Jump to content

Summarex Filter


Beyder28

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I recently was fortunate enough to pick up a mint 85mm Summarex with the hood and leather case. The lens exceeded my expectations in terms of quality and sharpness. I recently bought a filter to protect it and realized that what I purchased was actually an SL filter and not a UV.

 

Does anyone have any experience with SL filters? What are your thoughts, recommendations, etc. My main purpose for the filter was to protect that lens. I am told that it creates a warm effect to the photos. Not sure if I want that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

x

You'll get a very slightly warmer effect if you shoot and view colour slides, which could be noticeable if you're projecting successive shots in identical light with the Summarex and other lenses, especially another antique lens with no UV filter.

 

If you're using colour neg film the difference is not significant except perhaps for the most critical work (in which case you wouldn't have needed to ask the question) and can be corrected in the darkroom or digitally.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice buy Beyder... Summarex is something special :)... and to protect that big piece of glass at front is mandatory...

Is yours rather next to mine as age ?

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree with Giordano. A Skylight filter will have a slight warming effect, but it will be difficult to notice unless you have a side by side comparison on color slides. Go ahead and use it; my guess is you will not really notice the warming.

 

Guy

 

I am using it with the M9-P.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice buy Beyder... Summarex is something special :)... and to protect that big piece of glass at front is mandatory...

Is yours rather next to mine as age ?

 

I believe yours looks to be a later version than mine. Mine is a 1952 version with serial 940896. And you can see by the pic below that the first ring (closest to base of barrel) is not rounded like yours. I believe yours is the last version they made. I believe version 5 it was. Even though, from what I read in the last LFI, they all have the same optical quality just some design differences with the barrel.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe yours looks to be a later version than mine. Mine is a 1952 version with serial 940896. And you can see by the pic below that the first ring (closest to base of barrel) is not rounded like yours. I believe yours is the last version they made. I believe version 5 it was. Even though, from what I read in the last LFI, they all have the same optical quality just some design differences with the barrel.

Nice lens

and I agree with you about the LFI (excellent article)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice lens

and I agree with you about the LFI (excellent article)

 

Thank you. I was lucky enough to find one that is truly mint with the hood, both caps and also the elusive brown leather case (almost mint). Hard to find that case from what I understand.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes...:o (even if filters do fit)... glass is good+, but body is, let's say, "C+"... but is MY Summarex from 1987... :cool:

 

According to the LFI article, your lens was produced between 1958 and 1962 and is the 6th version. What's interesting is that it says that there were only 375 lenses produced of the last batch (version 6) of the Summarex ranging from serial #1.151.001 to #1.151.450 (the numbers are irregular).

Link to post
Share on other sites

According to the LFI article, your lens was produced between 1958 and 1962 and is the 6th version. What's interesting is that it says that there were only 375 lenses produced of the last batch (version 6) of the Summarex ranging from serial #1.151.001 to #1.151.450 (the numbers are irregular).

 

One of those :

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites

So does anyone else have any experience with the Skylight filter? Better to get the UV instead?

 

Sorry, I thought that was clear from my previous post. I have extensive experience with both skylight and UV filters. The difference between the two on a digital camera is only significant where colour matching is critical. For general and available light photography it scarcely matters which you use; you only need the UV if the skylight filter offends your sense of order.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, I thought that was clear from my previous post. I have extensive experience with both skylight and UV filters. The difference between the two on a digital camera is only significant where colour matching is critical. For general and available light photography it scarcely matters which you use; you only need the UV if the skylight filter offends your sense of order.

 

Thank you for the reply. I guess I notice a very slight warming effect on photos. I never use flash so I only shoot available light. I guess my main question was, what is the point of the SL filter? Just to get the colors a bit warmer?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for the reply. I guess I notice a very slight warming effect on photos. I never use flash so I only shoot available light. I guess my main question was, what is the point of the SL filter? Just to get the colors a bit warmer?

 

Exactly that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If I remember well (much years I do not process anymore B&W film... :o) the SL filter has no practical effect on B&W... the usage of different contrast papers, as well as different paper developers, surpassed widely any difference in the neg you (maybe) could see with the SL filter. On the contrary, the UV filter could give you some appreciable result also in B&W (I remember this expecially in relation with B&W pictures taken in igh mountain environments).

Link to post
Share on other sites

According to the LFI article, your lens was produced between 1958 and 1962 and is the 6th version. What's interesting is that it says that there were only 375 lenses produced of the last batch (version 6) of the Summarex ranging from serial #1.151.001 to #1.151.450 (the numbers are irregular).

 

The LFI article (thanks Beyder... ;)) says another thing I didn't know... the items with scale in meters are rather uncommon because for years the "commercial" Summarex (to say, not the few black items made in wartime) was sold almost exclusively to "non-meter" countries... probably the last batch is the one with more items with scale in meters...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...