Mike Johnston, the editor of PhotoTechniques, just posted this fascinated
piece in the Compuserve photo forum...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I should ring in again, then. I've used and tested a number of 50mm lenses
for the Leica and my strong recommendation is to go with the current 50mm
Summicron (in either mount, tabbed or untabbed). It is not a perfect lens
(no lens is, and I especially have trouble at the 50mm focal length finding
lenses I like) but the Summicron is a great all-around performer. Its main
strength is superb consistency, both up and down the aperture range and
from close to far focusing distances. This makes it MORE valuable as an
all-purpose, general-use lens as opposed to one which will be used for
special purposes.
For lens connoisseurs, of which I regrettably am one, every lens has
certain areas of performance one must learn to avoid--whether it is certain
apertures that aren't as good (large or small), certain focusing distances,
certain areas of the field (the corners maybe), certain types of flare
(different lenses have different weaknesses in terms of the types of flare
they can or cannot handle), or certain types of out-of-focus imaging. If
one really understands a lens, one will come to recognize the lens's
weaknesses and then learn not to present it with situations where its
weakness will be apparent. If you are a connoisseur, unfortunately you also
tend to learn a lens's strengths, too, and are then really only happy when
presenting the lens with situations which match its strengths. This limits
photography, so it is not entirely a desirable condition, but there it is.
The Summicron is not quite as good as the Zeiss 45mm f/2 for the G camera
at middle apertures and middle distances, according to John Kennerdell, who
compared them for the magazine. It is not quite as sharp as some of the
sharpest 50mm lenses, such as the Zuiko 50mm f/2 macro. It is not quite as
impressive in its "bokeh" or out-of-focus characteristics (the quality of
the blur) as the very best 50mm lenses in this regard, such as the Canon EF
50mm f/1.4. But it has advantages over all these lenses in terms of
consistency. With it, you will get consistently very good performance at
all apertures. Virtually all aberrations are at least decently (and some
superlatively) well controlled at all apertures, the exception being a
light bit of spherical wide open which I'd bet most non-experts will not
have the ability to recognize. Flare resistance, although again not the
very very best, is very well controlled for most all kinds of situations,
although you will indeed see modest flare effects here and there.
It is this consistency that makes the Summicron so good for normal
all-around shooting. There are simply no big weaknesses to avoid, which
means no nasty surprises no matter what you're trying to make the lens do.
You can photograph freely--close up, far away; stopped down, opened up;
with the light, against the light--go ahead. You can use all the apertures
freely, including f/2 (one of my friends, Nick Hartmann, photographs in
near-darkness more often than not, using the f/2 aperture very often). You
need not be afraid of flare, or distortion, or coma.
Added to the desirable performance characteristics are good handling
characteristics, reasonable size and weight (in which way it scores over
the Noct), and (for Leica) reasonable cost. For this reason I strongly
recommend this lens as the best choice. The older 7-element lenses have
_much_ more flare and are much weaker wide open; the stopped-down
performance of the Summilux is less pleasing to me (it looks much more like
a common Japanese lens of ten or fifteen years ago, very high resolution
but not too contrasty, with poor out-of-focus blur at some apertures when
focused close. This delicate, high-resolution look may be preferable to
some, but not to me); and the tessar (Elmar-M) is critically slower and has
a bit of an odd look.
There are certain situations in which any of the alternatives might be
perferable to the Summicron. I can make it look worse than virtually any of
the other alternatives if pitted directly against the other lenses'
greatest strengths. But the Summicron will easily exceed any of the other
lenses at those lenses' weakest points. It is easily the best all-rounder,
of current or historical Leica 50s.
Incidentally, for lurkers reading this, if anyone wants to find a
"Summicron on the cheap" I'd recommend experimenting with the Olympus Zuiko
50mm f/1.8. This lens has the same cross-section as the Leica Summicron-M
and in many ways is remarkably similar to it. The biggest technical
distinction I can find is that the Olympus lens is not coated as well--long
a weakness of OM lenses, up until the most recent ones--so flare is a bit
more of a problem. But in a 6/4 lens, with only 8 air-to-glass surfaces,
this is not such a terrible problem--more a matter of degree. The biggest
difference is that the Olympus can be purchased new for $110 and is very
easy to find used for $35 or even less. It is not quite the
Summicron-killer--higher quality control and better coating give the
Summicron better contrast performance, and the Summicron is better built.
But it is 85-900f the Summicron and not a bad lens at all in its own
right, and in character the two lenses are quite surprisingly similar. And
at the price the Zuiko is practically a throwaway. Fun to play with. For
fun, I intend to pit the two of them directly against each other (sometime)
in a series of trials, and report my findings (somewhere).
If you want a good Leica 50mm on the cheap, try to find an Ex+ or better DR
(Dual-Range) Summicron _without_ the close-focusing eyes. These are usually
very cheap, on the order of $250-$350 or so, specifically because they lack
the eyes (they're $500-$600 with eyes), but they are very good. In direct
comparison, the current Summicron just barely edges out the old DR.
Although the DR shows more flare at the wide apertures, for most general
shooting it is very good, and it costs half or even less of what a good
used current Summicron will. Ironically, a DR without the eyes is cheaper
than most so-called Rigid-Mount 7-element Summicrons, despite the fact that
they're the same lens. The only difference is that the eyeless DR focusing
mount is better built, and the original DR heads were subject to tighter
QC! Otherwise the optical heads are the same, and indeed are interchangeable.
Incidentally, don't think Leica is sleeping, either. I cannot say what I
know, but perhaps it is enough to note that Leica never claims to have made
their ultimate statement of any given lens type.
--Mike
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Regards,
Denton Taylor
_______________________________
Photogallery at www.dentontaylor.com
Panoramic and 360deg Immersive Images at
www.threehundredsixty.com
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|