My Article On The Leica Summar

[willeica]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have ended up with an 'accidental collection' of Summars as I seemed to get one with almost every camera that I collected. In recent times I have started to buy them separately, including a rigid example. In the article I show some examples of the bokeh from this lens when used on a digital M. I also have photos of my Summar collection. The bokeh varies according to the f stop used and the subject matter, but it is always interesting. There are some examples in the article. I really like the output from Summar, a lens which has an unjustified bad reputation in some quarters.

 

The article is linked below.

 

http://macfilos.com/photo/2016/12/1/leitz-summar-review-the-last-rose-of-summar

 

William

Edited December 5, 2016 by willeica

[earleygallery]

William,

 

My first Leica, my lllf RD came with a Summar - I didn't know much about Leica's back then and didnt realise it was much older than the camera, but it gave completely different results than I was used to and they've appealed ever since.

 

I now have a couple of others in very good condition. In good lighting they produce very good results especially with B&W film where the lack of multi coatings isn't much of an issue.

 

My original Summar developed some kind of odd fogging/haze over one half of the internal elements which even more oddly has 'dissolved' over time and is now quite faint.

 

As you say it's not really an alternative to a Summicron, or an Elmar for that matter, but find a decent copy and it's a lovely lens to have.

[Advertisement]

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

[willeica]

Thanks James. The uncoated ones will also give a lovely neutral 'old look' when used with colour film or, indeed, with digital. Because of my 'accidental collection' I have become a real fan of the lens and the look it produces. You can also get this look from other lenses from the same period, but not to the same extent as the Summar, except , perhaps, for the 7.3 cm f 1.9 Hektor, which also produces some wild bokeh when shot wide open or near to that. To an extent a lot of this involves making a 'virtue' out of what others might perceive as 'faults' in an old lens.

 

William

[mikemgb]

I have one Summar with some fungus etching on the second group of elements. That does soften some images but I have found I love the look this lens produces on high ISO film used indoors. I think it will also produce some very nice effects on Ilford SFX and have just bought a red filter for it to try some.

 

My lens has been coated at some point and the front and rear elements are flawless, no marks at all. I hope one day to find a lens with severe cleaning marks that I can take the second element group out of to bring mine up to scratch.

 

Thank you for the link to your article, it looks fascinating, I'll read it fully later.

[jc_braconi]

 You can also get this look from other lenses from the same period, but not to the same extent as the Summar, except , perhaps, for the 7.3 cm f 1.9 Hektor, which also produces some wild bokeh when shot wide open or near to that. To an extent a lot of this involves making a 'virtue' out of what others might perceive as 'faults' in an old lens.

 

William

William

You can get this also with the Thambar

IMHO the rendering of these old lenses is more accentuated on CCD sensor than on the CMOS one.

But that is my appreciation...

 

[earleygallery]

 

My lens has been coated at some point and the front and rear elements are flawless, no marks at all. I hope one day to find a lens with severe cleaning marks that I can take the second element group out of to bring mine up to scratch.

 

 

 

That shouldn't prove too difficult!

[mikemgb]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

That shouldn't prove too difficult!

 

It isn't, the problem is that people tend to believe that even a completely opaque Summar is worth the same as a pristine one.

[willeica]

I have one Summar with some fungus etching on the second group of elements. That does soften some images but I have found I love the look this lens produces on high ISO film used indoors. I think it will also produce some very nice effects on Ilford SFX and have just bought a red filter for it to try some.

 

My lens has been coated at some point and the front and rear elements are flawless, no marks at all. I hope one day to find a lens with severe cleaning marks that I can take the second element group out of to bring mine up to scratch.

 

Thank you for the link to your article, it looks fascinating, I'll read it fully later.

 

Thanks Mike. Sometimes a bit of internal haze will add some nice effects. You only know when you use the lens what the effect is going to be. There is a de-hazing tool in Lightroom which you can use to adjust the effects of haze. It is probably not possible to get a pristine Summar at this stage, but I have been lucky with most of the lenses in my collection which are pretty good. I agree with JC that the CCD on the M8 probably works better with old lenses than the sensor on the M240.

 

William

[mikemgb]

I just found the time to sit down and read this, very nicely written and very interesting!

 

My lone Summar is a 1937, marked in feet with the IR marking, I had no idea there were so many variations.

[jc_braconi]

I agree with JC that the CCD on the M8 probably works better with old lenses than the sensor on the M240.

 

William

I use the M8 for B&W and the M9-P for the color with these old lenses.

[willeica]

I just found the time to sit down and read this, very nicely written and very interesting!

 

My lone Summar is a 1937, marked in feet with the IR marking, I had no idea there were so many variations.

 

In the early years Leica cameras and lenses underwent a lot more variation and upgrade than is generally realised. Van Hasbroeck deserves credit for attempting to classify the various early Leica lenses noting the changes that were made with each variant. The 10 classifications for the Summar are on pages 198 and 199 of his book which is mentioned in my article.

 

The variant numbers from the book which I have are:

 

1. Rigid Mount Nickel Iris scale to f 12.5

5. Chrome Collapsible with Black Rim

7. As for 5 but all chrome 

9. As for 7 but nickel and also with an infra red mark

10.Modified iris scale (no f2.9) and control and infra red mark

10(a) Not noted by van Hasbroeck, but with modified iris control, f 2.9 mark and infra red mark

 

I have another Summar which is a mixture of two of the above variants. My coated Summar appears to have been a variant 10 which had been coated after manufacture.

 

Generally, van Hasbroeck does not list meter and feet versions as separate variants. He does do this, however, for the close focus version of the 5cm Elmar which was in feet scale only. He lists 22 variants of the Elmar but to get the full picture on that lens you also need to look at Angela von Einem's work (published in German only) on the variants of the 1 Model A camera as variations to the lens also appeared during the period of manufacture of the camera which was, of course, a fixed lens model.

 

I am of the view that Leica's engineers made remarkable progress in developing their lenses very rapidly over a short period of time. I am also of the view that in the early days Leica functioned as something of a craft industry as much as an industrial one as there are many minor (today we would we say micro) variations to be noted.

 

William

Edited December 6, 2016 by willeica

[mikemgb]

Thank you William, I'm going to see if I can find a copy of van Hasbroeck's book, it looks like it might be useful to me in the future.

 

Meantime, I'm wondering, as well as the external changes over the years did the guts of the lens change too? I'm wondering if I need to find an exact replica of my lens to steal the second group of elements from or if those elements were unchanged through the years?

[willeica]

As far as I am aware, the optical formula remained the same for the collapsible model throughout the whole production run. I believe that the formula is the same with the rigid mount but there are some differences with the iris in the rigid model, initially round rather than hexagonal and then a minimum aperture of f18 rather than f12.5 as in early rigid and all collapsible models. I would also look at how a second Summar performs before tearing it up for the elements. Also, as one of my examples shows, you can match the mount of one collapsible lens with the head of another.

 

Best of luck with your Summar hunt.

 

William

[mikemgb]

Thank you, I'll look out for a lens, I would like to bring mine up to scratch if possible, it is believed my IIIa was shipped with this lens when new, I'd like to keep them together.

[mickjazz]

William

 

Thanks for the images taken with my absolute favorite lens. I bought the first one maybe 6 years ago at which time the 'experts' hated summars. I tried it and although not really a good photographer, saw effects I'd not seen before. Prior to this my experience was with pretty decent slr's; nikon, minolta and canon. My first leica had a summitar with half the front element separated and I didn't realize until Youxin told me it wasn't repairable. The photos with that lens are ok!

 

Like you I acquired many summars along with screw mount bodies. Then separately 2 rigid versions and a tropen lens that came with a couple broken bodies. That was a fluke. A few months ago I acquired what is the 202nd serial number summar. Beautiful!

[chris_livsey]

My Summar is one of the f2.9 sub types. Have any of you Summar fans decent links to the Agfa Tri-colour process?

There is very little I can find on the www, but it may be my inadequate search terms.

Did other makers "adapt' lenses as Leica did for the process, again I see very little out there?

Finally, uptick for the well written article, the Summar is possibly the most loved lens in LTM.

[willeica]

William

 

Thanks for the images taken with my absolute favorite lens. I bought the first one maybe 6 years ago at which time the 'experts' hated summars. I tried it and although not really a good photographer, saw effects I'd not seen before. Prior to this my experience was with pretty decent slr's; nikon, minolta and canon. My first leica had a summitar with half the front element separated and I didn't realize until Youxin told me it wasn't repairable. The photos with that lens are ok!

 

Like you I acquired many summars along with screw mount bodies. Then separately 2 rigid versions and a tropen lens that came with a couple broken bodies. That was a fluke. A few months ago I acquired what is the 202nd serial number summar. Beautiful!

 

Well done at getting the Tropen by a 'fluke'. It is one of the rarest Summars and fetches extremely high prices at auction, in the same ballpark as the extremely rare chrome rigid model. I have even seen the tubular metal case for the Tropen lens going for high prices. The Tropen is on my wants list along with the rigid chrome and the nickel with black rim collapsible model. My coated Summar has a serial number not too far away from those of the Tropens but it does not have the extra length or the groove on the tubing. 

 

 

My Summar is one of the f2.9 sub types. Have any of you Summar fans decent links to the Agfa Tri-colour process?

There is very little I can find on the www, but it may be my inadequate search terms.

Did other makers "adapt' lenses as Leica did for the process, again I see very little out there?

Finally, uptick for the well written article, the Summar is possibly the most loved lens in LTM.

 

The best coverage I have seen is in Laney's Leica Collector's guide on page 395. There is a reference there to an article in 'Leica News and Technique' on the Agfa process. This is almost certainly a defunct publication, but it might be worth using it as a search criterion. Plate 42 in Laney's book shows the filters used for the Agfa process. The 7,3cm f1.9  Hektor was also intended for use with the Agfa process. Leitz had a manufacturing co-operation going on with Agfa in the 1930s and the Agfa-Leitz film cassette which was an evolution of the FILCA cassettes was part of that co-operation. The Agfacolor colour process soon became obsolete because of the introduction of Kodachrome and other colour films which did not need special filters.

 

Thanks mickjazz and Chris for your comments on my article. It is nice to know that I am not alone in my appreciation of this wonderful lens.

 

William

Edited December 18, 2016 by willeica

[chris_livsey]

William, Thank you for the pointers Laney's Guide is on the great Christmas list, I will follow up the rest, when there is little there just hitting the right search words is vital.

[jc_braconi]

The Tropen is on my wants list along with the rigid chrome and the nickel with black rim collapsible model.

best wishes

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!

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[chris_livsey]

Some success!!

An auction of the Hektor included the filters for both taking and projection:

 

https://new.liveauctioneers.com/item/26150618

WestLicht Photographica Auction

 

For completeness I include this link which I had previously:

 

http://zauberklang.ch/filmcolors/timeline-entry/1262/

 

I do note the Hektor does not have the f2.9 mark, but of course that mark is not labelled on the Summar as such and must be related to the correct mounting of the filter rather than the aperture as such.

The auction filter is marked specifically for that lens and the mounting system obviously varied as that was not collapsible.

The correct Summar filters must be an exceedingly rare item.