3.5 Summaron question

[anhtu]

Hi folks,

 

I'm curious about the 35mm Summaron in thread mount. Seems like a very compact

lens. What do people think about this lens? (not sure how many versions there

are) and does it flare easy? I'm looking to maybe get one for purely B&W film ..

maybe a fine grain film. Any insights appreciated.

 

thanks

anhtu

[Prof-K]

I just got this lens. In LTM, there are two versions, one takes A36 filter, while the other takes E39 (I think the optical formulae are the same). Mine is the older A36 version. It looks kinda cute, but handling is a bit problematic. Changing apertures is tricky (requires a three-finger operation, rather than two) if the lens is not locked at infinity. I also sometimes accidentally change the aperture while focusing the lens. I don't know whether the hood will fix this problem (BTW, the right hood is FOOKH, which is very costly).

 

Most of these lenses will have some haze (?). Mine looks like new, but have some internal haze (can only be seen with a flashlight). Mine does flare (but it might be due to the haze); stopped down, it has slightly better contrast than the summicron 50 rigid. Its sharp enough for me, even wide open.

 

Look in the archives, you'll find a lot of discussion on this lens.

[Prof-K]

Forgot to mention: they say, you can stop it down all the way to f/22 and not loose sharpness!

 

<a href="http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder.tcl?folder_id=614394">Here</a> are some of my test shots (mind that mine has some haze and a small air-bubble inside it).

[carl_larocca1]

Thank you for the Latin plural of 'formula.' Note to sportswriters: it's 'two stadia,' not 'two stadiums.'

[GlennS]

A GREAT lens that I was a damn fool to sell. So much for deciding to sell off my LTM outfit and concentrate on M's. There's a few shots in my gallery with the Summaron. Here's one shot on FP4 souped in D76.

 

<center><img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/4552084-lg.jpg"></center>

[blowingsky]

I have the lens in the M mount with goggles. Same lens, I believe. I found it to be sharp and have good color transmission. It seems to have a signature when it comes to bright objects, particularly high contract rim light in B & W. In that circumstance it has an attractive glow or slight diffusion that adds mood without making the picture seem soft or blurry. It isn't so easy to handle, and you might want to consider the CV 35mm 2.5 for all round brilliance.

[dan flanders]

I have used the 3.5 Summaron for near on to forty years and am not prepared to say it is better than X or worse than Y, but that it has always been satisfactory to my needs. It is compact and light, and its bulk is no more than the collapsed Elmar50. Mine is the older version that takes A36 filters. It does NOT have filter threads in the bezel but by using the SOOGZ it accepts E39 filters and the lens hoods designated for the Summicrons. Considering its current market cost it is one of the more attractive choices in its class.

[anhtu]

I've actually handled this lens in the local camera shop - very compact. Yes, tiny Summaron is a bit twiddly but most of my shots are aperture priority so it should be ok. I was trying to find a decent pairing of lens/camera for my take-in-coat-pocket kit. I like the contrast of edges as seen in the picture below taken by Bill Liao. <br/><br/>Thanks all for your opinions. I might take the lenss for a spin and see how it goes. A freshly CLAed Summaron for $150USD. :-) <br>

<br>

<img src="http://static.flickr.com/34/118784932_24c8d6bfe1_b.jpg">

[alex_lofquist]

It is a very nice lens with little flare. Much sharper than the 35mm f/3.5 Elmar that it replaced. The bright-line viewfinder for it might be hard to find, and even then expensive!

[anhtu]

Shakil and Glen,

 

Many thanks for the sample pics!!

[LMar]

I love my A 36 LTM version (early 1950's, I believe).<div></div>

[steve salmons]

I too have this lens in the coated A36 version and have found it to be a very satisfactory performer although the aperture ring on mine is a little stiff. It is the perfect lens to use zone focused on my Leica Standard.<br>

Finding the correct lenshood can be a difficult and expensive path though. My solution to this,which so far has served me well,was to use a SOOGZ adapter which converts the lens to an E39 filter thread. I then took the glass out of an old 39mm thread filter and screwed the filter ring into the SOOGZ.The combination of the SOOGZ and the filter ring creates a short hood for the lens which is adequate for most situations.<br>

You may have to hunt around a bit for a SOOGZ and this item is not cheap either, but I justified the cost of mine because all my LTM lenses are of the A36 spec. <br>

Alternatively you could probably rig something by removing the glass from an old A36 filter and using super glue to attach an appropriately sized metal/plastic slip on hood.

Good luck with lens, Steve

[blowingsky]

On my googled M version, I never needed a lens hood due to the recession and small surface area of the objective lens.

[dan flanders]

In my experience using circular hoods on this lens is hardly worth the trouble. The front element is recessed far enough into the mount to provide some flare protection but a rectangular hood is really needed in severe contre-jour situations. I use the SOOGZ and 12526 hood. However, this requires that the hood be re-oriented after any focusing change which for me is not a serious issue since I usually keep the lens focused at the hyperfocal distance for the great majority of my shooting. Even at the going rate, the cost of a SOOGZ is worth it in the accessory flexibility it affords.