences in the two types I would not feel able to say the second model gave "better" results than the first.Both lenses are more than good enough for anyone who takes pictures rather than spending his life peering into a collimator in an optical laboratory. If you want to dis iscover the [small] differences between the two types, it means buying both and taking pictures, rather than reading often ill-grounded internet observations..

The earliest models (sometimes referred to as "single-cam") are often much cheaper than the later second design ones which are easily identified by their built in lens hoods. If I fancied a SumicronR 50mm today, I'd buy the least expensive type in the best possible condition.

There's a lot of froth and misinformation around concerning the performance of these lenses. They were, without any question, as good a combination of optical properties as any 50mm lens by other makers in their time, but today some of their particular charcteristics are not really to be seen easily. I have said here before, and will probably say again, that whilst it was perfectly possible to pick Leica R lens pictures on Kodachrome frm a mixed batch of assorted lenses, that "difference" is not nearly so easy to see in digital images. And it WAS a "difference", not a quantifiable superiority. The term "Leica Glow" used to be understood as describing a distinctive vibrance in how colours were rendered by Leitz lenses in the 1960s and 70s. The way digital cameras process images seems to obscure such subtleties.

Summing up: buy a good condition example and take lots of pictures to see what you think of it.

[iangreenhalgh1]

Looking at the list of great 50s you already have, I'll be interested to hear your opinions on how the Summicron compares.

I suspect Stephen is right and a lot of the subtleties of the character of a lens are lost on modern digital cameras.

One annecdotal thing to back this up - my 1938 Sonnar 1.5/50 (Uncoated) is absolutely magical on my Contax shooting BW film - the richness and smoothness of the tonality.

On digital it's still a great lens but some of that tonality is lost and you just get a lower contrast flatter image.

My coated 1963 Jupiter-3 copy of the Sonnar is actually better on digital as it is coated - sensors are a lot more reflective than film so having effective coating against reflections on the rear element makes a big difference.

[Attila]

Buy most expensive one what you can afford and learn from personal experience. Price is good direction in quality, more expensive is better.

[uhoh7]

I'd start by looking through here:

http://collectiblend.com/Library/Leica_Lens_Compendium_Content.php

It's a mix of reports and history of both R and M. Skip of course to the FLs which interest you. Some R lenses are near identical in formula to their more expensive M counterparts. Others are totally different. I am still getting up to speed on which is which, but we had some recent threads here which pointed out some strong players:

50/2 (II) identical to legendary 50/2 v4 in M. Nothing old school here. Just a great design which is really good close at wide apertures, and fantastic at infinity as you stop down. Probably the most influential lens designed by Walter Mandler.

90/2.8 (II) Incredible 90mm Lens, same as very expensive Elmarit-M. There are people who feel, all things considered, bokeh, sharpness, this is the best 90 ever made by Leitz. But in truth the APO 90/2 is probably the best by Leica, but could be harsher character, I'm not sure on that.

And I would look at the other possiblites in R which Puts lists, but an additional help, here are all possibilities:
http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-wiki.en/index.php/R_Lenses_x_Focal_Length

Note the two 50/1.4 versions, which maybe similar to the pre-asph 50 Lux, with it's beautiful rendering. The CV 50/1.5 LTM and M is a modern takeoff from this. I'm curious as to the differences in the R versions.

Also note the many 35s. There should be some real gems in that list.

Maybe other members can point out some favorites or ones they have heard good things about.

If it was me I would look at a focal length which I liked to shoot, but had fewer alternatives, and see if there might be something enticing there.

PS update: just in terms of performance, the best Leica R 50 appears to be the 1998- 50/1.4 (II)
"In comparison to the Summicron-R 2/50 the new Summilux is a better lens. Optical aberrations( especially curvature of field and astigmatism) are tightly controlled, and from 1:2 the Summilux jumps ahead of the Summicron-R. Compared to the current Summilux-M the differences at full aperture are quite visible. On axis performance is more or less equal, but the R-version wins in the field, ad significantly so! And when stopping down forges ahead with superior performance in the field Summarizing: the 1./50 Summilux-R (II) defines the current state of the art of large aperture standard lenses. It outclasses the 1.4/50 Summilux-R (I) by a comfortable length. It edges ahead of the Summicron-R (II) and visibly improves on the Summilux-M (II) 1.4/50. Non-scientific comparison pictures with the Summicron-M (IV) show comparable performance in most picture taking situations. If you need to record the finest possible details and shades in small textures, the Summilux-R (II) has to be stopped down to 1:2.8 and at medium apertures, the Summilux-R (II) has no competition"
Erwin Puts

So that is a lens which has no corresponding M equivalent and beat all M 50s until the appearance of the M 50 Lux ASPH, which still commands 2300USD easily. Very interesting, I did not know about that one.

But what does it cost?

Check year by serial number:
http://www.kenrockwell.com/leica/lens-serial-numbers.htm
Spec on the Late lens, which is E60 filter only.
http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-wiki.en/images/5/5b/Summilux-R_50_mm_Technical_Data_en.pdf
Looks very expensive.

OMG Well must be pretty good because people are paying 3 grand for it right now, more than the M 50 Lux ASPH. But what's also interesting is the R Lux (I) seems highly prized by cine people with adaptations for aperture and focus. That one is running 600-1400.

Value: well prices are not low for the best Leica R lenses, higher than I thought, and higher than M counterparts in some cases. Rather eye-opening for a "nothing special" series, in the view of some. The best value I've seen is the 90/2.8 (II) at around 400USD. Serial number 29x and above only. Certainly there are cheaper ones, but that lens is fantastic today.

[Attila]

great reading, thank you !

[uhoh7]

[Attila]

[iangreenhalgh1]

I'd like to see that 98 Summilux 1.4/50 up against a late Minolta Rokkor 1.4/50.

I do wonder how big the difference in quality will be.

I bought a near mint Rokkor-X 1.4/50 recently for 20ukp and I'm enthralled by it, maybe the best 1.4/50 I have used, although my Planar 1.4/50 is damn good too but has a different look and I think I prefer the Rokkor.

These test results are perhaps useful:

[Attila]

Try in shade , that is usually kill non German lenses, I expect same difference what you seen on Cinelux projector lenses vs others

[bernhardas]

[Edited

[bernhardas]

Edited

[StillSanj]

Thanks for the reference bernhardas.
I have stumbled across this deal- I can hopefully get it for $200.
Does it seem like a good deal- is that version of the summicron a good one?
I think it would make for a decent deal after I sell the camera. I wold ask for a few more pictures of the lens first to ensure okay condition-looks slightly rough but picture quality probably doesn't do it favors.
Let me know what you guys think.

[Mir]

The Leica R4 camera is from 1985-86, that would therefore appear to be a Summicron-R (II), like mine :
http://forum.mflenses.com/leitz-canada-summicron-r-2-50-ii-picture-heavy-t72656,highlight,%2Bleitz.html

So if it's clean (remember you have no more tech) you'd certainly not be waisting your money....

[StillSanj]

Haha, yeah-thanks for the reminder about the tech guy ;p okay I'll try to get it and see what happens. I hope I won't be without a tech guy forever, and I really wanna try a Leica- but for cheap. I really enjoyed your post with you summicron, I love the colors.
Thanks for the response, Mir.