Best affordable 50mm LTM lens Summitar vs Nikkor f2?

[Madeleine Ostoja]

I have a pristine Leica iif that has quickly become my main camera, and I want to invest in my first "forever" lens for it. I have a few cheapies, but 50mm is my most used focal length so I'm starting there. Currently I mostly use an early chrome Canon 50mm f1.8, but it's too heavy and I find it good but not inspiring.

My budget isn't huge so I can't just go grab a Summicron. From everything I've read I've narrowed my choices down to either a Summitar or a Nikkor HC 50/2. The Nikkor is a sonnar which I like (and which should keep weight down compared to the Canon), and it has MUCH more robust coatings than the early Leitz glass. But the Summitar is, well, a Summitar. My big concern with it is the butter soft glass and finding one in good condition. They're more expensive than the Nikkor, but not by much. I also love that it's collapsible, I have a collapsible Elmar clone (Industar 50), which is lots of fun but gives very hit or miss results.

Has anyone shot with both lenses? What were your impressions?

 

[Eric Rose]

My suggestion is to buy both. Give them a try and sell the one you don't care for.

It seems some very famous photos were made with the Leitz lens.

I have used the Nikkor lens and I find it has no redeeming features beyond sharp photos.

 

[Kodachromeguy]

If I may add some suggestions:

1. The Summitar is a really nice lens, but you may have a long search to find one with intact coatings and clean insides. A really clean one is no longer inexpensive. Mine has a lot of field curvature, but I am not sure if that is universal. Odd filter size but you can use a Summitar-Ser VI adapter or Summitar-39mm adapter. I like the way to makes light "glow" (maybe not the right term):
https://worldofdecay.blogspot.com/2022/02/trashed-apartment-raymond-road-jackson.html
Always use a hood with a Summitar.

2. The Canon 50mm ƒ/1.8. The 1960s black and silver model is much lighter than the earlier chrome model. I think it is my highest resolution 50 LTM lens:
https://worldofdecay.blogspot.com/2022/05/more-1960s-excellence-canon-50mm-18.html
Beware, many of these have hazy or etched inner elements. Mine had fungus, bit it cleaned without any damage. 40mm filters.

3. If you like the Sonnar look, a slightly less expensive option might be a Soviet Jupiter-8. Beware of the slight focus issues with a Leica TM body unless you get it adjusted. And beware of the marginal quality of many (most?) of the recent ePrey offerings. Buyer beware. Mine from 1962 production is a pleasure. Mr. Brian Sweeney in USA adjusted it for Leica use.
https://worldofdecay.blogspot.com/2021/07/optical-treasure-1960s-jupiter-8-lens.html

4. 1960s Japanese excellence: the Canon 50mm ƒ/1.4 LTM lens. Really nice but rather big:
https://worldofdecay.blogspot.com/2019/07/1960s-excellence-canon-50mm-f14-leica.html

Have fun on your search.

 

[c41]

The Summitars come with either hexagonal aperture blades or with a more rounded aperture. I’ve only used the latter and liked it.

I’d consider the collapsible aspect v the diminutive Nikkor HC a negative as it’s more fiddly for little real reward.

My vote goes to the Nikkor, a very nice little lens with a close focus capability albeit uncoupled from the rangefinder. I find mine sharper and more ‘reliable’ than my Summitar was but I don’t do lens tests and condition is obviously the biggest factor.

 

[Huss]

Looking at the price and condition of Summitars, it seems that to get one that actually is in good condition is pretty expensive. About the same price as getting a new or very lightly used Voigtlander 40mm 2.8 LTM - which is a fantastic lens.
There is also the Voigtlander 50mm 2.5 LTM which is the same price as a good condition Summitar.

 

[Nitroplait]

Getting a great condition Summitar will cost quite a bit or involve a good amount of luck, but a forever lens for a Barnack Leica is a Leica lens IMO.

If the search for a good Summitar looks a bit too daunting I would suggest an Elmar 50.
It is much easier to find one in good condition at a reasonable price and it is, after all, the lens that laid the foundation of Leica's optical reputation.
An Elmar is both pleasantly sharp and characterful.

 

[250swb]

I agree with the idea of looking for a 50mm Elmar, a lovely lens in every respect.

I have two Summitar's, one pre-war so uncoated and one post war 1946 and coated, in normal light they render almost exactly the same, the coated one is a steady performer into the light and with reflections, the uncoated a bit of a lottery but even better for character when it all comes right. Neither are pristine, not that it affects performance, but does come back to the point of finding a good one, they are now expensive due to the trendy millennial guys from Rangefinder Forum popularising them for the Summitar's wild psychedelic bokeh wide open. Out of the other suggestions on offer I like the idea of a Canon 50mm f/1.8, they are very cheap relatively speaking and a very good lens. The filter size is 40mm so that may be a problem with availability (Marumi filters are good and often come up on eBay) unless you get an adapter and use maybe 46mm filters.

 

[Don_ih]

My general preference is an Elmar. I have a Summar and a Summitar and an LTM Sonnar a Jupiter and an Industar. All of those can take fine photos - I just use an Elmar more. The fact that it's so small is part of the decision. But, if you say a lens adds to a photo, I'd say I like whatever it is the Elmar adds.

If your Canon lens has left you cold, the Summitar may also. Personally, I like that Canon lens, but I can see why someone may find it uninteresting.

 

[guangong]

I have owned summar, summitar, Elmar lenses for a very long time. My lenses are pristine. I also have a voitlander 50. Not being in market for a 50mm ltm lens I have no idea about comparative prices. Based upon lab test comparisons, probably the voigtlander is best. In terms of actually having a camera at the ready I would look for a clean coated collapsible elmar. Along with lens I recommend the small lens shade. This lens created 35mm photography.
I would not use eBay, but rather a reputable dealer who stands behind his sales costumer satisfaction. Such as Robert’s or Igor’s.

 

[Besk]

I have an Elmar, Canon 50/1.8, a Voigtlander 50/2.5 ltm and various USSR 50's.
The Voigtlander is very compact, relatively light and sharp. That would be my first choice for your use.

My Canon uses 40.5 filters with a 40-40.5 adapter, BTW

 

[Huss]

Taken with Voigtlander 50 2.5 LTM

 

[BradS]

I guess that everybody has a different idea of what is and is not "affordable".
@Madeleine Ostoja , what do you mean by affordable? What is your budget?

 

[brose]

I use my iiif with three Voigtlander lenses, the color skopar 28/3.5, color skopar 50/2.5, and a recently acquired Heliar 40/2.8. On B&W film, enlarging to 8x10, it’s hard to see a difference between the 50/2.5 and a Summicron DR I use occasionally on an M4. The 50 color skopar is really very nice; well built, good optics and ergonomics. I’m still getting used to the 40mm. I like it. It is sharp, for sure, sharper edge to edge than the 50 skopar, but it’s not a 50 and you must set the aperture before focusing.

 

[250swb]

I use my iiif with three Voigtlander lenses, the color skopar 28/3.5, color skopar 50/2.5, and a recently acquired Heliar 40/2.8. On B&W film, enlarging to 8x10, it’s hard to see a difference between the 50/2.5 and a Summicron DR I use occasionally on an M4. The 50 color skopar is really very nice; well built, good optics and ergonomics. I’m still getting used the 40mm. I like it. It is sharp, for sure, sharper edge to edge than the 50 skopar, but it’s not a 50 and you must set the aperture before focusing.

I agree with your assessment of the quality of each of these lenses, but considering the OP's comments about a budget have you actually checked on the prices just lately, even if you can find them for sale?

 

[brose]

I agree with your assessment of the quality of each of these lenses, but considering the OP's comments about a budget have you actually checked on the prices just lately, even if you can find them for sale?

You’re right about the cost differences. Not sure what her budget is. On EBay, 50 color skopars are about $500. Elmar 3.5’s vary from $200 to $500. A clean Elmar is trickier to find, though.

 

[Huss]

I agree with your assessment of the quality of each of these lenses, but considering the OP's comments about a budget have you actually checked on the prices just lately, even if you can find them for sale?

A Summitar that is in decent shape is expensive. The only "affordable" ones (whatever that means) that I've seen have major issues.

But as other's have mentioned, the OP should clarify her budget in actual monetary terms!

 

[George Mann]

I have used the Nikkor lens and I find it has no redeeming features beyond sharp photos.

I don't know how you can say this as the Nikkor has identical performance between f5.6 and f11 to a Summicron copy, with the Nikkor providing more accurate color rendition!

I have been using this lense since '75, and wouldn't trade it for anything.

 

[Madeleine Ostoja]

Thanks for the input everyone!

My budget is around $300 - $400 USD, and I’m in New Zealand so eBay is about the only option since the local market for LTM glass is pretty much nonexistent.

I definitely don’t hate my chrome Canon 1.8, but weight is an issue, and the newer black barrelled ones just look a little out of place on a barnack (and seem to suffer much more from the Canon Haze issue). The lens itself is beautifully made.

I have an Elmar clone (Industar 50), and it’s pretty subpar. It’s quite low resolution and flarey, which is surprising considering it’s a Tessar. I feel like finding an Elmar that is much better would be almost as hard as finding a clean summitar.

I did look at the Skopar, but prices have gone way up recently and for that kinda money I’d probably prefer to get some clean leitz glass. I’m also concerned that it’d be too contrasty?

 

[Wallendo]

If the size and weight of the Canon 50/1.8 is an issue, consider the Canon 50/2.8. It is frequently thought of as a bargain lens, but I enjoyed using mine on a IIIc. I eventually upgraded to a haze-free 50/1.8 because my f2.8 lens had a bent filter mount.

It isn’t likely what the OP would see as a “forever lens”, but is a decent performer.

 

[George Mann]

I have an Elmar clone (Industar 50), and it’s pretty subpar. It’s quite low resolution and flarey, which is surprising considering it’s a Tessar.

Are you using this lens with a hood?

 

[__Brian]

The Summitar is ~215grams, the Chrome Canon 50/1.8 is ~270 grams, and the Black 50/1.8 is ~170grams.

Finding a clean Black Canon 50/1.8 is about as hard as finding a Clean Summitar. The Canon will cost less these days. The Canon is sharper, and will protrude less into the viewfinder than the extended Summitar. The Canon uses hard to find 40mm filters and the Summitar uses even harder to find Fluted filters. Look for Walz brand on Ebay. The Nikkor 5cm F2 is a very good Sonnar, and can be found at a good price. The Collapsible Version of the Nikkor is a collectors item, but has the same hard coating. The Nikkor uses easy to find 40.5mm filters.

Priced of collapsible Summicrons are way up. A clean Black Canon 50/1.8 is probably the sharpest of any of these. I have all of these lenses. I have a lot of lenses.

Leica Showcase - Canon 50mm F1.8, later Black version.

Now I know why this lens is claimed to be the sharpest of the Canon 50's in Leica Mount. It is. The 50mm F1.8 Serenar was introduced in 1951, replaced the 50mm F1.9 Serenar. The 50/1.8 Serenar is much sharper than the older F1.9. The Black version is a new lens, even though it retains the same...

cameraderie.org

 

[__Brian]

I have an Elmar clone (Industar 50), and it’s pretty subpar. It’s quite low resolution and flarey, which is surprising considering it’s a Tessar. I feel like finding an Elmar that is much better would be almost as hard as finding a clean summitar.

Leica Showcase - Industar-50 Collapsible Mount 50mm F3.5

This lens is a Tessar formula 50/3.5 in a brass mount with "very shiny Chrome". Performance compares well with the post-war 50/3.5 coated Elmar and coated Zeiss Tessar 5cm F3.5. The I-50 is the third formulation of the 50/3.5 Tessar in the Industar series, it improves on the optics of the...

cameraderie.org

The Industar-50 is made to the USSR standard 52.4mm rather than 51.6mm for the Leica. To get better agreement, typically a thicker shim needs to be used. The later Rigid I-50 is not as well made as the collapsible.

 

[mshchem]

Nikkor.

 

[jgoody]

+1 on the Nikkor

 

[dourbalistar]

The Nikkor-H.C 5cm f/2 will look right at home on a Barnack:

Leica IIIf with Nikkor-H.C 5cm f/2 LTM by dourbalistar, on Flickr


It was my first 50mm rangefinder lens. Here's an example taken wide open near minimum focus:

2018.05.26 Roll #157-02222-positive.jpg by dourbalistar, on Flickr


And plenty sharp stopped down:

2020.02.29 Roll #238-04460-positive.jpg by dourbalistar, on Flickr