Summicron 35 f 2.0 --- Canadian version ???

Hi All

 

I'm in the market for a Leica 35mm f 2.0 lens for my M6, and have not

had much luck finding one lately. But a local dealer has the canadian

version of the Summicron - M 35mm f 2.0 lens made in Canada ???? Did

Leica really make lenses in canada ?? and are they as good as the

German made lenses,??? and is $1000.00 a fair price for this Canadian

version in very good, excellent condition..

 

Thanks

 

Ngyuen "Billy" Kok

"Did Leica really make lenses in canada ?? and are they as good as the German made lenses,??? "<p> Yep, search the archives.

Yes. "the canadian version of the Summicron - M 35mm f 2.0 lens made in Canada" was made in Canada. :-)

Billy...

 

Short answer? .... Yes.

 

Your next question... any good?

 

:) Answer, Yes... I don't think there were any bad 35 crons made.

 

Cheers

I bought one of the first black Canadian versions just prior to the issue of the second version in the late sixties. It was my favorite lens but I foolishly let it go when offered an (at that time) exhorbitant price for it. Leitz operated a plant in Midland Ontario until recently and their products were of equal quality to those of Wetzlar. It would appear to me that the lens offered to you is fairly priced, assuming tha its optical and cosmetic condition is satisfactory.

Billy, I used to own a Canadian 35 Summicron (4th ver.), which I bought new in about 1985 for $550 and sold in about 1997 for $800.

 

Many people like this lens because it's small, light and has a reputation as "the king of bokeh," i.e., it renders out-of-focus areas of the image pleasingly, at least at medium apertures. As a result, $1000 doesn't seem out of line for this lens.

 

However, there was one thing that drove me crazy about the lens: the rectangular lens hood was always cocked a few degrees off kilter. This could be corrected by slightly unscrewing the front element of the lens...but who wants to do that? I learned at the time that this was a common problem with that version of the 35 Summicron, though not with older or later versions.

 

When I re-entered the world of Leica last year, I bought a mint 35 Summicron ASPH -- the latest model -- for less than $100 more than the price of the lens you're thinking about. It's bigger and heavier than the older Canadian version, but I like its biting sharpness. I can't honestly say which lens is "better."

 

The truth is that all the 35 Summicrons seem to be good and each version has its partisans.

<a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00Ce8T" target="_blank">FS Black 35 summicron pre asph $875.00 + shipping</a>

I have a Canadian made 35 summicron from 1979. <br>

Great lens, no worries.

It was not only made in Canada but designed in Canada by Dr Walter Mandler.

Herr Mandler died recently in Canada too.

Hello

 

Yesterday I spoke with Mr. W. S. the former Leica chief rep in Canada- met him in Leo's in Vancouver.

 

Yes, the Midland plant did indeed make first quality Leica stuff until they sold to Hughes Aircraft in 1990. It is now Elcan Optical Technologies, owned by Raytheon. They make the F1 Noctilux for Leica, as well as military and other specialized optical systems;i.e IMAX.

 

 

Dr. Mandler was regarded as one of the top optical designers in the world.

 

I did not hear good things about the state of Leica's health. I am telling tales out of school, but I heard that Leica sent someone some parts invoiced at less than 1 euro, but paid 26 euros for shipping and absorbed it themselves. That seems like a real no brainer!

 

Oh well!

Hello Billy and forum, I have a Canadian 35 f2 Summicron and a M4-2, both great. I am

wondering if anyone out there could help me identify my lens type/age? It is number

2317953. thanks for any help, Tony

Hi Billy

 

Leica made many fine lenses in Canada, as good as anything made in Germany. I use the 35/2 Canadian on my M6 and it always gives me great results. I have a 50/2 (German) that is great, but sees little action as I prefer the 35 as it is closer to what the eye sees. You can find them on ebay for far less (I got mine pristine with the shade for $700), but you take a chance. Get it, you won't regret it!

 

-Ray

Hi Tony:

35 2.0 M, #2317953, 1969, version 2, product # 11309.

Best regards,

Mark

Hello Mark thanks for the information. Just for the record I paid ?700 about three years

ago for the lens. That price is comparable to the price Billy is contemplating buying at, 3

years on. Tony

I used a Canadian 35mm Summicron (round metal vented hood) through much of the 70's

through the early 90s. My impression was that it had considerable vignetting in the

corners as well as whatever abberation it would be that would cause the corners to go soft

as far down as 5.6 (chromatic, I suppose). I liked it because of its faults, not in spite of

them. It surprises me that it should be such a sought-after item nowadays.

Having seen examples of the same Leitz lenses made in Canada vs Wetzlar (eg., 35/2 Summicron versions 1 and 2, 28/2.8 Elmarit version 1, 50/1.5 Summarit), I can say that they all exhibit the same high standards of quality. I think leica is Leica no matter where the product originates. Remember, even the M3 was mostly made in Portugal and very few would complain about the quality of that product.

 

I would not consider the Canada vs German origin as a factor in assessing quality, though it can contribute to collectibility, because in some cases, fewer lenses or cameras were made in one place vs the others.

Eliot Rosen , jun 25, 2005; 09:58 a.m.

Having seen examples of the same Leitz lenses made in Canada vs Wetzlar (eg., 35/2 Summicron versions 1 and 2, 28/2.8 Elmarit version 1, 50/1.5 Summarit), I can say that they all exhibit the same high standards of quality. I think leica is Leica no matter where the product originates. Remember, even the M3 was mostly made in Portugal and very few would complain about the quality of that product.

I would not consider the Canada vs German origin as a factor in assessing quality, though it can contribute to collectibility, because in some cases, fewer lenses or cameras were made in one place vs the others.

 

 

there is no such thing that 'even the M3 was mostly made in Portugal and very few would complain about the quality of that product. '

 

R3 was made in Portugal but had lots of problem due to poor design.

Eliot, I think Dan is right. Everything I can find says nothing about the M3 made in Portugal. Also it seems production at Leitz Portugal did not start until the 1973 and from what I find online says the M3 production ceased in 1966.

 

I could be wrong but some basic Google research shows me nothing about M3 production in Portugal.

Richard, many or most of the parts for the M3, as I recall, were made by Leitz, Portugal. The camera was assembled in Wetzlar, where the final quality check was done, from parts made in Portugal. For a long time they had the tools there for machining various parts required for M Leicas. I don't know if that plant is still in operation, but as of not too long ago there were still Leica items (such as the 24 mm Leica brightline VF) made in Portugal.

In fact, here is a quotation taken from Erwin Puts' essay on the M7, the entirety of which should be available on his website.

 

"M3, M5 and M7: three models in a 48 year period. The M3 is composed of about 860 parts, counting every screw and washer. The M7 has 1300 parts, and again every electronic component has been counted as a separate part. 350 of these parts are new and/or improved parts when comparing to the M6TTL. Two hundred of those parts are electronic and 150 are mechanical. The manufacture: tradition and modernity meet. I happened to be in the Portugal factory when the first new M7's started to be manufactured. This camera is an astonishingly clever mix of old and new production technology. In the Portugal factory you will find the original equipment, made in 1953 by Leitz for the production of M3 parts. These machines have the classical green color of most mechanical drilling and milling machinery, all moving parts are thick with grease, and the smell of cooling liquid and oil is impregnating your clothes. Even the sewing machine that has been used for over 70 years to stick the silk threads on the shutter curtains, is working continuously, operated by extremely skilled..."

quoted from E Puts' article on the M7

 

This should leave no doubt that the Portugal factory has played a major role in the production of M cameras.

Thanks Eliot. I stand corrected. Your research was more successful and extensive than my quick Google searches revealed. I remember that people hotly debate the Canada vs. Germany issue on the M4's so I figured I would have heard about it before now if M3's were made in Portugal. Maybe people feel differently that in the end the assembly and quality control was in Germany?

The assembly and quality testing was a big deal. Assembly was a big deal because of the large number of individual parts that had to be properly put together and the mechanisms that needed to be adjusted. This included things like calibrating the rangefinder, adjusting the shutter mechanism, and so on.

 

One could make a good case that the assembly and testing of the camera justifies the Wetzlar, Germany engraving. Even today, Leica buys various components for lenses (eg., different types of glasses and in some cases even the barrels) from different companies. However, the lens is engraved Germany even though not all of the components are German made.

 

My own opinion is that if the camera was designed by Leica, Germany, and the assembly, adjustments, and testing occurs in Germany, they are justified in engraving Germany on the camera. But that's just my opinion.

Billy: Whether this lens is worth $1000 depends on which version it is. The version I, an 8-element lens, in excellent or better condition, brings more than that. Versions II and III, which are 6 element lenses, bring more like $800, again, in nice condition. Version IV, which has become in recent times an internet legend for its rendering of the out-of-focus areas, is a 7-element lens that is enjoying some popularity now, with prices running over $1000.

 

Thus it's important to know the version number when assessing the value. Post the serial number, and we'll tell you the version.

I don't think the quotation from Puts really settles the issue. The original equipment used to manufacture the M3 may have been in Portugal when Puts wrote about the M7, but that doesn't necessarily mean it was there while the M3 was in production. It could have been moved there at any point in the last 40 years.

 

Eliot, I have long respected your knowledge in this area and I imagine you have other evidence that the M3 had a Portugese provenance. I'm curious as to what that evidence might be.