40mm Summicron-C vs 35mm Summaron (with the "goggles")

<p>Greetings--</p>

<p>I recently fallen into Leica ownership when I met a fellow at a local camera store who was trying to trade in his old M4-P. On a whim, I offered him $500 (50 bucks more than the store offered) we made the deal. I am now looking at lenses and want something in the slight wide family. I found a fellow who has these two lenses, the 40mm Summicron-C (SN 2553401) and the Summaron 35mm with goggles (SN 1679119) for close to the same price.</p>

<p>I am seeking advice on which to choose. I am not a collector and unless one is worth a huge amount to a collector am not really interested in dollar value comparisons. I am interested in any experience anyone has with their performance. I shoot mostly B&W, if that matters.</p>

<p>On the surface, I like the light weight and slim design of the Summicron-C, and the extra stop may come in handy. I'm not sure I would care about the close focus ability of the Summaron. I care much more about the quality of the results. </p>

<p>Thanks all for any thoughts.</p>

<p>I would actually look for another lens. While 35mm is probably the right choice, you don't need the one with goggles for that camera. My choice would be the Zeiss 35/f2.</p>

<p>I have owned both lens and both are very high quality lens. The eyes can be a PITA. I would go with the 40 summicron which is a tiny very sharp lens. I am currently using a 35 summicron(ver iv) and have compared the 40 cron to the 35 cron and there is no significant difference. The 40 cron is one of the best buys for a rangefinder</p>

<p>Don't get the goggles 35 or the 40. The 40 is very good but is neither fish nor fowl on the M4P. Totally agree that the Zeiss 35/2 is a super choice. An older cron 35/2 would also be good. Or even the Voigtlander Nokton 35/1.4, which I use on my M8. For the first time in a long time there is a good variety of reasonably priced 35s out there.</p>

<p>Not fish nor fowl, but a very handy field of view. The 40 is excellent and beautifully small. Take note of what John says, since he has actually used the lens. I use a 40/2 Rokkor (almost the same) on an M6 and I have filed it to bring up the 35mm frame lines (very easy 5 minute job - search site for instructions). In my experience, at anything over 2 metres it is a better match for the 35 mm framelines than my 35 lux.</p>

<p>Thanks all for the excellent input. Since I have access to these two lenses for good and cheap (two birds in the hand) and I cannot really afford the extra few hundred more bucks for the next-cheapest options (these are going for $300 and the zeiss and the voigtlanders seem to run in the $700 - 800 range), I am probably going to go for the 40mm.</p>

<p>Thanks again to all and on your behalf I hereby welcome myself to Leicaland.</p>

<p>The Summaron 35mm lens with "goggles" are not for close-up pictures. They are for the M3 camera that didn't have the frame lines for the 35mm field of view.</p>

<p>It will work on any M camera that has a viewfinder. You will be using the 50mm frame line.</p>

<p>One thing to be aware of is that the 40mm Summicron uses a different filter thread pitch from standard 39mm Leica filters. It is difficult to find filters to fit it. The Summaron takes ordinary 39mm Leica filters, as well as those by Hoya, Heliopan, B&W.<br>

The 40mm Rokkor is optically equivalent to the Summicron, but uses 40.5mm filters, which are still made. I use it in preference to the Summicron for that reason.<br>

Is it the f/2.8 Summaron? I used to have one. Love its imaging! If you wear glasses, the goggles might not be a disadvantage. They cause the entire 35mm field to appear within the 50mm frameline, making it visible at aglance to an eyeglass wearer. It's the same view as if you were to use a 35mm lens on an M6 with .58 finder.</p>

<p>Actually, Rob, the 40mm summicron also uses 40.5 mm filters as well. The lens shade screws off and the filters are drop-in. The Rokkor is a very close copy. If it also uses 40.5, it's closer than I thought. I have the 'cron on my CL.</p>

<p>What's even more fun is if you find a 90mm rokkor made for the Minolta CLE -- it is the leica lens, just with a different lens name ring on the front.</p>

<p>40.5 mm filters are a tad hard to find as well, but they don't get thin with age or anthing, so how many do you need?</p>

<p>I own both the Summicron C 40/2 (on the Leica CL, an ultra classic set) and the goggled Summaron 35/2.8 (on the Leica M3, another ultra classic set). Are both excellent performers.<br>

Ciao. </p>

<blockquote>

<p>zeiss and the voigtlanders seem to run in the $700 - 800 range</p>

</blockquote>

<p>While that may be true for the Zeiss, there are a number of 35mm Voigts that can be had new for <strong>well</strong> under $700. Even the new summicron/summilux styled 35/1.4 is only $580. Brand new 40/1.4's from Voigt are $370. Not much more than you are paying for the "bird in your hand" and a whole stop faster. Plus, there are a pile of voigts out on the used market for even less. I picked up a 35/2.5 for $155 off of ebay.</p>

<p>That having been said, I have owned two 40/2 summicrons and they were both great lenses. The worst aspect is learning to gustimate the field of view using the 50mm framelines. And that is something you get used to very quickly.</p>