1970 summilux 35/1.4-any good?

[nugat]

Can somebody comment on working qualities of the lens? What is the fair price?
Thanks.

[luigi bertolotti]

It's the "old Summilux 35" , a design that dates to 1960 and was practically unchanged for 30 years or so: plainly speaking, it is not a lens that is up to the quality image standards people are accustomed today : if you use it wide open or near (and if one buys a 35 f 1,4, I suppose is for using it at max aperture) you easily observe :

- Lens flare
- Vignetting at the corners (of course, more on film than on M8, and probably unsignificant on your Epson RD)
- A less than good sharpness

But, for Leica gear lovers, it's anyway a fine item to have: is deliciously compact and nice, with a very elegant and smooth mechanics; I have one of the very first production (1.765.xxx, chrome, with the old OLLUX hood) and simply will never sell it, though the prices are rather high (in Europe, in the range 700 - 1000 Euros, depending on finishing, condition, version...).

So, my advice is very simple: if you want a superluminous 35 TO USE, is better to look elsewhere: apart he costly Summilux ASPH, there are a pair of Cosina Voigtlander 35s (f 1,4 and f 1,2, this really a very interesting lens) surely better than old Summilux. Things are different if you put yourself in a collector/user mood: the old Summilux 35 is anyway a little gem to have, and is usable with satisfaction, if you don't pretend to shot always at f 1,4 or 2...

[stunsworth]

Wide open it's soft and light objects will have a halo around them. By f4 it's an excellent performer. I used it on a recent trip to France (I also took the ASPH 35mm Summicron) and I'm happy with the shots I took with it. I'll post an image this evening.

The CV 1.4 appears to be an attempt by them to copy the Leica original in size and form if nothing else. The reviews haven't been that good for that particular lens.

The CV 1.2 is a big lens, the Leica is tiny.

[andybarton]

Here are two examples from when I had one of these.

Asleep at the Tate Modern

Tate staircase

[nugat]

Actually I am looking for a low-light(1.4) working lens to share between the MP and Epson.
The other candidate is the contemporary CV35/1.4. I excluded 35/1.2 as too bulky.
I also would like as slightly un-contemporary chracteristic from the lens. Hyper- and Sur-reality of today's imaging is something I want to avoid. A nostalgic look I am after, I think...
I read it's good to use such lower-contrast, softer lens on digital too...

[nugat]

Originally Posted by andybarton

Here are two examples from when I had one of these.

Asleep at the Tate Modern

Tate staircase

Andy,
I actually like the feel of the two pictures! What was the aperture?
Why you don't shoot with this lens any more?
Cheers, Piotr

[stunsworth]

Piotr, one of the 'problems' with the CV f1.4 is that is seems to replicate some of the problems that the Leica lens has - or at least that's been my impression reading the reviews.

[andybarton]

Originally Posted by nugat

Andy,
I actually like the feel of the two pictures! What was the aperture?
Why you don't shoot with this lens any more?
Cheers, Piotr

These were both shot at f1.4

I quite like the look of the shots, but I needed something more versatile. As I can't afford to keep three 35 lenses, I swapped it for a boring 35 Summicron ASPH, which produces shots like this Guggenheim Cafe

[nugat]

Perfect.
After years of (amateur) shooting with Canon DSLRs I suddenly felt the urge this year to try film Leica (got an MP). Initially I was really surprised how the B&W prints from the darkroom are different from the all-surrounding digital perfection. I think they hide more and allow imagination to work. I am now after that look, also with digital (Epson, which I just added). Hence my quest after old lenses. The MP has a 1970 50/2 Summicron.

[mooky]

I'd give up a stop, save some money and shoot Summicrons. My older 35 Summilux was okay but not worth the expense, it was noticeably softer wide open than the 35 Summicron wide open - Even given the fact it was a stop faster.

Even my R 35's of both persuasions yielded the same results. I'm sure the new M 35's are better, but again, visually, will you see that much of a difference for the monies spent?

[echorec]

I have had both the old Lux, the Summicron ASPH and the Lux ASPH. The old Lux is my favourite so I have sold both ASPH lenses.

Andys pictures illustrate beautifully what I like with the lens wide open. If you stop down a little, the lens is very sharp but still with a more "personal" touch than the ASPH lenses.

[jc_braconi]

I agree with Gunnar,

both for film and digital, one of my favorite for colour rendering.

[nugat]

Fantastic colors and picture. My other lens is 1970 summicron 50/2. Does it have a special character comparing to contemporarary summicrons?

[echorec]

Hi Nugat,

Check the link below, it´s a picture I took with the old 35 Lux wide open and shows the effect very clearly. The glow/halo does not always show up as much as on this picture though. Maybe the light that day and the filter in my 12504 hood contributed with a little extra glow...

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-...eica-glow.html

[nugat]

Originally Posted by echorec

Hi Nugat,

Check the link below, it´s a picture I took with the old 35 Lux wide open and shows the effect very clearly. The glow/halo does not always show up as much as on this picture though. Maybe the light that day and the filter in my 12504 hood contributed with a little extra glow...

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-...eica-glow.html

Gunnar,
Great picture, shows the lens' character vary well. Glad I am getting it. One of the disbelieving comments says about a "computer effect". No wonder, today films (movies) use computer effects to get this kind of nostalgic, dreamy look. People think everything is computers nowadays.
Piotr

[jc_braconi]

Originally Posted by echorec

Hi Nugat,

Check the link below, it´s a picture I took with the old 35 Lux wide open and shows the effect very clearly. The glow/halo does not always show up as much as on this picture though. Maybe the light that day and the filter in my 12504 hood contributed with a little extra glow...

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-...eica-glow.html

Gunnar,
1.4 is a maximum aperture you can get with a 35mm and for getting this you have a front lens with a large curvature to catch a maximum of light, and this can create a lot of flare too, so, to help prevent this, you must use an adequate sunshade and better if the light is coming from the 180° back of the lens.

[Erik van Straten]

Originally Posted by nugat

Can somebody comment on working qualities of the lens? What is the fair price?
Thanks.

Mine has number 2221356, black. I also have 2060691, chrome with M3 viewfinder attachment. Performance is identical.
This picture is with the black one, on an M2 on Tmax 400 film, enlargement with Focomat IIc on Ilford MG IV fb paper.

Erik.

[maddoc2003jp]

I have a newer version of this lens, SN # 353xxxx and it is my workhorse lens. Compared to the 35mm Summicron-M IV that I had, the Summilux is SHARPER but has a lower contrast.

Taken at f/1.4 on Tri-X:

[gravastar]

Nugat I see that you want to use the lens with the MP and Epson, but I suspect you'd also find it useful on the M8. I have an early one and like it very much. Yes, it can suffer from severe flare if the sunlight falls on the front surface and it does have a glow around bright objects at full aperture but you can use that to creative advantage. Particularly useful on woodland scenes with skylight shining through trees for example.

If you do want to use one on the M8 do check that the lens will focus to infinity without binding. There is a protective shield at the rear of the lens which may hit the internals of the camera. There's more than one mechanical variation of the lens. Some are OK on the M8 and some aren't. Mine wasn't and I had to machine off part of the shield. Also there is tolerance in the placement of the internal chamber of the M8. It should be symmetrical about the lens axis but if it's displaced to one side that can also cause the rear lens shield to hit the side of the chamber. Early Nokton 35 f1.2 lenses could have this problem, later Cosina modified the shield to avoid this.

Bob.

[gravastar]

This is to add to my previous post since the "edit time" has expired.

If you use the lens on the M8 and want to mount a UV/IR filter you will find there is no filter thread on the lens. However you can get a series 7 filter from B+W which will mount in the 12504 clip on hood. The hood unscrews into two sections to take the filter. As an alternative to the Series 7 filter I've found if you take a 49mm filter (Leica or B+W) and mount it in the hood with the filter thread facing away from the lens you can screw the two parts of the hood together to hold the filter.

Bob.