I took arrival of my Leica 50mm ƒ/2.0 Summicron-R and was curious to see the differences between that and my friend's Leica 50mm ƒ/1.4 Summilux-R. I'm about to convert mine to Sony Alpha mount, my friend uses his on Canon EOS. I'd thought I'd share my thoughts.

The Summicron is noticably shorter and lighter.

The Lux 50 is not the current version and it is reported the current version is much better IQ, but prohibitively expensive. You may find your Lux 50 to be weaker in the corners at wider apertures, than the Cron 50.

My cron 50 was very sharp accross the frame into the corners. The big question is, will you use f/1.4 alot?

JimU wrote:
I don't really see much of a difference between the two lenses except for 1 stop and about $500 difference.

I'd say that's about right--which makes the 'cron probably the best overall 50mm of all time. There are 50s that are critically sharper; there are 50s that have "better" bokeh (subjectively; there are 50s that are more affordable; there are 50s that are more compact. (I'm not convinced that there are 50s that are built better.)

The 'cron is a 9 of 10 in all those categories, as opposed to a 10 in one and a 6 in others.

I like the Summilux better, because of the Biotar-Type Highlight bokeh.

Thanks for posting these - very interesting. I almost bought a Lux (older version) but opted for the Summicron. I'd love to find a reasonably priced Lux E-60 - maybe in the next lifetime. Until then - I'm really enjoying the 50/2, one of my favorites.

Greg Feldman wrote:
JimU wrote:
I don't really see much of a difference between the two lenses except for 1 stop and about $500 difference.

I'd say that's about right--which makes the 'cron probably the best overall 50mm of all time. There are 50s that are critically sharper; there are 50s that have "better" bokeh (subjectively; there are 50s that are more affordable; there are 50s that are more compact. (I'm not convinced that there are 50s that are built better.)

The 'cron is a 9 of 10 in all those categories, as opposed to a 10 in one and a 6 in others.

+1

I tested an E60 lux against my cron and decidied to keep the cron, mainly a financial decision as the difference wasn't worth the money. Yes, if they cost the same I'd get the E60, but they don't.

JJ

Figure I'd better give you guys a heads up, I was gonna bid up and acquire another one, but I don't have enough disposable income atm. I've already communed with the seller and he ships worldwide for ~55 euro and will declare at a lower value if (like me) you live in a country with insane import tax.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=110424092032

3hrs to go.

cavewalker wrote:
I like the Summilux better, because of the Biotar-Type Highlight bokeh.

+1

You have excellent taste in bokeh, cavewalker.

thrice wrote:
Figure I'd better give you guys a heads up, I was gonna bid up and acquire another one, but I don't have enough disposable income atm. I've already communed with the seller and he ships worldwide for ~55 euro and will declare at a lower value if (like me) you live in a country with insane import tax.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=110424092032

3hrs to go.

He has 0 feedback as a seller though... Never had any probs buying expensive lenses on eBay, but personally, i'd like to use a seller with many sales and good feedback.

PeterGlaso wrote:
He has 0 feedback as a seller though... Never had any probs buying expensive lenses on eBay, but personally, i'd like to use a seller with many sales and good feedback.


Oh I hear ya, but ebay will cover you, and also he said it's unmounted. Seemed like a really genuine guy over e-mail, fluent english etc. If he was a scammer wouldn't he have posted on US ebay and specified he shipped everywhere to get the exposure?

Either way, someone got a great deal. I paid 2k for mine and considered myself lucky, such a great lens.