Leica Summaron f/3.5

<p>Another <strong>"Look inside":</strong></p>

<p>Check out this very typical <strong>lubricant failure.</strong> This time in a LTM 3.5cm f/3.5 Summaron.<br>

The lube has congealed to the point of taking up the form of the helical thread. (See the tweezer picture)<br>

This lens as a result, also had significant migrating of the lubricants to the aperture blades, that then out-gassed into the elements in the form of the dreaded <strong>fog/haze.</strong></p>

<p>Once fully solvent washed, then reapplication of the new synthetic lubricants, coupled to a careful cleaning of the tiny elements; and you once again have a crystal clear, smooth & stunning little performer... </p>

<p>This lens is one of my favorites of all time. Once serviced, nothing is smaller, more versatile and as impressive optically as this model Leica lens. (Put an M-adapter on it and then broaden your horizons !)</p><div></div>

<p>Gus,</p>

<p>I can't believe there are so many parts in a LTM Summaron 35mm f3.5. The lens is tiny! I envy people being able to do the kind of work you do. </p>

<p>I can change the oil in my Nissan Xterra, but that's about the extent of my mechanical prowess.</p>

<p>Gus, thanks for the insight and example of lubricant problems in long use. Barnack and his optical colleagues would likely also be highly pleased to see how this later lens maintained the old Leitz tradition. I wonder if the even more recent lenses are as equally well built and whether the mechanical side has kept up with the optical advances with the higher speed lenses? The new lenses focus smoothly out of the box, but is that an acceptable indicator in itself? Their prices should probably denote highest quality.</p>

<p><strong>Erwin Puts</strong> partial comments regarding this lens, as published in the Hove Leica Pocket Book, 7th Edition.</p>

<p><strong>Summicron 1:3.5/35mm</strong> (Screw or Bayonet mount)</p>

<p>"Vignetting is 1.6 stops and there is no distortion. The lens is a very fine performer and would be rated as very good, even according to todays standards. Overall contrast is medium to high and the central definition is quite high, bringing in fine detail with clarity. The zonal areas and the corners are low contrast and finer detail is recorded with some softness and there is some astigmatism. Best aperture is f/5.6 where excellent image quality is delivered."</p>

<p>I've had two examples. A fine lens, if rather small for clumsy fingers.</p>

<p>Here's a snap with mine, from a couple of weeks ago. I don't think it's ever been CLA'd but it doesn't look as if it needs it much.<br>

<img src="http://www.peeble.com/hands.jpg" alt="" /></p>

 

<p>Just a step above in quality is the 35 f/2.8 Summaron, I bought mine a little over 40 years ago, at f/5.6 to f/8 this lens will stand against anything that Leica has to offer, if you do not need speed look into this one.</p>

<p>Gus<br>

Thanks for another interesting post, here's a pic with my 3.5 summaron, (not cleaned yet), has haze, ect inside.<br>

It performs excellent wide open or stopped down, and ultra compact.</p><div></div>

<p> </p><div></div>

<p>another shot but wide open</p><div></div>

<p> </p><div></div>

<p>Unfortunately the 700 pixels dosen't do the lens justice, but by comparison this lens performs as well as any, for your everyday picture taking.</p>

<p>It is a sweet lens. I have it in both the LTM and M mount versions. I had to have the LTM version cleaned a few years ago. </p>

<p>It's quite good value in M mount, at least compared to the 'cron.</p>

<p>The Summaron is a wonderful performer.</p>

<p>Does anyone know who at Leitz designed the Summaron? All my M-lenses were designed by Dr. Walter Mandler and my Summitar by Max Berek but I can't find any info on the designer of this lens.</p>

<p><a href="http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5292/5481019283_ba53030dc8_b.jpg">This</a> is from my 35 Summaron-M f/2.8:</p>

<p><img src="http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5292/5481019283_ba53030dc8_b.jpg" alt="" width="1024" height="885" /><br /> <strong>M2 | 35 </strong><strong>Summaron-M</strong><strong> </strong><strong>f/2.8 </strong><strong> </strong><strong> </strong><strong>| Kodak BW400CN</strong></p>

<p>Ray, a most interesting photo, whatever the lens, with the highlights contrasting with the darker tones, the pole and the positioning of the person and statue, each relevant to the overall subject.</p>

<p>Walter Mandler was the chief lens designer for Leitz from about 1950 to 1985 and although he doesn't claim principal design responsibility for this late 1950's design (he mentions 45 other Leica lenses he designed with colleagues, when Midland was the principal design centre for Leitz). It is definitely post Berek (who died in 1948), but Mandler at Wetzlar apparently worked with a Professor Marx (responsible for the aspherical Noctilux) and the earlier 35mm f3.5 Summaron lens was from 1945 (when Berek was still alive, but I don't know if he was actively designing then).</p>

<p>As you can see, my reading is not very thorough, but one of the Leica lens books (Sartorius, others) may provide you the answer, or perhaps the LHSA? What is amazing is the quality of the lens, given the pre-computer, or very rudimentary computer, ray tracing required to develop designs, and the scarcer supply of modern glass ingredients. Do many of these lenses of the same period (58 to 74) exhibit any fogging?</p>

<p>Great lens. Had the M version and passed it onto my dad for his M3 - he is extremely happy!</p>

<p>I just read an article in Rangefinder Vol 34, #3, 2001, regarding the 35mm Summaron f3.5. Performance is lauded at all apertures, including stopped down to f22, where it is apparently all but immune to diffraction. At f22, with the lens focused at 5.5 ft., depth of field is 3' to infinity.</p>

<p>No information about who designed the lens, but apparently it was designed in 1946, but did not go into production until 1948, the first samples being sold in 1949. The design is Double-Gauss.</p>

<p>No lens is immune to diffraction; its a matter of physics and is unescapable.</p>

<p>To quote the above mentioned article by Dick Gilcreast;</p>

<p>"<em>The small aperture performance of the Summaron is especially noteworthy. Due to its relatively simple design, the lens retains a remarkable amount of sharpness even to the very small stop of f/22. At this aperture, with the focus set at 5.5 feet, the depth of field extends from three feet to infinity at the center of the frame, and quite a bit closer at the edges</em>."</p>

<p><strong><em>Robert</em></strong>, yes thanks for that. In fact, the lens has even more disassembly to go if you wanted. The double helical visible in the front of the image is made up of 3 parts. The solid brass aperture/lens holder seen in the back, can go another 13 pieces ! Even more retainers and screws not visible in the picture...</p>

<p>I just love that picture <em><strong>Roger</strong></em>. The 'M' mount version of this lens has the identical lens cartridge as this LTM lens but is by comparison bloated. (The added mechanism was designed that way to stop the spinning lens)</p>

<p><strong><em>Arthur</em></strong>, even cheap new lenses have a smooth feel. It's just that they did it through the use of thick grease rather then use of brass and precision.</p>

<p>In fact, I've got two (not so cheap) 'Mint' Nikon samples (See image provided) right now in my shop that have <strong>fully frozen</strong> helical units. (Requires two hands to even budge them) The helical threads are aluminum and full of play when dry; therefore you need grease to give it a precision <strong>"feel"</strong></p><div></div>

<p>I really love my LTM 35mm 1:3.5 Summaron on my IIIC w/35mm Briteline finder; but I use my M 1:2.8 Summaron more often -- it's always on my M2. The Summarons are a "best kept" Leica secret IMHO.</p>

<p>I have the F/3.5 Summaron with the M3 Goggles that I use as my default lens with my M5. I was very nervous about purchasing it at first but am incredibly glad I did. It consistently yields amazing results and am looking forward to using it on my travels.</p>

<p>See sample shots from this very Summaron at <a href="../film-and-processing-forum/00YThw">this post</a>.</p>

 

<p>Hi Gus,<br>

I owe a summaron LTM 35mm7f3.5 whose frontal element of the rear group is affected by what looks like oily haze. This looks like thin, translucid, circles concentric to the lens center. To my opinion it does look anything like fungus.<br>

I sent it to the official leica service which, to my surprise, replied saying that they run out of spare sparts (what?) to fix it, from which one would understand the lens in not cleanable. Apart from being disappoitned by the very coincise (and not professional) reply which did not include any diagnosis, now I need a plan B to follow which may also be cleaning it by myself, as both I do not know any good repair man in Roma I trust better than me and sending it overseas could me too expensive.<br>

Do yuo think I can do it by myself? My main concern is the softness of the coating and the steps to follow in taking it apart. Can you advise me on how to do it (or to not do it by myself, of course)? <br>

Many thanks<br>

Mattia</p>

<p>p.s. really would like to re-born pa camera repairman ;-)</p>