Summarit-M Lenses: Right Choice?

[esophoria]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Although not new to photography, I am new to my Leica M9. I jumped in and bought a new M9 and 3 Summarit lenses, 35,50 & 90mm. As you know the "new" M series has a maxium aperture of f/2.5 across the product line.

 

I did save much money by buying these newer lenses but now wonder what others think of the maximum aperture size? I justified the decision by thinking that I could always increase the ISO reading to shoot with less light.

 

I'm wondering if there are any Summarit M lens owners out there who can speak from experience about my buying decision.

 

Thanks in advance.

[Dougg]

Welcome! As you use your Summarits, and see what they can do, I think you'll be pleased and impressed. They are perceived by some as lesser gear because of the different outer appearance, lesser cost, and smaller aperture.

 

But, Leica has offered slightly slower f/2.8 lenses in the recent past that have developed a respectful following. For example, the 90 f/2.8 Elmarit in various versions, the 50 f/2.8 Elmar, and the well-respected 35 f/2.8 Summaron (I recently got a used one). Your current Summarits are probably superior optically to these older designs.

 

And "Summarit" is not to be considered a "cheap" lens name. Three of the four current lenses for the Leica S2 are Summarits... and the 35mm f/2.5 Summarit-S lists for $6495...

[Ronan]

Although not new to photography, I am new to my Leica M9. I jumped in and bought a new M9 and 3 Summarit lenses, 35,50 & 90mm. As you know the "new" M series has a maxium aperture of f/2.5 across the product line.

 

I did save much money by buying these newer lenses but now wonder what others think of the maximum aperture size? I justified the decision by thinking that I could always increase the ISO reading to shoot with less light.

 

I'm wondering if there are any Summarit M lens owners out there who can speak from experience about my buying decision.

 

Thanks in advance.

 

You did fine. If you want a faster lens, i would sell one of them and get a 1.4 or something along those line. Honestly at ISO 800 at 2.5... you will be ok.

[akiralx]

I have the 35, 75 and 90 Summarits - all excellent. I prefer the rendering of the 35 Summarit at smaller apertures (i.e. for 'normal shooting) than my 35 Summilux-ASPH.

 

I also shot the 75 Summarit and 75 Summicron together for a while and then sold the latter as the Summarit was much nicer to handle and indistinguishable in results.

 

You will enjoy using them. You may need a fast lens at some point for low light and shallower depth of field, maybe a CV 50 f/1.1 or 35 f/1.2, but wait and see which is your preferred FL.

[ramosa]

They have generally gotten good reviews. There appear to be only three drawbacks: 1) relatively slow; 2) resale not as good as other Leica lenses; and 3) not built on par with other Leica lenses (according to some reviews). But, really, the only one that would matter for use would be speed ... and lots of folks don't need 1.4 or 2.0 ...

[nggalai]

Morning,

 

I use both the 50mm and 90mm Summarit-M. I also own a Summicron 1:2/50mm and CV Nokton 1:1.1/50mm, and of those three 50mm the Summarit-M remains the best compromise of size and performance for me. I now keep the Summicron permanently on my M3; its optical advantages (more interesting bokeh, sharper up to about f/4.0) don’t weigh in more than its disadvantages (flare-prone, much heavier), and that additional half-stop doesn’t change too much for low-light photography.

 

I only recently acquired the Summarit-M 1:2.5/90mm so can’t really yet compare it to the Elmarit I tried before (but never bought). I have the impression, though, that it’s lighter and more compact than the Elmarit I got lent, and it’s bloody sharp wide open. At 90mm, I find f/2.5 fast enough for good subject separation.

 

My suggestion to you is to keep all three lenses and add one f/1.4 (or faster) in your preferred focal length for those times you know you’ll end up deep in the woods, or in a darkish museum, or stay out after twilight.

 

Cheers,

-Sascha

[lars_bergquist]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I once heard a story about a fledgling M photographer way back in time, who asked his dealer what lenses he should buy for it. The man, in a thick Hungarian accent, said "Summicron". However much the customer tried to make him explain or qualify his advice, he just repeated "Summicron".

 

It struck me that even back in the 1960's, this was a really inane response. Even then, 'Summicron' was just a redundant way to say 'f:2 speed', and told you absolutely nothing about the lens design (or quality; there has only ever existed one level of quality, Leica quality). But the man did probably make a higher profit on the more expensive Summicron lenses.

 

Even at that time – I was there – only about 50% of all 'system' cameras sold of all brands were used with any other lens than the 50mm one they were sold with. A very large proportion of the buyers knew little about photography. They just wanted an expensive camera for the satisfaction of owning it, and for showing off. I think that this proportion still holds for Leica M buyers. To fifty percent of them, the cameras are just esoteric bling.

 

These blingers don't really buy a camera, but a conversation piece. And they don't buy a lens, they buy the prestigious letters on the front ring. So any other lettering, to them, means less bling value, so therefore crap. And, with the particular loudmouthedness of ignorance, they tell the world that it is so.

 

I do not think that the Leica people can bring themselves to make a low-grade lens. The current Summarit lenses would be regarded as first-class optics superbly mounted if made by Nikon or (especially) Canon. The moderate speed just makes it possible to use more 'relaxed' all-spherical designs and makes for easier assembly, hence the lower price. My own experience with a 75mm Summarit (on a M8) was very good indeed. These are lenses you can have complete confidence in.

 

I do much low-light work so I own two Summilux lenses, but not one Summicron! Horses for courses and scratches for itches ...

 

The old man from the Age of the 5cm Elmar (1:3.5)

[kdriceman]

A good choice, they are excellent lenses. Definitely a smart choice if you can get by at f/2.5 and smaller. The size, weight and image quality ( oh, and price ) of the Summarit 50 is a tough combination to beat in my opinion.

[lct]

Welcome to the forum.

Right choice if you don't need faster speed that f/2.5. I don't use my 35/2.5 much now that i have acquired a 35/2 asph. Not that the latter's IQ is better but because i miss f/2 too much. Makes a difference to me don't ask me why.

Otherwise the Summarit is one of my favorite 35mm ever and quality wise i don't see significant differences with my other Leica lenses contrary to Ken Rockwell's statement of "sub-par mechanical quality". I've heard things like this 30+ years ago about the C lenses for Leica CL. Dogs bark but caravans pass.

[Jeff S]

I once heard a story about a fledgling M photographer way back in time, who asked his dealer what lenses he should buy for it. The man, in a thick Hungarian accent, said "Summicron". However much the customer tried to make him explain or qualify his advice, he just repeated "Summicron".

 

That was my story about Mr. Heller, from the now defunct Heller's Camera, in Bethesda, Maryland. He owned a small 'mom and pop' shop and I really don't think he was focused on profit margin; rather that's just what he grew up to believe, right or wrong.

 

Luckily I learned a lot on my own after that experience decades ago, and now routinely recommend the Summarit line to others here looking for a nice lens at a reasonable price. Different tools for different needs and preferences, of course.

 

And I wouldn't sell my 50 Summilux asph either.

 

Funny that you recall the story; it's etched in my mind, in a fond nostalgic way.

 

Jeff

[darylgo]

Right choice. The lenses are getting good reviews, Erwin Puts rates the 35mm as preferable to the Summicron, not by any great degree but to be in the same league as the 35mm Summicron means the lens is state of the art. My 75mm Summarit is the equal to my 75mm Summicron save for slight fringing occasionally, a spectacular lens. If you look at mtf data supplied by Leica these are designed to be first class with reduced expense of manufacture and non use of expensive elements such as asphericals and non dispersives. That Leica could accomplish this optically is quite remarkable. The botom line is what you do with these lenses, how well you practice the craft of photography will have a bigger impact than the lens quality. Of course having good optics is a good way to start.

[darylgo]

These blingers don't really buy a camera, but a conversation piece. And they don't buy a lens, they buy the prestigious letters on the front ring. So any other lettering, to them, means less bling value, so therefore crap. And, with the particular loudmouthedness of ignorance, they tell the world that it is so.

 

Three cheers for the "blingers", when they tire of their old toys we can purchase them at great prices in unused condition.

[lars_bergquist]

That was my story about Mr. Heller, from the now defunct Heller's Camera, in Bethesda, Maryland. [ ... ]

Funny that you recall the story; it's etched in my mind, in a fond nostalgic way.

 

Jeff

 

What a remarkable forum this is. I am delighted that the originator of this anecdote is with us, and able to identify himself! I pulled that story directly out of my memory, and I did not remember the origin. Sloppy of me; but memory is neither a filing cabinet nor a video camera. It is a toy theatre in which we reconstruct the past, from out of a few scraps we actually do remember (and more that we just think that we remember).

 

At least, I did not concoct this out of thin air! The old man with a fuzzy memory ...

[swamiji]

I have the 75mm Summarit. It had to go in for service after 3 months (It was in NJ for 4 months) as the aperture ring came loose, and started to rattle. The rubber grip around the barrel seems to collect dirt....

 

Optically, quite good, No complaints, and it's certainly smaller and lighter than my 75mm Lux.

[Shanghait]

I have the 50mm and 75mm.

 

The 50mm was recently purchased and ranks among my favorite lenses because of portability and IQ. Its sharpness is on par with the summicron. The construction is better than the 75 and 90 because it lacks the rubberized grip. I do like the metal lens cap that comes with it too.

 

My 75mm Summarit has caused me some heartache. Its back focuses terribly at longer distances. I havent found the time to send it along with a camera to get it calibrated.

I also have the 75mm Summicron ASPH which size wise is similar, but seems to alot sturdier and renders subjects in a more appealing way. ( not as clinical )

 

On the 2.5 speed, I do feel it is slow. For me personally, there seems to be a bigger difference in use between F/2 and F/2.5 than there is in F/2 and F/1.4

[Jeff S]

What a remarkable forum this is. I am delighted that the originator of this anecdote is with us, and able to identify himself! I pulled that story directly out of my memory, and I did not remember the origin. Sloppy of me; but memory is neither a filing cabinet nor a video camera. It is a toy theatre in which we reconstruct the past, from out of a few scraps we actually do remember (and more that we just think that we remember).

 

At least, I did not concoct this out of thin air! The old man with a fuzzy memory ...

 

Not sloppy at all; as you say, memories are like that. In fact I'm delighted that someone other than myself shared the thought.

 

Later on, as Mr. Heller (and his nice wife) aged and knew he needed to sell the business, he asked me (and I'm sure many others) if I would be interested in taking over the small store. I was ill equipped to do so, but flattered nonetheless. He may not have have been the most savvy businessman, but he truly liked photography, and Leica and Rollei in particular. I ended up moving out of town and the business eventually closed, I think, without ever changing hands.

 

I moved back a few years ago to the same general area and often wish Mr. Heller were still there to drop in on, even if for a nice conversation about photography and, of course, Leica. I wonder, too, if he would have embraced the digital M versions at all; it was strictly film back then, and he was stuck in his ways (Summicron!).

 

Thanks for appreciating the anecdote, Lars.

 

Jeff

[Riccis]

Definitely the right choice. The Summarit line is outstanding!

[adan]

Although this is probably just a reprise of what everyone else has said - the Summarits are just as good optically as any other Leica lenses. Unless one really needs the extra aperture speed, or in some cases the slightly closer focusing, of the more expensive lenses.

 

For me, the Summarits' close focus limits (at least for the 75 and 35) have been the flaw in the ointment - but not everyone shoots the way I do.

[lars_bergquist]

Not sloppy at all; as you say, memories are like that. In fact I'm delighted that someone other than myself shared the thought. [ ... ] Jeff

 

Not sloppy to you, Jeff, but I was trained in the academic craft of history, where you can't claim that two by two make four without a reference in the endnotes.

 

--------------------

 

There is a Law of Diminishing Returns, which I know well from a career in very technical publishing: The last ten percent of performance cost as much to acheive as the previous ninety, and the last percent costs more than the other ninety-nine. Leica know well that their 'superlenses' are up in that last percent. And that is the rationale of the Summarit line. Reduce the speed with about one half of an f-stop, and the price by half. Bill Ruger, the sporting arms producer, once summed up his design philosophy as "give the customer what he pays for, plus ten percent." That might be a Summarit, as well as a Ruger Blackhawk.

 

The old man, home from the range

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Lord Fluff]

I did save much money by buying these newer lenses but now wonder what others think of the maximum aperture size?

 

Why should you care? If I tell you f2.5 is near useless for me, how does that affect you? It shouldn't - you'll either run repeatedly into issues of low light, or be consumed with an obsession with shallow DOF, or you won't. Or that you always want to focus closer. But if not, you'll find your lenses are just dandy.