Fred, thanks for the comparisons! Since I already have the Rigid, this virtually eliminates my desire to try the Elcan replica (and LLL lottery), though the much smaller size of the Elcan replica is certainly compelling.
It's like the rendering of the two is 90% similar when backlit. The slightly smoother background rendering of the Elcan becomes more apparent to my eyes in the front-lit scenes, which is where I prefer it over the Rigid.
Yes, when I first got the Rigid some years ago, it surprised me how decently sharp it was for such an old lens.
rscheffler wrote:
Fred, thanks for the comparisons! Since I already have the Rigid, this virtually eliminates my desire to try the Elcan replica (and LLL lottery), though the much smaller size of the Elcan replica is certainly compelling.
It's like the rendering of the two is 90% similar when backlit. The slightly smoother background rendering of the Elcan becomes more apparent to my eyes in the front-lit scenes, which is where I prefer it over the Rigid.
Yes, when I first got the Rigid some years ago, it surprised me how decently sharp it was for such an old lens.
The Elcan is definitely shorter but the Rigid does not block the '50mm' frameline and both weigh about the same. So, the size difference is not that meaningful when using the lenses.
I'm wondering how the Rigid would behave in images like this one below. I shot this wide open and there is a significant drop in resolution and contrast off-axis. Away from center, the highlights get very glowy with the Elcan.
LEICA M10-RLLL 50mm f/2 Elcan lens50mmf/2.01/60s400 ISO0.0 EV
Fred Miranda wrote:
The Elcan is definitely shorter but the Rigid does not block the '50mm' frameline and both weigh about the same. So, the size difference is not that meaningful when using the lenses.
I'm wondering how the Rigid would behave in images like this one below. I shot this wide open and there is a significant drop in resolution and contrast off-axis. Away from center, the highlights get very glowy with the Elcan.
I think that the Rigid will do better in this scene but with reduced amount of overall contrast. I find that the Elcan performs real well for isolated subject at 1-5 meter distance. Personally, I much prefer the Rigid in almost all cases.
Fred Miranda wrote:
The Elcan is definitely shorter but the Rigid does not block the '50mm' frameline and both weigh about the same. So, the size difference is not that meaningful when using the lenses.
I'm wondering how the Rigid would behave in images like this one below. I shot this wide open and there is a significant drop in resolution and contrast off-axis. Away from center, the highlights get very glowy with the Elcan.
Oh man, thanks for posting this. Totally killed my desire for this lens, which is good! I have many 50s already!
Desmolicious wrote:
Have you ever tried the CV 50mm 2.5 Color Skopar?
Would love to see some images from the Skopar. It's a lens I've been curious about. I read one review years ago and thought its character was 'interesting' and suited the reviewer's style.
Hard to get a feel for it browsing images on Flickr. Most are farther distance stopped down. This post has an interesting summary by a 50/2.5 CS owner:
"...it's become my go-to lens for 35mm landscape photography when I want to travel light (it's perfect on a Leica Barnack). It's also very good for street photography because it's not only quite sharp but also handles well with the focus tab. This lens got mixed reviews when Cosina first released it -- it was criticized for being "too contrasty" -- but those criticisms are misplaced IMO. It can render a lovely range of tones if you handle film development properly. It's very sharp, flare-resistant, compact, and well constructed. It's the lens the kept me from buying a Leitz Elmar-M 50/2.8. Check out Erik van Straten's photos w/ this lens too. He has said it has hardly any distortion, and shoots a lot with it (especially in the Nikon S-mount version). The only times I would not use this lens are those when I'm looking for lower contrast, a particular lens signature (e.g. a sonnar look), or a faster max aperture."
Well, this is good but embarrassing news. Popflash asked me for shots showing the issue with the Elcan as the distributor contact wanted to share with LLL. I sent the corner comparisons, then I started to doubt my results as one of the shots looked a bit distorted. I asked them to hold off sending for me to retest this morning in calmer air. Sure enough, all four corners are now perfect. Yay but also ugh. That's a lesson to me to never rush testing.
re. The Color Skopar…Sorry if I didnt explain myself.. I was wondering if you tested it. I have it and really like it, but I shoot mainly on film and do not do the kind of tests you do!
Here are the re-done results of corners on the Elcan at infinity. These are at f/8, IBIS off, no filter, best of two shots for each corner chosen. Magnification is 200% in C1 then screenshot taken. At 100% magnification, I can't see any differences. Since I have the CV 50 f/1 now, the Elcan will mostly be for casual shooting.
The bottom right image is truly to the farthest corner, hence the tiny smearing edge that was present on all but not shown on the others. The rest were moved in slightly away from the far corner to show the same part of the house.
Edit to add: they should be sending me another copy to compare later this week.
As a curiosity, I compared the 50/2 Rigid wide open vs CV 50/1.5 Heliar @f/2 and to my surprise, the background rendering is very similar.
So, the Heliar has the 'classic' rendering at f/2 and a very unique and glowy character wide open.
Around the center area, the Rigid is sharper than the Heliar though but one has to inspect it close to notice a difference. Both weigh exactly the same at 257 grams and although the Rigid is slightly longer, it blocks less of the frame-line because it's thinner at the end of the barrel. One advantage of the Heliar is that it focuses down to 0.5m while the Rigid's MFD is 1m.
The Rigid is also narrower than 50mm. My copy shows 51.9mm.
I won't post too many samples on this LLL thread but here are just a few crops comparing their rendering a various distances. (50% magnification)
Fred Miranda wrote:
The Elcan is definitely shorter but the Rigid does not block the '50mm' frameline and both weigh about the same. So, the size difference is not that meaningful when using the lenses.
I'm wondering how the Rigid would behave in images like this one below. I shot this wide open and there is a significant drop in resolution and contrast off-axis. Away from center, the highlights get very glowy with the Elcan.
The blurred performance off-axis at f/2, doesn't that have a benefit of increasing central subject isolation? I've been taking a few test shots around the house, and I'm liking how it renders a central subject at f/2.
LLL Elcan 50 at f/2
LEICA SL2-SUnknown Lens lens50mmf/2.81/2000s100 ISO0.0 EV
highdesertmesa wrote:
The blurred performance off-axis at f/2, doesn't that have a benefit of increasing central subject isolation? I've been taking a few test shots around the house, and I'm liking how it renders a central subject at f/2.
Yes it does and I like the glow.
It's just good to know how the lens behaves so we can better use it. For example, I would not shoot it wide open to take a group shot even if the people were in same plane of focus.
The 'Elcan' is a nice lens, for sure. I still think it's a little unfair to compare it to a Summicron. Or rather, it was never meant to compete in that arena. It's more in the realm of 2.8/3.5 Tessars/Elmars and just happens to have to have been pushed beyond that speed limit (with all the expected trade-offs). All the same, it's very small, well built and the over-sized tab is a revelation. I'm happy with mine.
Man on Ferry by Jim Fischer, on Flickr
Leica M5, Light Lens Lab 50mm f/2 'Elcan,' Kodak T-Max 400, Xtol 1:1 (@f/5.6)
Lucy by Jim Fischer, on Flickr
Leica M5, Light Lens Lab 50mm f/2 'Elcan,' Kodak T-Max 400, Xtol 1:1 (@f/2)
Jenny by Jim Fischer, on Flickr
Leica M5, Light Lens Lab 50mm f/2 'Elcan,' Kodak T-Max 400, Xtol 1:1 (@f/2.8)
Fred Miranda wrote:
As a curiosity, I compared the 50/2 Rigid wide open vs CV 50/1.5 Heliar @f/2 and to my surprise, the background rendering is very similar.
So, the Heliar has the 'classic' rendering at f/2 and a very unique and glowy character wide open.
Around the center area, the Rigid is sharper than the Heliar though but one has to inspect it close to notice a difference. Both weight exactly the same at 257 grams and although the Rigid is slighly longer, it blocks less of the frame-line because it's thinner at the end of the barrel. One advantage of the Heliar is that it focuses down to 0.5m while the Rigid's MFD is 1m.
The Rigid is also narrower than 50mm. My copy shows 51.9mm.
I won't post too samples on this LLL thread but here is just a few comparing their rendering a various distances.
Well now, this is interesting. At least the Heliar still has the wide open glow advantage. But wow, another lens stricken off the 'need to try' list by the Rigid! I'm sure there are more reasons to try and like the Heliar.
Thanks for taking the time to make this comparison, Fred. Please don't hesitate to post these kinds of tests here. I find it very informative!
Now...It would be interesting to see a direct comparison between the 'Elcan' and the 1.5 Heliar (or, dream comparison the f/2 Anniversary Heliar). Those lenses exist in the pushed-beyond-their-limits-at-full-aperture category (like the 'Elcan'). In my non-scientific comparisons at home, Voigtlander single coated optics (I have the 35mm Nokton v1 and the 50mm Nokton v2) are more dependably flare resistant at any f-stop (but especially wide-open). The LLL products are true to their designs and very vintage-y as Fred showed above vs the rigid cron. I'd bet the 1.5 Heliar is no different (at least in regards to flare).
Now...It would be interesting to see a direct comparison between the 'Elcan' and the 1.5 Heliar (or, dream comparison the f/2 Anniversary Heliar). Those lenses exist in the pushed-beyond-their-limits-at-full-aperture category (like the 'Elcan'). In my non-scientific comparisons at home, Voigtlander single coated optics (I have the 35mm Nokton v1 and the 50mm Nokton v2) are more dependably flare resistant at any f-stop (but especially wide-open). The LLL products are true to their designs and very vintage-y as Fred showed above vs the rigid cron. I'd bet the 1.5 Heliar is no different (at least in regards to flare).
Based on the Rigid vs Heliar rendering comparison, I'm pretty sure the Elcan's draw is also very similar to the Voigtlander's. Three totally different designs with very similar rendering at f/2!
I agree that both Elcan and Heliar designs were pushed beyond their limits. The Heliar gives optimal performance starting at f/3.5 and shooting at f/1.5 and f/2 is just for the character. The same for the Elcan but to a lesser degree.
