50mm M-Mount Lens Suggestions

[Laurent]

If it were me I would get an FSU lens for next to nothing - letting you use the camera - and save up for the DR Summicron.

I dis the same when I got my M4. Started with a Jupiter 12, which I stupidely sold when I could afford a Zeiss Biogon.

Jupiter 12 or 8 cost next to nothing and you will enjoy the M3 until you can get a better lens.

 

[RDW]

If it's within budget, I'm not sure I'd look further than the ZM Planar that BradS mentions.

If you want a Leica lens, then the Summitar is often good value if you can find a nice one (coated and not scratched up or hazy, preferably the 10 blade version). It's nice and sharp in the centre, though softer in the corners. The swirly bokeh in certain situations perhaps veers into 'character' territory, but most of the time the rendering has a pretty modern look.

 

[Huss]

I know it isn't a 50 (slap my hand) but I have been using the Voigtlander Color Skopar 35 for several months now and I am very impressed with it. It is a pretty small lens with excellent image quality right from f2.5 on up and the price fits your budget. Just a thought, you can always crop to 50 if you want.

C'mon, a 35mm lens on an M3 is miserable unless you use an external finder! Been there.

 

[Huss]

You can get a very sweet Summicron 50 M v1 (the collapsible version) in great condition for $650. Or as Brad mentioned the Zeiss Planar 50 for $600. FYI the coatings on the Zeiss are far more flare resistant than any Leica 50mm lens I own.

I had a Jupiter 8 50mm f2 - advantages: tiny, cheap, nice pics.
- disadvantages: did not focus correctly unless shimmed (or you estimate how much you have to front or back focus), the aperture ring is clickless and very loose so very easy to change w/o you realizing it. This is not a huge deal with an auto exp camera but is with a manual exposure cam like an M3.

 

[Pioneer]

C'mon, a 35mm lens on an M3 is miserable unless you use an external finder! Been there.

Pffft!! You are much more sensitive to that type of thing than I am then. External viewfinders are kind of a fact of life with Leicas. Kind of like extra jewelry for a woman.

I just use the viewfinder to make sure I am getting what I want knowing that there will be a bit extra around the edges. Kind of like a birthday surprise everytime you develop a roll.

If it is critical I use an external finder but that is more common when I am shooting a Barnack because that camera's viewfinder is so much smaller.

 

[Huss]

Pffft!! You are much more sensitive to that type of thing than I am then....

lol.



All with an M3:

Summicron 50 v1




Summicron 50 DR:




Zeiss 50 ZM Planar:



And the wild card - the 7Artisans 50 1.1 which is a screaming deal at about $220 used ($350 new)

 

[Pioneer]

Nice shots Huss. I decided to focus my attention on my MA and sold my M3s.

 

[Huss]

Nice shots Huss. I decided to focus my attention on my MA and sold my M3s.

Thanks Dan. The M-A definitely has some advantages! Basically a new M4.

 

[Ai Print]

The ZM Planar is a really nice lens, but I personally found it a bit too contrasty for the style of shots I pickup the M3 for. I managed to get a really clean rigid Summicron when prices were very reasonable for only a couple hundred more than a used Planar and it delivers great images in black and white for me, will never take it off the M3.

 

[film_man]

If you can stretch to it a used ZM Planar is a solild option, not a character lens, sharp, bit of vignetting wide open but that's it. I recently got a 50 Elmar-M, a great little lens if the f/2.8 works for you and has great Leica colours too.

The only other 50 I have experience with is the 50/1.5 ZM which is expensive but is a character lens for sure and laterly I'm fed up with character, I just want something that works without imposing itself.

Another option is the Voigtlander 40/1.4. You can pick those up cheap(er), certainliy used ones. Modern, sharp, tiny and you could use the entire finder to get an approximate framing on the M3.

 

[craigclu]

I was in your situation some years ago and bought a lightly used Zeiss 50mm f/2 Planar ZM. At the time, the plan was that I'd eventually get a current model Summicron and sell the Planar. I eventually did get the Summicron and found the Planar to be superior in to the Sumicron in every regard except snob appeal. I returned the Summicron and have no intention of ever buying another. Like so many things in the Leica world, it just did not live up to the hype.

It's not really clear what your budget is but the Planar ZM can be found in excellent used condition for around $600.

Let me echo this experience. I had the exact sequence and final outcome. I had an embarrassing number of 50's (all major brands) over the years (I'm 99% B&W in M bodies if that matters) and settled on the ZM 50 ƒ2.0 and the slightly odd-ball Heliar ƒ3.5 for my 50's. In the last year, my Voigtlander 40 ASPH ƒ1.2 gets more exercise than the 50's as it tends to be more versatile for a grab and go simple rig when I'm not dragging extra gear. It basically does what the 50's do and gives a bit more coverage indoors.

 

[Huss]

$200 7Artisans 50 1.1 on a Leica M7

 

[Huss]

$600 Zeiss Planar 50 showing its excellent flare resistance:



$4000 Leica Summilux 50 ASPH showing its terrible flare resistance:

 

[film_man]

$600 Zeiss Planar 50 showing its excellent flare resistance:

$4000 Leica Summilux 50 ASPH showing its terrible flare resistance:

ZM lenses always have excellent flare resistance. Still, the flare makes the photo in the Lux photo.

 

[Huss]

ZM lenses always have excellent flare resistance. Still, the flare makes the photo in the Lux photo.

What is interesting is my ZF.2 lens - the 50mm Makro Planar (which is an F mount SLR lens) - has the 'same' coatings but is pretty bad in flare resistance. Great lens otherwise.

 

[Marcelo Paniagua]

I dis the same when I got my M4. Started with a Jupiter 12, which I stupidely sold when I could afford a Zeiss Biogon.

Jupiter 12 or 8 cost next to nothing and you will enjoy the M3 until you can get a better lens.

Another vote for Jupiter 12. Pretty decent lens and pretty cheap. Got one for my Leicas and another one on Kiev mount. They do a expectacular job actually. Just try to find a clean one and you will be good to go.

 

[Huss]

Jupiter 8 on a Zorki w Fuji C200:






A heads up (and I'm repeating myself) - I have had two of these lenses and they only focused correctly on a Zorki and a Fed. The focus register is different on those cameras than on Leicas. They did NOT focus correctly on any of my Leica Ms.
They will either have to be shimmed or you will have to estimate how much to forward/back focus.

How come no-one else is mentioning this who is recommending these lenses?

 

[Huss]

Summicron 50mm v1 (collapsible). About $700. The one thing I don't like about this lens is the infinity lock implementation.

 

[Moose22]

Summicron 50mm v1 (collapsible). About $700. The one thing I don't like about this lens is the infinity lock implementation.

I have this one. It's great... but

1. I agree on the infinity lock. Just got used to it, but you can go over which bugs me.
2. The glass on these is ridiculously soft. Mine's a 2 owner lens that has been recently CLAd, else I'd not have gotten collapsible. Have to be careful not to get one with the glass mistreated, most of the are rough.

 

[Huss]

The M3 works really nicely with 40mm lenses. Just use the entire VF outside the 50mm frame lines. The Summicron 40 f2 is super compact too.

Leica M3, Summicron 40, Arista 100 (exp 2010) pushed to 400 in DF 96

 

[Kodachromeguy]

I dis the same when I got my M4. Started with a Jupiter 12, which I stupidely sold when I could afford a Zeiss Biogon.

Jupiter 12 or 8 cost next to nothing and you will enjoy the M3 until you can get a better lens.

I will second that suggestion. An inexpensive Jupiter-8 offers a lot of lens for a reasonable price. This is a railroad yard in Mississippi on Panatomic-X (yes, the real thing, old and now rather grainy) at ƒ/11, yellow filter, tripod-mounted. Of course, any lens is pretty even at ƒ/11.

 

[Huss]

I will second that suggestion. An inexpensive Jupiter-8 offers a lot of lens for a reasonable price. This is a railroad yard in Mississippi on Panatomic-X (yes, the real thing, old and now rather grainy) at ƒ/11, yellow filter, tripod-mounted. Of course, any lens is pretty even at ƒ/11.

View attachment 293319

Did your Jupiter 8 focus correctly wide open on your Leica?

 

[bdial]

I haven’t noticed any focus issues with my Jupiter 12 using it on a Leica M.

 

[Kodachromeguy]

Did your Jupiter 8 focus correctly wide open on your Leica?

At infinity, it is fine and matches my Summitar for focus. Close-up up, I have not tested it enough yet.

 

[Marcelo Paniagua]

I suppose YMMV. No issues with my Jupiters on either my Leica IIIf o M's. Probably someone shimmed them before they got to me? Not skilled enough to do so myself.