35mm goggled lenses

[Pangur Ban]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm interested in using a 35mm goggled lens on my M3. What are they like - an intrusive nuisance or do you barely notice them?

 

I have found two available lenses - a Summaron f2.8 and a Summicron f2 with goggles.

 

In the past I've owned the f3.5 Summaron, which I didn't get on with and the v4 35mm Summicron - presumably the goggled one would be a much earlier version so would it be comparable? Is the f2.8 Summaron that different from the f3.5 version?

[ismon]

I'm an M3 guy. For that reason, the goggled 35 Summicron was my obvious choice (de-magnifying the rangefinder ONLY for that 35, and maintaining the .91X accuracy for the other lenses). The Summicron was the first version (and my personal favorite). The goggled 35 is a little bulkier, but hardly a nuisance, unless you want to carry it on a Benser baseplate. I believe there is a marked improvement in the F/2.8 Summaron over the earlier F/3.5 formula. As my eyesight deteriorated with age, I traded the goggled 35 for a ver. 4 Summicron and SBLOO. More rangefinder accuracy, nice lens. Still preferred the character of the old 8 element design.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[budrichard]

No problem! The Summicron is the best of the lot. I have switched to a 35mm f1.4 ASPH, otherwise I would still be using one.-Dick

[scsambrook]

The F2.8 Summaron is a good deal better than the f3.5, which is itself not bad at all - even by today's standards. I have both versions. The faster version seems to me to equal to the 8-element chrome Summicron at f5.6, and scarcely any worse at f4.

[gyoung]

I'm interested in using a 35mm goggled lens on my M3. What are they like - an intrusive nuisance or do you barely notice them?

 

I have found two available lenses - a Summaron f2.8 and a Summicron f2 with goggles.

 

In the past I've owned the f3.5 Summaron, which I didn't get on with and the v4 35mm Summicron - presumably the goggled one would be a much earlier version so would it be comparable? Is the f2.8 Summaron that different from the f3.5 version?

 

I have had the M3 with goggled Summicron for 40+ years, and compared to my M6 with asph Summicron the goggled lens is :-

 

1 bulkier

2 not so bright and clear because of the extra glass between the eye and the subject

3 something else to go wrong/ get knocked etc. Once in all that time I have had thave the elements in the viewfinder part recemented

 

Performance wise, there are differences in the two Summicrons, but they are minor, both are by quite a margin the best 35mm lenses I have ever owned (I have 5 others at the moment, and I have owned 3 others and used many many more over the years!

 

Gerry

[tobey bilek]

They work nicely but add a lot off glass that detracts from the nice clear VF.

 

Any 35mm lens will work as well if you add an auxillary finder which may bother you more than all the extra finder glass. I go either way.

[Nando]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I do not mind the goggles on my 35mm f/2.8 Summaron. The added bulk is the only nuisance for me and its a minor one.

 

The f/2.8 Summaron is a masterpiece lens! Without a doubt one of the highest resolving of any Leica lens. I get sharp photographs from corner to corner and tones are always gorgeous. Great value in this lens. In my opinion, it is very undervalued and the goggled version sells for less. The 8-element Summicron is costs considerably more than the f/2.8 Summaron. The 8-element Summicron is a very high resolving lens too but sharpness falls off in the corners relative to the f/2.8 Summaron and to the more modern Summicrons that I have used (Gen IV and ASPH). The 8-element does produce a very nice 'look' though.

[pierovitch]

Have used the Summaron goggled almost permanently and sold a 50mm Summicron because I couldn't remember using it for years.