1st version 35mm Summicron Greatest Lens Ever Made ?

[tony_salce]

Hello All,

 

I was recently reading an issue of the LHSA VIEWFINDER from a couple

of years back.

 

There was an article of Tom Abbrahamson's which stated his view that

the first version 35/2 Summicron was the greatest lens ever made and

that the M2 was the apex of Leica M design.

 

Anyone else share that view of either the lens or the camera and if

so why ?

 

Regards,

 

 

Tony

[pensacolaphoto]

I have this lens, and I like its performance. I don't know whether it is the ulltimate 35mm lens or not by Leitz, but it is a sharp lens with execellent contrast. Mine is the one with goggles for the M3, and it is very clean in all aspects. I recently used it with color film and I was impressed by the results. Maybe the 8-element design has something special about it, but I am not a lens designer.

[Rob F.]

The 8 element version I Summicron is very sharp, but has only medium contrast compared to later Leica lenses. Leica, along with other makers, later realized that high contrast was more important than high resolution for making a crisp, sharp looking print.

 

So why does Tom like the version I so much? For one thing, Tom is a black and white, Tri-X shooting, photographer. And for black and white, too much contrast can be too much of a good thing. For Tom's work methods, the version I gives him what he wants. For another thing, Tom is one of the most entertaining photo-writers I know of. When he likes something, you'll want one by the time he gets done writing about it.

 

I have, and use, a version I. However, the results I get with my Summilux ASPH, coupled with its versatility, often prompt me to take it along, while the version I, version IV, and pre-ASPH Summilux, stay home.

 

The Version I is a fine lens. But the best 35? That is a slight exaggeration! I think I'd make that claim for the ASPH Lux. It's my best single go-anywhere and do-anything 35.

[david k.]

"I was recently reading an issue of the LHSA VIEWFINDER from a couple of years back."

 

I think the key words are "from a couple of years back", I know that when the 35 Cron ASPH came out Tom stated in a review that up until that time, he believed the Ver.1 was the best 35 Cron.

 

If you read between the lines of that review he is saying that the ASPH is today's lens, and the Ver.1 has the vintage look and feel, a great lens for B&W in particular.

 

However, the Ver.1 Cron and the M2 were released the same year (1958) and were literally made for each other..... a classic camera/lens combination.

[tony_salce]

David,

 

The specific issue I was referring to was Volume 36 No 1 2003. Not that long ago.

 

Tony

[regit_young1]

Here's an updated view on the 35mm's from Tom, seems like he likes the type IV, and I quote:

 

"The post 1980 version of this lens is probably my favourite."

 

http://www.photoethnography.com/ClassicCameras/index-frameset.html?Lens-LSM-Tom35.html~mainFrame

[eliot_rosen1]

The first version of the 35/2 Summicron (8-element) is the best made, most elegant, and most ergonomic of all of Leica's 35/2 lenses. It has the infinity lock/thumb rest and thin milled aperture setting ring that falls right where your fingers would like to rest on the lens. It is very solidly built. Optically, it was an excellent lens in its day. I can understand why Tom likes it. But I'm sure the ASPH and immediate pre-ASPH versions of that lens are optically superior. I have used the 35/2 first version lens and it is a very good lens. It's only at F/2 that you can see spreading of light outside of bright lights in night scenes.

 

The downside is that it is a very expensive lens because of demand from collectors.

[stephen_w.]

I have a ver. 1 'cron, and have used a 'lux, both pre and asph. Guess which I kept.

[sparkie]

If you put it in the context of the greatest lens ever made for: 35mm Black &

White Classic photography, then yes IMO. (alongside the 35/2.8 Summaron)

These lenses as Eliot has described are the most beautifully designed &

incredibly built lenses in their period and probably since. The 35/1.4 1st

version is also in this group without exception - engineered to last. you have

to hold and see one yourself to understand what I'm talking about; although

some would say optically lacking at 1.4, but this lens was used by some of the

best photgraphers of the time. Said to be a 35/2.0 but with an extra stop for

emergency situations. At f2.0 this lens really cleans up and its still the most

compact & fastest 35mm lens ever made, and to my knowledge, to this very

day.

 

IMO the 35/2.8 Summaron is right up there if not a very close second and

thats only because of it's 1 stop slower speed. But some images from my

summaron have incredible tonality & sharpness. Alongside it, I love the 35/

1.4 pre-ASPH for B&W images with that wide-open glow. The bokeh is like

butter.

 

But I am sure others would say the 50/2.0 Rigid, 50/2.0DR, 50/1.4 lux Classic

are usual suspects also in the line -up

 

For modern B&W & colour photography some would say its now the 35/2.0

ASPH. but for B&W work I still prefer the 35/2 1st , 35/1.4 pre or 35/2.8. The

35/2.0 ASPH is just too clinical & contrasty for the shadow details and mid-

tones .

 

One of the best lenses for 35mm color photography is the 35/1.4 Aspherical &

ASPH (along with 35/2.0 pre-ASPH & 90/2.0 pre-ASPH. Great lenses.). Colors

are more accurate and neutral than their 60's & 70's counterparts. And its just

about the only ASPH lens in the ASPH line-up which isn't overly contrasty and

clinical. And yes I have tried all the others - brutally sharp and optically

perfect. But then again...

 

There is Perfection in Imperfection.

[raymond_tai]

The first version (8 element) Summicron is over priced due to the hype of being the best lens

for b/w ever made. You can save a bit of money by getting the Summaron from the same

era instead. The M mount 35mm Summaron costs at least half as much but has the same

barrel, a bit sharper and slightly higher contrast.

[paul_neuthaler]

Do you guys remember Marty Forscher, the "eminence grise" of cameras/lenses of the 50's,60's and 70's? He always claimed that,up to his time at least, the best lens ever made for B&W photography was the 105mm 1:2.5 Nikkor.<div></div>

[john_boyle3]

I've been using the original versions of the M2 and M4 for over 30 years and definitely agree with Tom's opinion about the M2. It has a solid smooth feel and my button rewind model has given no trouble whatsoever. My M4 developed viewfinder separation, which was fixed by replacing it with one from an M2, and just didn't feel quite as solid as the M2. I like the M4, but if I could have only one it would be the M2.

 

I can't comment on the 35mm Summicron, but will say that the 35mm 2.8 Summaron is an excellent lens - sharp with plenty of contrast.

[john_r._fulton_jr.]

<I>I have a ver. 1 'cron, and have used a 'lux, both pre and asph. Guess which I kept.

</I><P>Since you say you <I>have</I> a ver 1 and <I>have used</I> the others I suppose

the ver 1 wins? I own both the 35mm lux classic and the asph. The lux classic's on my M6

right now. In many ways I find I actually prefer it to the asph due its small size and weight.

Go figure.

[stephen_w.]

John,

 

Correct. I just got some prints remade from this past summer in Paris (still here until Fri.) of my GF on the bank of the Seine with Notre Dame OOF in the background (1/1000 at probably f4, Reala, sun). All I can say is this lens delivers the "glow", "pop", 3D look with very smooth OOF areas, every hair on her head in sharp focus. What more does one need?

[pensacolaphoto]

It seems that the expression "Best 35mm lens" can be interpreted in several ways, since "best" differes to different people when it comes to personal likings of how a lens performs. The mechanical built of the first version 35mm lens is certainly solid and beuatiful. Cost also plays a role here. If a lens is twice the cost of another lens, don't expect to get twice the performance. I suspect that some people do.

[stephen_w.]

Bought mine for $400 CDN in 1992 in Edmonton. If every hair and every fiber is visable, what increase in sharpness is required?

[peter_yankin]

"The first version of the 35/2 Summicron (8-element) is the best made, most elegant, and most ergonomic of all of Leica's 35/2 lenses. It has the infinity lock/thumb rest"

 

Spoken like a true collector who rarely shoots. Nobody else could use "most ergonomic" and "infinity lock" in the same sentence.

[stephen_w.]

The infinity lock is not a burden.

[eliot_rosen1]

"Spoken like a true collector who rarely shoots. Nobody else could use "most ergonomic" and "infinity lock" in the same sentence."

 

Spoken someone who has never used this lens, makes unfounded assumptions, and doesn't have a clue. :-)

[stephen_w.]

I use my left index finger, no problem.

[jerry_pfile]

I doubt that there is a "...greatest 35mm lens ever".

 

Why? Because it's one of the "eye of the beholder" questions, and we all have different eyes as far as photography is concerned.

 

As it happens I have both the Summicron ver 1 (8 element), and a Summicron 35mm ASPH. The difference is more than simply 40 production years. As others above have correctly stated, the ASPH version is about as sharp and contrasty as one can imagine and ever need for that matter. I use it for color negative films.

 

However, for B+W and the 50 or so K25 rolls I husband carefully left in the freezer, the choice is always the older lens. Legend has it that Leitz computed their lenses at that time to best respond to Kodachrome and to my eyes at least, they succeeded.

 

Now, if per chance you meant 35mm format, as opposed to 35mm focal length, then the 50mm DR Summicron is the last of my lenses I'd part with.

 

Best,

 

Jerry

[Rob F.]

"The infinity lock is not a burden." I agree with that, Stephen. I've had lenses with infinity locks ever since my 35mm Summaron, then my 35mm Summicron I, and my 35mm Summilux pre-ASPH. My fingers expect it to be there. With my later lenses that lack a lock, something feels missing. I use it as the default position. When shooting a distant subject, I can pick up the camera and shoot, knowing that the lens won't accidently have been moved off infinity.

[frederick_muller]

The original question asked if the Type 1 35mm Summicron was the "greatest lens ever made", not ... the "greatest 35mm lens ever made".

 

I love questions like this, really. It generates a lot of discussion, but we all know there is no right answer as it all comes down to personal preference :-)

 

Among the 35's, I have the Type 1, the Type 4, and the Aspherical Summicrons, the former in screw mount. Of the three, my personal favorite is the Type 4, followed closely by the Type 1. The Aspherical gave up the compactness of the earlier lenses. The Type 1 is more prone to flare, but gives a wonderful glow. The Type 4 Summicron is the best all-around shooter, and I would actually put the 35mm Pre-Aspherical Summilux right in that category as well.

 

What is the greatest lens ever made (I assume, for Leica rangefinders) ... I am soooooo tempted to vote for the 50mm Summicron.

[john_r._fulton_jr.]

frederick -- that screw mount 35mm Summicron asph is a known dog of a lens. If you ever

need to 'dump' it let me know. Hehehe.

[dan flanders]

When I found out what a superb lens the Summicron C was I decided that I could afford to part with my version 1/35 considering the price it was bringing in the collectible world. Mated to a surplus M2 it brought enough to afford a several other lenses I longed for. Since then I have come to the opinion that though it was one of the best of the 35's the difference in cost is much in favor of the "C". I doubt if 90% of the Leica users could tell the difference by examining images made by those two lenses!