Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Delacroix

35mm summicron vs. Summitar

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm ready to buy a 35mm lens for my M9 if and when they become available again. I am somewhat mystified, though, about the many comments about the latest Summicron being unsuited for the M9 because of it's higher contrast. I would love to see some side-by-side comparisons between the 35mm Summicron-Asph and the 35m Summicron (which seems to be universally praised in this forum).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Leica do not make any lens whose 'contrast' (hovever you measure it, of all possible ways) makes it unsuitable. This obsession with 'contrast' in general, in contradistinction to definition, is just a fad to occupy the under-occupied. Leca publishes MTF curves for both lenses. Compare them – their differences are small.

 

The old man from the Age of the 3.5cm Elmar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Both perfectly suitable. And so would be a Summitar (definitely lower contrast, but that's what you would expect from 50+ years' old lenses...).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the OP means the 35mm Summarit; to compare a modern 35mm lens with one of 50mm which was abandoned more than half a century ago would make no sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I can't give you the comparison but I can tell you that I'm surprised to learn that my 35cron is "contrasty". My style has developed closer to the flat end of the scale than the contrasty end, my camera profile and post process start point in LR3 with the M9+35 Cron (new one) give me details in all but the darkest of shadows, no crunched lower ranges and good detail throughout. It's an incredible lens in my opinion. Some say it lacks character but again, that matches my style (haha - my images have NO character whatsoever!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Leica do not make any lens whose 'contrast' (hovever you measure it, of all possible ways) makes it unsuitable. This obsession with 'contrast' in general, in contradistinction to definition, is just a fad to occupy the under-occupied. Leca publishes MTF curves for both lenses. Compare them – their differences are small.

 

The old man from the Age of the 3.5cm Elmar

Hi Lars

 

Maybe that is non consensual.

 

a) there is some difference in the MTF at /5.6 probably not detectable but probably detectable at f/2, it would not worry me though.

 

The typeIV cron (last pre asph) needs its hood contrajour, that would worry me... and it is over price cause lots of people like it, again that would worry me.

 

c) In general a single coated lens (double gauss) will adaptively compress a sceane so that the image on film or sensor is less. Even with XP2 I'll use a SC lens on a sunny day street shooting, and put up with the flare. The colors are more pastel as well, contra jour.

 

Cosina offer two lenses in multi coating or single coating for the Ja mono film users but lots of the EU digital users have discovered that specular high lughts look well, how shall we say, ' nice ',,,

 

Try a SC MC competative shoot out with specular high lights before flaming please.

 

Noel

P.S. I use a type II Canon f/2 LTM for SC and a CV for MC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

c) In general a single coated lens (double gauss) will ...

 

single coated and double gauss are two entirely different things. Double gauss refers to a certain type of optical formula, while single coated refers to the number of coatings on each lens surface (just one coating in case of single coating).

 

And btw, the last pre-asph 35mm Summicron lens, often referred to as the Summicron IV, already had multicoated lens elements.

 

Andy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
single coated and double gauss are two entirely different things. Double gauss refers to a certain type of optical formula, while single coated refers to the number of coatings on each lens surface (just one coating in case of single coating).

Correct but the point was a double Gauss with at least four groups and 8 air to glass surfaces would be low contrast if single coated and less likely to burn highlights, The Summaron f/2.8 are superb lenses.

And btw, the last pre-asph 35mm Summicron lens, often referred to as the Summicron IV, already had multicoated lens elements.

Andy

Accepted even the initial production ones in '79 were probably MC lenses but they still are lower contrast then the Asph. You would need to go to earlier Leica lenses from 60s to get single coated.

 

I use a Canon LTM from '65 on sunny days with film.

 

If you want to burn high lights use an asph, if you like high lights try the SC CV f1.4 35mm, lots of people buy the SC lenses. The CV may distort a bit but you can post process that burnt high lights stay burnt.

 

Noel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By Jim J
      I have a 1936 IIIa (s.n. 184223) that is in need of a lens, and I am now in a position to purchase one.  I am leaning towards an f3.5 Elmar, as I think it complements the design of the camera beautifully both in compactness and in general appearance.  The other lenses that are possibilities look a bit heavier and some even a bit too modern (even though some of them are not) for an 85 year old camera.  I do have some points that I would appreciate comments on from those who know more about things Leica than I do, before I part with my cash.
      Firstly, condition.  Quite a few lenses of this age have either dust or haze in the optics, and others have light marks.  Would I be correct in assuming that dust or haze (provided the haze is not excessive) could be fixed with a CLA, as could a stiff aperture ring or focusing ring, but marks would generally not go away?
      Secondly, coatings.  I see that, as a rule, Pre-War lenses are clear, and Post-War lenses are coated, and I understand the basic reasoning behind coating lenses is to cut down internal reflections but, in lenses of this quality, is there really much of a difference between the two?
      As for the lenses that I’m looking at:
      Elmar f3.5:  My preferred option, as it is so light and compact and just looks so right on a Barnack Leica;
      Elmar f2.8: Aside from the extra f-stop, is there any reason for preferring this over the f3.5 Elmar?  I find it does not have quite the same visual appeal as the f3.5 Elmar, but it could be useful in low light situations.
      Summar f2:  Maybe another lens to consider.  Again, not quite the same visual appeal as the f3.5 Elmar, but it could also be useful in low light situations.
      Summitar: From what I can see, it appears to be an updated and improved version of the Summar.  Compared with the Elmar, and even the Summar, it looks a trifle bulky (yes, I know it isn’t really).
      Summicron: I’m not so keen on this one, as I find the appearance of the earlier lenses more appealing.  I would also prefer to fit my camera with a lens that’s a bit closer to what it originally had.  I have heard that the front element is made of an unusually soft glass, which means that these lenses are often badly scratched.  Is this so?
      Thank you in advance for helping a newcomer to the world of Leicas.
    • By Michael Korak
      Alas, it is time for me to move out of 35mm film photography. After 6 decades of making pictures with a variety of equipment, I must finally abandon the wonderful world of emulsion.  

      My love for Leica goes back to the late 1970's and just a few years ago, I let go of my beloved M6 with its 35mm Summicron. It had become to difficult to get a good focus point with my 70 year old eyes. I moved into this R6 with the same focal length and speed. I have been shooting the ..OCOL way of thinking...one camera-one lens.

      I also have a Fuji X-100F that has become my very acceptable replacement for the Leica. It suits my age and lifestyle now. So, here is what I am offering;

      Leica R6 body vintage 1988, with eyecup and split image focusing screen, strap, Leica eveready case and very comprehensive Fritz Meisnitzner book,

      Leica 35mm F2 Summicron-R lens vintage 1979, both caps, 55mm Leitz UVa filter, leather zip case, and original box with the packing foam in it,

      Leica 2x R-Extender (rarely used) with both caps and a nylon pouch,

      Metz 32 Z-2 electonic flash unit with SCA 351 Leica adapter (again, rarely used)

      All of the items are in perfect working condition. Optically, the lens is top notch LEICA quality, nothing less. My last roll of film left the camera two weeks ago.  

      Will ship to almost anywhere. Priority USPS Mail, fully insured, buyer pays shipping.

      Buyer also pays fees if using PayPal.

      $1250.00 USD buys it all.
    • By johnbuckley
      I read a good deal about how averse people are in Marrakech's Old City/Medina to having their picture taken. So when my wife and I spent a week in Marrakech last week, I took along my M10, but swapped out the 35mm Summilux Asph for the old Summicron. It is smaller and therefore more discreet. I knew it would work well with the tile and other architectural and decorative work, given that it is, well, the King of Bokeh. Nonetheless, I was once again blown away by what an incredible lens it is at f/5.6 or 8.  
      Yes, some of the images might be a little soft, at least compared to the tack-sharp Summilux. But this was a situation where the lens was right for the circumstances. I'd say I lost, at most, 10 shots due to the softness at the edges.
      Last point: All of the inanimate objects were shot with the M10 held to my eye. But virtually all of the street shots of people were shot from the hip -- either cupped in the palm of my hand and held at stomach level, or when shooting vertically, rested with the top of the camera/shutter trigger at my chest. If you like these images, and I hope you do, blame user error for things displeasing, but remember that a fair bit of the composition was accidental, given I wasn't using the viewfinder.
       
      In Marrakech with the M10 and King of Bokeh 
       
       
    • By max.mlzr
      Hallo Freunde der analogen Fotografie,
      seit einer Weile fotografiere ich nun schon analog, erst mit einer Canon AE1 und jetzt mit einer Olympus OM1, da ich vollmechanische Kameras mehr mag, so kommt es auch, dass ich mir jetzt eine alte Leica zulegen will. Da mein Budget als Schüler begrenzt ist und ich Schraubleicas bald schöner als dass M-System finde, habe ich meine Suche auf die IIIF, IIIC und IIIG eingegrenzt, wobei die IIIG auch schon fast zu teuer ist. Dazu soll es noch ein schönes Elmar, Summitar oder sogar Summicron sein.
      Da ich Händlern generell mehr vertraue bin ich auf 2 Angebote gestoßen:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              Leica IIIC mit Summitar 50mm f/2 und Beli für 500€: https://www.meister-camera.com/de/gebraucht/5297/leica-iii-c                                                                                                                                                          Leica IIIF VLW mit Elmar 50mm f/2 für 445€: https://www.leica-store-muenchen.de/de/gebraucht/15166/leica-iiif-vlw-3550mm
      Ich weiß wirklich nicht, welches Angebot ich nehmen soll, da beide Kameras ziemlich gleich sind (Der Blitzanschluss der IIIF ist mir egal).
             Die IIIC hat halt noch einen Belichtungsmesser und das bessere Objektiv für Naturlichtfotografie, jedoch, hat Sie kein Rückgaberecht, der Zustand ist schlechter (das Chrome blättert ab), sie hat                 Selbstauslöser (eigentlich ein cooles Feature, was jedoch kein Muss ist) und ich habe von vielen gehört, dass es nur selten ist, dass man ein Summitar ohne Kratzer findet, da dass Glas sehr weich           ist. Objektiv und Kamera sind beide von ca. 1949/50.
             Die IIIF hat an sich ein (licht-)schwächeres Objektiv (ist das ein großer Unterschied?), keinen Belichtungsmesser (welchen ich eigentlich nicht wirklich brauche, jedoch ist dieser ganz nett) und ist ein         Umbau (was nicht unbedingt schlecht ist?). Jedoch hat der Body einen besseren Zustand, die Kamera hat ein Rückgaberecht und ist 50€ günstiger. Der Body ist auch so von 1949/50, von dem                    Objektiv kenne ich aber Jahr, was auch bedeuten könnte, dass es keine Vergütung hat.
      Ich gehe bei beiden Kameras davon aus, dass ich sie noch justieren lassen muss, dazu will ich sie für 120€ zu  Oleg Khalyavin schicken, hat da jemand Erfahrung?
       
      Schon mal vielen Dank im Vorraus für eure Antworten!
       
      Max
       
    • By sml_photo
      More photos from Cuba. 
      A guajiro--a farm worker on a tobacco farm, hand rolling a cigar.

      Hello guest! Please register or sign in to view the hidden content. Hallo Gast! Du willst die Bilder sehen? Einfach registrieren oder anmelden!
×
×
  • Create New...