david_clark4 Posted June 21, 2006 Share Posted June 21, 2006 What is the reputation of the Summitar? Does anyone use this lens with any success? They are not very expensive, is that because they are so bad folks will not consider owning one - or is it because they are plentiful? Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erudolph Posted June 21, 2006 Share Posted June 21, 2006 Their reputation, as far as I know, is good and I like the tonality and sharpness of mine a lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blowingsky Posted June 21, 2006 Share Posted June 21, 2006 I used one throughout Europe and the U.S. in the mid 80's and it produced a nicely balanced mid-contrast image with a unique way of recording light. Mine did throw a crescent of light onto the neg if I didn't watch my light source.<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCL Posted June 21, 2006 Share Posted June 21, 2006 So a search for "Summitar" ---there are 84 threads, but the LONG one from last June is priceless as it wanders about the glow and 3D characteristics of this lens into more esoteric leica mythology. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john_shriver Posted June 21, 2006 Share Posted June 21, 2006 The biggest downside of the lens is that it has very soft flint (lead) glass for the front element, which is readily scratched with careless cleaning. It shares this downside with the Summar and collapsible Summicron. So many are butchered in this way. It make this a dicey lens to buy on eBay -- I wouldn't buy it without a no questions return policy. They come in coated and uncoated, the coated ones are pricier. The coating is the early very soft Leitz coating. It was the last 50mm lens Leitz designed without assuming lens coating. Lots of collapsible Summicrons have incurable coating damage on the internal elements. Summitar isn't as prone to this. So in that way the Summitar is less of a risk to buy. Contrast is low wide open, but increases as you stop down. Astigmatic and somewhat unsharp in the corners wide open, but it cleans up. I agree with the notion that it's a wonderful lens for B&W. The barndoor hood is plentiful, with patience you can get the hood for under $50. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
victorm. Posted June 21, 2006 Share Posted June 21, 2006 Ask Les Gediman: http://www.lesgediman.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
james_elwing Posted June 21, 2006 Share Posted June 21, 2006 I see a lot more Summars and collapsible Summicrons with scratched front element damage than Summitars. Of course, all of those Summicrons would have had a soft coating on that surface, while only a proportion of the Summitars, and the scratching commonly appears to have destroyed the coating without much damage to the glass. You will have seen the guff about high central resolution & poor corner resolution from Puts and others; I can't comment. They are nevertheless highly regarded. The Summitar and collapsible Summicron are both designs with large front elements to reduce vignetting/light loss in corners. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jkelly04 Posted June 21, 2006 Share Posted June 21, 2006 I just started shooting with the Summitar, and I don't have any great examples yet, but I'd say it does a decent job with color as well as b&w. I haven't noticed any dropoff in sharpness at the corners. <img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/4592629-md.jpg"> <img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/4554933-md.jpg"> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
feli Posted June 21, 2006 Share Posted June 21, 2006 The Summitar performs one step below the collapsible Summicron. That said, it produced very nice results and has a nice vintage signature. Contrast is medium and you will see some blooming around specular points. I own both lenses, so I speak from experience. The Summitar delivers the highest performance of the pre-war / wartime Leica lenses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vincenzo_maielli Posted June 22, 2006 Share Posted June 22, 2006 Hi, dear friends. I own a beautyful Summitar, that i mount on Leica M2 or Bessa R2. The sharpness it's very very good. Ciao Vincenzo Maielli Italy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sal_carovilla Posted June 22, 2006 Share Posted June 22, 2006 I think for the price you can get ($150 to $225 depends) is one of the best 50mm you can have especially the coated ones, I love mine. Have this lense on a M3 with 400 ISO b/w ...that's all you need. Sal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
feli Posted June 22, 2006 Share Posted June 22, 2006 Just keep in mind that this is a 1930's design. It has a certain look. Medium contrast, on the soft side wide open. It's perfectly capable of making 8x10 prints, but it can't compete with the later Leica glass or something like a 1960's Canon 1.8/50 in LTM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tim_stephens Posted June 22, 2006 Share Posted June 22, 2006 David, The lense is very sharp, especially after f4. I also like the out of focus areas (as a point of interest mine has the hexagonal iris, and dates to 1951). All my people shots with this lense are beautiful. Contrast is certainly better than uncoated, but not as much as modern lenses obviously. As other posters noted, the lense is often found with cleaning marks and haze. Ebay is very hit and miss - I bought my Summitar from a 100% seller who was selling lots of Leica gear - he claimed it was absolutely clear and without scratches. On arrival it had almost no cleaning marks, but the haze was substantial. Not a huge deal as it can be cleaned for a price - but the Leica technician (a highly regarded repairer) who restored it reminded me that there is a risk of the coating thinning or coming off altogether. Ultimately, this did not happen to my lense, but note the risk anyway. Comparing the lense to my 1970s Summicron or my new Voigtlander Nokton 50, then true enough, the lense is not as surgically sharp. Same comment compared against a Zeiss 50mm Planar. Against a 1930's Zeiss (Contax) Sonnar 50 - the Zeiss is slightly sharper, with similar beautiful out of focus areas. But unless you specifically need that level of clinical/technical sharpness, I suggest you appreciate it as a classic lense that has a beautiful look to the very sharp images it produces. Final analysis: I think it is an unrrated lense and despite the other lenses I use with my M, Contax or Blad, I would not part with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan flanders Posted June 23, 2006 Share Posted June 23, 2006 "It's perfectly capable of making 8x10 prints. . . . . . ."<p> Up until the seventies many 11x14 and 16x20 salon prints were quite common before the more modern lenses became common. I graduated to the Summicron when I got my M2 more because of accessory compatibility than any of its optical qualities. I could have accomplished the same with the SNHOO but I got a deal on the 'cron that I couldn't refuse. To this day I can't tell the resulting images apart, and I like its images better than the later generation 'crons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emmanouel_pateros Posted March 11, 2008 Share Posted March 11, 2008 I have a summitar in perfect condition. It is a well made lens but the coating is not so tough. I never clean the lens without very serious reason. As for the quality of pictures it is good if you use the lens with knowledge of laws of optics. ie not wide open photographs of dinstant objects. A cheaper alternative is the jupiter 3 which is an exellent lens in 1/4 of the price. I have them both and I find the J3 to be sometimes more contrastry and as sharp or sharper in some apertures. J8 is good if you find a good sample, but J3 50mm f/1.5 is outstanding. For me is the best russian lense ever made for the kiev/contax and LTM rangefinders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MTC Photography Posted March 11, 2008 Share Posted March 11, 2008 Summitar was a 1939 Max Berek design. I got a very clean and coated Summitar with 10 blade diaphram. I love this lens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now