Best affordable 50mm LTM lens Summitar vs Nikkor f2?

[dourbalistar]

If you like Sonnar-type lenses, I'll also mention the Canon Serenar 50mm f/1.5 LTM. I think it's about the same weight as the chrome Serenar 50/1.8 that you have, but it's a little shorter so might feel less front-heavy. Perhaps a bit less common, but I think you can find one in good condition within your budget if you're patient.

Here it is wide open:

2020.10.06 Roll #259-05432-positive.jpg by dourbalistar, on Flickr


A few stops down from wide open, around f/2.8 if I recall correctly:

2020.10.06 Roll #259-05407-positive.jpg by dourbalistar, on Flickr


And stopped down a bit more:

2021.02.13 Roll #270-06003-positive.jpg by dourbalistar, on Flickr

 

[yossi]

Summitar, if you like its 'character' (and you could find a clean one that's it.)
An example from a Hex Summitar, TMY.

 

[__Brian]

My 1952 Jupiter-8, focus Tab and German glass weighs in at 120grams.

The problem with the Jupiter lenses is finding a clean one that has been adjusted for a Leica.

Wide-Open at F2, Leica M8.





The ones with the best glass are usually the ones with a focus that is way off, the lens received little use.
The earlier ones up until 1955 or so have German glass, and those up into 1952 have Zeiss cut/polished optics.
This one was $40, but required a LOT of work to get the focus correct and the focus to be smooth.

 

[Eric Rose]

Has the OP bought anything yet??

 

[gone]

The FSU lenses tend to be excellent and cheap. My black J8 made nice Sonnar like images, and had great bokeh w/ smooth focus. I never had to adjust it on my Leica screwmount. Even did a focus test wide open, it worked perfectly.

You'll get a lot of different recommendations, everyone has their favorites. When I look through my photos, the ones I like are from the 50 Summicron collapsible and the Summar.

A clean Summar is an incredible lens. These came from my uncoated one w/ a yellow filter. That thing was sharp! It's not coming through on these small uploads, but on the prints most things have a 3-D pop like a Heliar.

 

[Kodachromeguy]

Here is another Summitar example. A view of an alley in Kathmandu demonstrates the curvature in my lens. Note how the building in the center is in focus, but so are the signs on the very left and the water bottles on the very right. Possibly the ideal travel kit would include two 50mm lenses, the Summitar with its curvature and another lens with a flatter field (maybe one of the later Japanese Gauss-type models).

More Summitar examples in Kathmandu:

https://worldofdecay.blogspot.com/2018/02/into-maze-asontol-kathmandu-nepal-post.html

https://worldofdecay.blogspot.com/2018/02/footloose-in-kathmandu-nepal-2017-04.html

https://worldofdecay.blogspot.com/2018/02/fantasy-in-kathmandu-gardens-of-dreams.html

 

[Huss]

Has the OP bought anything yet??

Threads on Photrio are never about the OP. They are so we can argue amongst ourselves.

 

[yossi]

>>A clean Summar is an incredible lens. These came from my uncoated one w/ a yellow filter. That thing was sharp! It's not coming through on these small uploads, but on the prints most things have a 3-D pop like a Heliar.

To find a clean Summar these days is not going to be easy, and clean ones are going for crazy/greedy price at the Bay

Take a look at these:
1. from AU
2. from Germany

OP is talking about $300-400 ?

Reckon better chance to get an Elmar 5cm or Summitar in exc condition.

 

[guangong]

One necessary accessory for practical work using an Elmar is the little prong(since I never had to buy another I forget the catalog code) that fits into lens shade, so that f stops can be changed while using filters and lens shades.

 

[Kodachromeguy]

One necessary accessory for practical work using an Elmar is the little prong(since I never had to buy another I forget the catalog code) that fits into lens shade, so that f stops can be changed while using filters and lens shades.

In USA, clean late 3.5 coated Elmers are also approaching $400-500 from a trustworthy vendor like Tamarkin. Add the right hood, the aperture device, and some 36mm push-on filters, and you are in the $500+ range. A decent 2.8 Elmar is even more. Where does this inexpensive Elmar folklore come from?

 

[Eric Rose]

Threads on Photrio are never about the OP. They are so we can argue amongst ourselves.

So true

 

[__Brian]

To answer the original question- the Nikkor 5cm F2 is about 1/2 the price of a Summitar in the same condition. The Nikkor uses hard lens coatings starting in 1948 or so, tend to be in good condition. Sometimes haze builds up on the surfaces each side of the aperture: front group comes out using a rubber cork on the older ones and is an easy cleaning job. The Rigid mount is very well made, the Sonnar design gives a compact lens. The 40.5mm filters are easy to find. The collapsible Nikkor 5cm F2 is best left for collectors, the mount does not have the positive lock of the Summitar.

An early Rigid LTM Nikkor 5cm F2, sold this one to a friend for $150 last year.

 

[dourbalistar]

Continuing the arguments.... If collapsibility is desired, I'll mention for the Canon Serenar 50mm f1.9. At 230g (according to the Canon Lens Hall), it's slightly lighter than the OP's Serenar 50/1.8 at 270g, but perhaps more front heavy when extended. Aperture is not clicked and it does have some "character" at the wider apertures. A few review links from a blog (not mine, but by forum member @02Pilot):

Meet the Lens: Canon Serenar 50/1.9

Some lenses are almost universally loved, others are not. Advocates of the latter tend to speak of “character” instead of more easily quantified measures like resolution, lack of distor…

filmosaur.wordpress.com

Lens in Depth: Canon Serenar 50/1.9, Part 1 – Color

As you may have read, I’ve recently acquired a very nice example of this lens. There’s not a lot of information out there about it or samples from it, the later Canon LTM normal lenses …

filmosaur.wordpress.com

Lens in Depth: Canon Serenar 50/1.9, Part 2 – Monochrome

Having taken a look at the color side of things here, we now turn to monochrome; without a doubt, this lens will see far more use with black-and-white film (as will most of mine these days), so the…

filmosaur.wordpress.com

Here are some image samples I've taken:


2017.07.22 Roll #115-01254-positive.jpg by dourbalistar, on Flickr


Here it is stopped down:

2017.07.23 Roll #117-01290-positive.jpg by dourbalistar, on Flickr


Maybe a hint of veiling flare on the left side of the frame here, but for a lens that was originally introduced in 1949, maybe it's just the condition of my copy:

2017.07.22 Roll #115-01275-positive.jpg by dourbalistar, on Flickr

 

[guangong]

In USA, clean late 3.5 coated Elmers are also approaching $400-500 from a trustworthy vendor like Tamarkin. Add the right hood, the aperture device, and some 36mm push-on filters, and you are in the $500+ range. A decent 2.8 Elmar is even more. Where does this inexpensive Elmar folklore come from?

Ahhh! If only my Visoflex would appreciate in value the same way.

 

[darinwc]

The Nikkor 5cm f2 is the best value right now. You get sharp, consistent results.
40.5mm thread is easy to find filters and hoods.
And you have the option for closer focus if you use it on a digital.
I do prefer a rigid lens over a collapsible.
Prices seem to vary quite a bit, 100-300.

 

[Jon Buffington]

Here is the summitar wide open, my most recently scanned image from last winter. It is in pristine condition, bought from the son in law (who inherited) of the original owner, a GI in Europe post WWII. I have all the papers and boxes, the iiif and should have bought the photos of the owner with his camera from his military days. Anyways, here is an example on kentmere 100 with a different leica, a iiic I also have.

 

[E. von Hoegh]

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?

One thing about the Summitar - it's no lightweight, weighing about 210gm. I love mine, but I got lucky. Mine has perfect glass, but came with the front cemented pair about 40% separated. Fortunately I could repair that, so I got very lucky to find the lens, the dedicated lens cap, the SOOPD folding shade, and rear cap at a bargain. It is from '46, with the 10 blade aperture. I wouldn't say it has a lot of field curvature, but it has some. So, don't use it to copy maps. You won't really notice it otherwise. The collapsibility is a big plus, I use it on a Canon IIb and carry it hiking in a waist pack. The Nikkor I have no experience with, however I have / have had several Zeiss Sonnars and some J-8s (which can be delightful), Sonnars from that era will be a bit glowy at F:2, very sharp around 5.6 - 11. Fun to use in a dark bar or nightclub, at F:2 some veiling flare but a sharp central image, very 1930s. on fast B&W.
When I had my Summitar apart to recement, I gave it a thorough mechanical and optical cleaning, so no "Leica glow" - just a very nice lens with excellent smooth contrast and some serious sharpness especially in the central zone (the corners are just fine). Compared to a v2 Summicron, it's at least as sharp in the center, but the resolution is a bit less even center-to-corner. At F:5.6 - F:8 they'd be very hard to tell apart. By far my favorite Leitz RF 50, and I've had or used Summarits, Summicrons, Elmars, etc..
The J8s are a crapshoot these days, a good one is really nice, but they seem to be hiding. Then there's the difference in focal length. I use my good J8 on a Zorki-S, and leave the Canon calbrated to the Leitz standard. I also have an Industar 22, 1957, original to the Zorki-S and it's a pretty nice Tessar, I'd say at middle apertures it approaches the performance of an Elmar, sharp with good contrast and detail - the I 50 is purportedly an improvement on the I 22, maybe your I 50 has haze, or is incorrectly assembled?

 

[gone]

I guess the op is still looking? My recommendation (other that the Summar, which is in first place, but that's just my personal preference) is my usual one.

Just put a J8 on it, and use the extra money for film, papers, chemicals, etc. They would learn much more that way, and their photography would improve a lot.

I hate to say this, mostly because it applies to me too!, but this whole thing can become the equivalent of pixel peeping, to use a digital term. One person prefers one type of lens, another likes a different lens, and on and on. It can default into a decision being made by committee, tallying up the votes, and we all know where that leads. Just stick the J8 on it (which is a perfectly nice lens) and get out there and take some pictures.

 

[mrosenlof]

I own both the Summitar and the Nikkor. The Nikkor is by far my favorite of the two. Good sharp lens.

 

[E. von Hoegh]

I guess the op is still looking? My recommendation (other that the Summar, which is in first place, but that's just my personal preference) is my usual one.

Just put a J8 on it, and use the extra money for film, papers, chemicals, etc. They would learn much more that way, and their photography would improve a lot.

I hate to say this, mostly because it applies to me too!, but this whole thing can become the equivalent of pixel peeping, to use a digital term. One person prefers one type of lens, another likes a different lens, and on and on. It can default into a decision being made by committee, tallying up the votes, and we all know where that leads. Just stick the J8 on it (which is a perfectly nice lens) and get out there and take some pictures.

"Pixel peeping" Yes.
My preference for sharpness across the frame is the double Gauss type, however the Sonnar type has a lot of appeal. The j-8 and j9 are really nice, also a 30s uncoated Zeiss Sonnar. The Summitar has some of the same smooth contrast as the Sonnars. And since the OP has an F, there's the Sonnar type 105/2.5 in F mount, a really good Sonnar with more modern glass & coatings and excellent sharpness across the frame.

 

[Huss]

Continuing the arguments.... If collapsibility is desired, I'll mention for the Canon Serenar 50mm f1.9. At 230g (according to the Canon Lens Hall), it's slightly lighter than the OP's Serenar 50/1.8 at 270g, but perhaps more front heavy when extended. Aperture is not clicked and it does have some "character" at the wider apertures. A few review links from a blog (not mine, but by forum member @02Pilot):

Meet the Lens: Canon Serenar 50/1.9

Some lenses are almost universally loved, others are not. Advocates of the latter tend to speak of “character” instead of more easily quantified measures like resolution, lack of distor…

filmosaur.wordpress.com

Lens in Depth: Canon Serenar 50/1.9, Part 1 – Color

As you may have read, I’ve recently acquired a very nice example of this lens. There’s not a lot of information out there about it or samples from it, the later Canon LTM normal lenses …

filmosaur.wordpress.com

Lens in Depth: Canon Serenar 50/1.9, Part 2 – Monochrome

Having taken a look at the color side of things here, we now turn to monochrome; without a doubt, this lens will see far more use with black-and-white film (as will most of mine these days), so the…

filmosaur.wordpress.com

Here are some image samples I've taken:


2017.07.22 Roll #115-01254-positive.jpg by dourbalistar, on Flickr


Here it is stopped down:

2017.07.23 Roll #117-01290-positive.jpg by dourbalistar, on Flickr


Maybe a hint of veiling flare on the left side of the frame here, but for a lens that was originally introduced in 1949, maybe it's just the condition of my copy:

2017.07.22 Roll #115-01275-positive.jpg by dourbalistar, on Flickr

Excellent pics!

 

[whitelight]

+1 for the Nikkor. Great bang for buck, renders beautifully. Albeit a little too contrasty for me, and now use Summicron v2

 

[dourbalistar]

Excellent pics!

Thank you, @Huss!

 

[ronw]

I really liked the oof swirl of my Summitar collapsible.