Summicron Versions

[leslie_p.]

I am in the process of looking for Summicron lenses and the more I

read articles and comments I'm seeing an array of opinions. Does

anyone have a website that shows you pictures taken with different

versions of Summicron lenses?

 

Also..how much do you think the asking price of a Summicron C should

be in case I consider going that route. And I've read that filters and

hoods are hard to come by..is it worth the investment? Thank you

[celia_bashir1]

[i am in the process of looking for Summicron lenses]

 

Indeed quite a process! Would you consider narrowing it down to one of the six different focal lengths Leica have produced them, in three different mounts for two camera systems, or is your quest one of amassing the lot of them?

[benjamin_shapiro2]

Hi Leslie,

 

If you're going to go down the summi-c route, take a look at the CLE Rokkor. Same (or

slightly better) lens, easy to find filters and hoods.

 

That said, I LOVE my CV 40/1.4.

 

Ben

[ronald_moravec1]

You will not be able to see the differences on a screen in any meaninful way unless the pictures were made of test targets full open. If you were to do a brick wall from 30 feet, you would see the an area of sharp definition perhaps 6 to 10 mm across at f2 with the oldest collapsable one. Each version thereafter this area gets larger and larger. Also each reaches max resolution with less stopping down the newer the lens.

 

The subtle image forming differences will not show up on a screen. I put up a whole series of shots done on the tail of a roll of color and they are from a summar to dual range and many 50`s in between. Frankly you can`t see differences except the last scan of the dula range is soft in the center and that is some kind of a scanning issue. The neg is fine. The date of the post is june 6 this year I think. I`ll try to put up a link.

[david_chong2]

A summary of what Celia means-

(1) "Summicron" is the Leitz/ Leica designation for a classical symmetrical lens design with

max aperture f2

(2) "Summicrons" come in

- 28mm (current M mount aspheric)

- 35mm (5 versions, current one has aspherical element),

- 40mm (Summicron-C; 1 only designed for the CL);

- 5cm/50mm (thread mount collapsible, thread mount rigid- super rare; M mount

collapsible, M mount rigid, M mount dual range; M mount tabbed; current one is

untabbed),

- 75mm (current apochromatic),

-90mm (thread mount, 3 M-mount versions- somebody confirm this! Current one is

aspheric/ apochromatic)

 

(3) Can we assume you're looking for a 5cm/ 50mm 'Cron?

[ronald_moravec1]

Sorry it was june 26. Copy and paste the address.

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00CgON

[ronald_moravec1]

Here are the two I needed to do for publicity shots. 50 mm dual Range on Kodak Gold 200.<div></div>

[ronald_moravec1]

another boring one<div></div>

[leslie_p.]

Thanks for your responses. I'm simply looking for either a 35mm or a 50mm Summicron. While reading and looking at photos and looking at what people are selling and for the price..I just want to be sure I'm spending this money on something I'm happy with -which is the bottom line-I've looked at many photographs taken with Noktons and Summicron 40mm and I'm just now sure if I like the grey tonality..it seems a bit flat for me(although I can use a filter).

[dan flanders]

The quality of the Summicron C is among the best that Leitz has ever made and well worth putting up with the minor inconvenience of its non standard filter thread. Its clone, the 40mm Rokkor, is optically identical and of equivalent quality and performance. The filter and lens shade issues are easily resolved though they may take some searching. From the standpoint of expense, the C and its clones can be obtained for as little as a third of the cost of other Summicrons. In my own arrogant opinion it is equal or superior to any of its more modern competitors and constitutes the best bargain in a high performance lens for M mount cameras. If anyone wished to flame me for my arrogance I am wearing my asbestos suit.

[johnmarkpainter]

Leslie,

 

There isn't a bad summicron as long as it is clean and callibrated. Looking at example

Photos is largely a waste of time. Any decent camera is capable of taking a photo that can

impress you.

 

Check with www.tamarkin.com www.kevincameras.com www.keh.com

 

A 1950's "Rigid" Summicron 50 would be a great start. That is a landmark lens. I

recently switched to a 2nd Gen 60's 50 Cron because it focuses a little closer and is

smaller and lighter than the Rigid. I used to have a Collapsible 50 Cron that was

great..just had slightly different color rendition.

 

The 40 Summicron (C or Rokkor) are excellent as well. A little bit small but that is also a

plus. THe later Rokkor version has more modern coatings. They generally sell for $275-

$400

 

Anyway...all of these lenses are of better quality than my Photo skills.

 

jmp

[peter_white2]

John! Are you saying the photo of the gent next to the big sign doesn't have that "Leica Glow"?

 

Leslie,

 

All kidding aside, whatever differences exist between the various 50mm and 35mm Summicrons can only be seen at high magnification and only exist when shot with a tripod. Just buy the least expensive version you can find in good working condition with cosmetics you're comfortable with and take pictures. You'll be just as happy with the results you get with any of them.

 

There are people who make comparisons of the various Summicrons and will tell you that the 1970 vintage 35 and 50 I own are the worst of the lot. But I doubt that any of these folks could pick my lenses from an assortment of Summicrons made over the years in a properly run double blind test.

 

Lastly, there's simply no way to display an image on a monitor that will show you what these lenses are capable of, unless you look at it under high magnification, in other words at the pixel level. And you have no way of knowing what has been done to any images that are posted on any web site. Just rest assured that any Summicron in good condition will deliver image quality as good or better than any other lenses made for 35mm cameras.

[paul_neuthaler]

Really, any 50 Summicron is a great all-purpose lens. I have the DR Summicron & I love it. I've had most of the other ones as well -- they're all good.

[icuneko]

The 40mm Summicron or Minolta version is great. KEH Camera has the former in Excl. condition now listed for US $364. Better hurry!

[john_boyle3]

Peter has it right. If you have a Leica M you may want to look for one of the 50mm lenses rather than the 40mm. You will have the proper frame lines and E39 filters are quite common as this was the standard size for many Leitz lenses.

[feli]

The collapsible and rigid/DR have a certain, distinct fingerprint which is very noticeable.

Both of these lenses are single coated and have a lot more glow than later versions of the

Cron. Many black and white shooters prefer these versions for that reasons. The DR/rigid

is a very strong performer and overall better than the collapsible, in particular below f5.6.

Since both of these lenses are decades old they will need at CLA for optimum

performance. I own copies of both and had them cleaned by Leica this year. The

difference the CLA made is quite obvious.

 

The 3rd and 4th (current) versions of the Cron pack noticeably more bite, i.e. they produce

more contrast and due to the multi coating and revised optical designs are more flare

resistant. They have less of the 'glow'. Version 4 (current) is stunningly sharp.

 

The differences between v3 and v4 are mostly noticeable at enlargements beyond 8x10

and probably 11x14. Version 4 will be a tad sharper in the corners, below f4, and f2 will

have more 'sparkle'.

 

Both lenses out perform the two earlier models, in particular the collapsible.

 

I own a collapsible, DR and v4 in M and R mount, so I speak from experience.

[frank_farmer2]

You might want to check out <a href="http://www.cameraquest.com/mlenses.htm" >Camera Quest</a> for information on the various Leica lenses that have been produced. There is a list of Summicrons in both 50mm and 35mm.<p>Frank Farmer<p>Jackson, Miss.

[lee hamiel]

You may want to check http://www.kbcamera.com/mreviews.htm as they list the various serial numbers, etc.

 

Good Luck

[johnmarkpainter]

Feli,

 

Everything you say is true...BUT only the person shooting the Lens can decide how or if it

applies to their Subject matter/Film/style etc. When you look at an exhibit from a great

Photog, their personal style is the common thread and not what generation Cron they

used.

 

Leslie,

 

I KNEW there was a reason I sold my 40 Cron....FRAMELINES. Yes, the lens can be modified

to bring up the 50 framelines, but not without devaluing the lens.

 

RE: 35 Summicrons

 

They aren't cheap. Consider getting a Cosina "Ultron" 35/1.7 (I think around $350) and a

sub-$500 Summicron 50/2

[anand_raghavan1]

I don't know if it is a major inconvenience to you, but the 'cron-C does have a non-standard filter thread and it is very hard to find a filter to fit it. That said, a standard thread filter will also mount on it, though it won't completely screw-in (nor should you force it). There are similar problems with obtaining a hood. It's original hood is a rubber collapsible (that doesn't seem to hold up very well over the years) and takes series 5.5 filters. These aren't easy to come by either.

 

These are the only things I would hold against this lens, though I haven't used one extensively enough to form a definite opinion.

[todd_phillips1]

You may want to consider a 50mm F/2 Hexar (if you can find one). They are every bit an equal to the current 'Cron and, perhaps, a bit more well built. They used to be a bargain at $250-$300, but I think those days are past. If you find one in that price range, I really think hard about getting it!

[stuart_richardson]

All the summicrons are excellent. The older ones tend to flare more easily, particularly since

they were single coated and had soft coatings that are usually a bit scuffed up. Anything from

the 70's on will be extremely sharp, contrasty, and will have nicely saturated colors. Earlier

lenses will be slightly lower contrast, but still very high resolution. The earliest versions can

be more pleasant when used wide open for portraits. For a general purpose lens, I think you

are best off with a modern lens (read last 20 years) or the 40mm summicron/rokkor. These

will serve you well no matter what the situation. A modern 50mm summicron can usually be

had for around 400-500 dollars in good condition

[johnmarkpainter]

'cause we all know that Leica photos before 1985 looked soooooooo bad... ;)

 

jmp

 

p.s. note the smiley face/wink

[gadge]

Hey Feli,

 

<The 3rd and 4th (current) versions of the Cron pack noticeably more bite, i.e. they produce more contrast and due to the multi coating and revised optical designs are more flare resistant.>

 

Assuming the glass is in quality condition, you might want to try a high quality modern multi-coated filter on your DR like a B+W MRC used with a decent hood of course..

 

I have been subjectively pleased with mine to date. My logic was that an improvement provide by the filter on the original coating on an old lens would help improve contrast and reduce flare.

 

Mine is fitted to a Rigid, although I must confess I haven't run proper with/without tests and all that jass, as yet.

 

The resolution on DR/Rigid lenses is reported as good or better than modern 50mm Crons so improving their less attractive aspects with a modern day coating provided by a great filter just seems totally logical to me.

 

Expensive for a filter? Yes indeed, but a bargain if it raises the contrast/flare performance of a 50 year old lens (with great build quality) up to modern day expectations for $25 or whatever.

[jeremy_tok]

<i>My logic was that an improvement provide by the filter on the original coating on an old lens would help improve contrast and reduce flare...</i>

<p>

<i>The resolution on DR/Rigid lenses is reported as good or better than modern 50mm Crons so improving their less attractive aspects with a modern day coating provided by a great filter just seems totally logical to me.</i>

<p>

<i>Expensive for a filter? Yes indeed, but a bargain if it raises the contrast/flare performance of a 50 year old lens (with great build quality) up to modern day expectations for $25 or whatever.</i>

<p>

Your logic is flawed. Seriously so.