There is a Voigtlander 50 2 Collapsable Heliar from the 250th Anniversary set in the B&S. I owned one and it's an interesting lens. It doesn't collapse very much but it has good rendering. Here's an example from 2020 taken with a M4 on TMax 100. Please excuse the lousy scan, it was early in the learning experience.
Fat City Cafe, Multnomah Village
nehemiahphoto wrote:
@_jim_@ I don’t know why I did not think about the 50/1.5 Heliar – – I was on Fred’s review thread, and I have almost purchased it a couple times over the years, but always for digital, never really considered it on film. And I may take you up on the offer to borrow it. Kind of you!
And yes on the focus shift is the tricky part. If not for focus shift, I would just shoot the ZM 50/1.5 or Summarit 50/1.5 and call it a day.
@raizans@ that is on my radar and a good consideration!
@gammarART@ I am curious about this lens. Fred said their 35 was really a replica with the aesthetic and barrel design, but not optical draw. To be honest, I don’t really care how lenses look on the exterior, but I would be very interested if the draws like a pre-asph 50 lux.
@RustyRus@ the cron looks pretty darn modern and clean in terms of high contrast and smooth draw but the photos are nice…but I do think your v3 50 Lux pre-asph it’s probably really what I am after. I just don’t wanna cough up the cash but you are spot on.
@rsolti13@ this was not on my radar, but looks awesome. I may do it. Seems challenging to find clean copies, especially a version one….
@fritzx6@ for some reason, I’ve never quite gelled with that lens…but I do love lots of CY and G glass. I really want something dinky.
@mapgraphs@ very helpful—thank you. I need to research these.
@bjhurley@ I think you’re pretty spot on Brad—as usual. This is great thought. I think I’ll start looking around and see what copies I can find.
@Steve Spencer@ Hey Steve! Not familiar with your the smaller cron version, but will definitely research. All things being equal, pretty even resolution across the plane is actually a nice thing and reminds me a lot of older Minolta. But I do want some character in the bokeh and lower contrast wide open. When I compare my MD Minoltas to 80s Leica lenses, one of the biggest differences is Minolta have better resolution across the field, even wide open while Leicas tend to be a bit higher contrast essentially but fall off significantly more in resolution. That could be due to constraints of rangefinder versus an SLR lens. Regardless, thanks for the rec! ...Show more →
I've only seen a couple of the early copies of the 50 Cron Collapsible Thorium copies up, they don't come along often. Here are some samples of the rendering. I like it a lot on the monochrom. It's relatively sharp but has some great character to the oof areas. It definitely has a warm tint to it due to the glass. Doesn't do well though pointed at the sun, very low contrast
The Summicron-C 40/2 seems to fit the bill, except it's 10mm short. You'll have to play a guessing game with the frame lines, but it's small, full of character, and has no notable focus shift. Plus, it's easy to find and reasonably priced.
If it's 50 or nothing, then I'd look to Canon LTM. Personally, I think the 50/1.8 is the one to go for, because it shares a lot in common with their flawed but lovely 35/2, but you really can't make a wrong choice with a good copy of any of the three.
@RustyRus I am definitely not a collector, and I think if you took the total net worth of my gear versus most other people on the alt form, mine would be significantly lower. The reason I buy/sell so much is because I don’t want to have a, what I perceived to be, large amount of money, sitting in glass. My Ikon, 35 Lux pre-asph and Noct comprise about 2/3 of my photography budget. To be honest, if I had to sell those, I would just quit photography. Those two lenses and that camera by far bring me the most joy and my favorite photos.
And the Noct gets a pretty good amount of usage, but in instances like right now, I’m traveling in Mexico for almost a month, and often times in parts that I would not exactly say are super safe or gentrified, I don’t want to have pricey optics. A 50 Lux pre-asph would present the same problem for me—too nice for the environments I am in. I usually go ice fishing in subzero temperatures yearly as well. And I also shoot a music festival, which is another setting I don’t like to have fancy lenses
@freaklikeme that is an option for sure, but I would really like a 50 and I already have a 35 Lux Pre-asph, which I feel is too close to the 40 cron in rendering
@madNbad I did some research, and I think I’d just go for a CV 50/1.5 Heliar…thanks for the rec though.
@EMH2025 Since reading Bastian’s review when freshly published, I’ve loved this lens but I can’t swallow the price.
@fritzx6 I do have a CY 50/1.7 but it mostly gets used stopped down and evens then not often. I used a g45/2, and I did like that glass better, but it’s pretty high contrast and punchy. As for the Nikon S 50/1.4, it’s for focus shift galore, so I have passed on it for RF usage. As for the Xenon 50/2–this is neat! Know where I can buy one?
In the end, I think I will either get an MS optics 50 F1 (if I can find it and be depending on the price). Or a MS optics 50/1.3 which seems to fulfill all my criteria and be available readily.
I’ll also keep in mind the Canon LTM’s and the LLL 50/1.9 Low Contrast—both quite enticing by the images.
Having just read through this thread (and I agree with @_jim_ that your criterion concerning focus shift makes it more difficult), I was going to suggest that you seriously consider the MS-Optics 50/1.3 — and I now see what you've said in your most recent post, too!
Another lens that immediately came to mind was the ‘Lux pre-asph (I’ve been on the point of buying one for several years ….) but I take your point about the cost. And I'm very keen on Sonnars (partly thanks to your “bomb” in the excellent ‘Lux pre-asph thread a few years ago), but they obviously don’t fit the bill.
However, having had the good fortune to pick up a new MS 50/1.3 (direct from MS themselves), I can certainly recommend it. Character? Certainly. Size? Obviously. More interestingly, I really don’t perceive focus shift to be a material issue. I haven’t done any meaningful comparison with either of my Sonnars (ZM new and CZJ 1930s / early 40s f/1.5s), but my subjective impression is that whatever focus shift does exist with the MS Sonnetar is relatively trivial by comparison. Flare resistance, which is always quite important to me, probably isn’t great wide open or nearly so, but not too bad at other apertures, I think. Overall, it doesn’t have any major flaws that worry me, and I’m delighted with it.
@Andrew CD Yes—if not for focus shift I would not have started the thread
I don’t even member that Sonnar bomb thread off hand, but I do love Sonnars especially.
As far as the 50/1.3, what you are saying is a) positive and b) aligns with Bastian’s review which I trust.
Perhaps when I get back to my computer, I’ll PM you and ask for RAW files if you’d be willing to supply some for the 50/1.3. From what I can tell, it’s the more controlled of the super speed MS Optics lenses.
a) Leica 50/2.0 LTM collapsible Summitar: exhibits Leica glow wide open with highlights and has some nice circular bokeh and rendering. Con: uncommon filter thread (36 mm with special tapered pitch or an adapter is required to mount 39 mm filters). I used once Scotch tape strips on the side to attach a 39 mm filter on it....not the most ideal solution but it worked.
b) Leica 50/1.5 Summarit M-lens: Crazy and very artistic bokeh, also exhibits some glow wide open with highlights. I don't use it often I admit.
c) Leica 50/2.0 DR Summicron-M: one of my favorite 50 mm M-lenses since it allows me close focus photography with the goggles. Con: does not work with unmodified lens mount at infinity on several M camera models like the M 240 series. Bummer since otherwise I would use it all the time on my M 240 series cameras for 50 mm range. Really like its rendering and sharpness plus contrast.
d) Canon 50/1.4 LTM: The Japanese Summilux. Built quality is definitely not on par with Leica lenses. But if you get a good copy, the image quality is fine. It also gives some circular bokeh. Flares when photographing into the sun.
e) Canon 50/1.2 LTM: Not the the tiny bit faster Canon 50/0.95 LTM "Dream Lens" for about $2K, but with the f/1.2 you are set for a few hundred bucks and getting about the same image quality. Con: I had to go through 3 copies to find one which was undamaged and working well. The 50/1.2 LTM is very different in image quality compared to its little brother, the above mentioned 50/1.4 LTM: much more cat eye-based highlight bokeh which blends beautifully into each other wider open, sharp when closed down a bit but keeps some corner vignetting. Very artsy lens.
f) Nikkor 50/1.4 SC LTM: bit of a hidden gem, you don't hear much about this lens. It is different in rendering compared to the Canon 50/1.4 LTM. Wide open, the image can look like a painting, super smooth bokeh which is not circular. Much better lens built and more compact than the equivalent Canon lens.
