For the same money: 35mm Summilux v1 or Summicron v3?

[philipus]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The 2.8 Summaron doesn't seem to have been made with removable goggles. I appreciate this about the 3.5, even though it is a half a stop slower. And the 2.8 is about twice the price, too (but perhaps twice as good).

 

Since I'm mainly shooting Portra these days and will use 400 extensively I'm leaning towards the 3.5 Summaron. I like that the goggles can be removed so I can use it on both my cameras. Then it becomes a very little lens on the M6.

 

I actually just now found a lens that looks to be in very good shape at a dealer for just over 300€ so I might go for that. I guess I could always sell it if I don't want it. Even the 3.5s should keep their value for a while.

[gvaliquette]

The 2.8 Summaron doesn't seem to have been made with removable goggles. I appreciate this about the 3.5, even though it is a half a stop slower. And the 2.8 is about twice the price, too (but perhaps twice as good).

 

Since I'm mainly shooting Portra these days and will use 400 extensively I'm leaning towards the 3.5 Summaron. I like that the goggles can be removed so I can use it on both my cameras. Then it becomes a very little lens on the M6.

 

I actually just now found a lens that looks to be in very good shape at a dealer for just over 300€ so I might go for that. I guess I could always sell it if I don't want it. Even the 3.5s should keep their value for a while.

 

The "goggles" on the 2.8 Summaron are a problem only in as much as it makes the lens a little awkward to carry in your bag. I have one, with goggles, that I bought for my M3, but I also use it with my M4-2 and my M9. A very nice lens indeed.

 

Guy

[Advertisement]

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

[philipus]

Agreed.I understand there are early and late models, the late being better but still not great.

 

Hello everybody

 

I hope it is ok that I resurrect this thread. I wanted to know about the different versions - early and late - of the first version 35 Summilux. Puts only mentions one model. The next one is the Aspherical.

 

Were there two optically different versions before the Aspherical? I have checked the Wiki and it does mention a v. 1 and a v. 2 before the Aspherical but I am now confused. If there's an optical difference, and v. 2 is "better", is it enough to look for one later than 1967, which is the earliest date of the second version? Someone mentioned 1989; basically, do I have to go for a lens that late or could I go for an earlier one?

 

Again, I realise that the latest versions of the Summilux, and the later versions of the Summicron, are superior, but I can't buy those now. And (I have to admit) I am a bit fascinated by the aberrations of earlier lenses, though I'm not mad about them to such an extent that I want to see my images degraded.

 

Thanks for any insight.

cheers

Philip

Edited August 20, 2012 by philipus

[lars_bergquist]

The two 'versions' of the Summilux I is a myth. Leica have consistently denied that there has been any re-computation of the lens during its production life. There is of course a possibility that coating technique has improved during this long span of time (1961–95) but this is not enough to materially improve the performance of the lens. Its deficiencies stem from stretching the double-Gauss layout too far.

 

The MTF curves for f/1.4 are in themselves bad enough, but they don't tell the real story. This is about the veiling glare that emanates from even diffuse highlights. Under even quite normal shooting conditions these can make you search in vain for anything sharp in the picture. The lens was aimed at people who absolutely had to bring home a picture – any picture – in an age before the ubiquitous electronic flash. Quality didn't matter in an age when newspaper pictures were printed abysmally, and small, on paper that reminded you of the toilet paper of the time (and indeed often substituted for it).

 

As I stated before, stopping down improves the lens considerably. It is useable at 2.8, and at 5.6 it is in fact slightly better than the v. 2/3 Summicron (these two Summicrons are really identical in performance). The v. 2/3 is in fact a little loved lens. The v.4 was really the first fast 35mm Leica lens that performed decently, and it has acheived something of a cult status. Mine is fine, though I carry the current Summilux ASPH if I antecipate using wide apertures.

 

If I were you, I would pass both these two lenses over and start saving for a Summicron ASPH or even a Summarit, which are both excellent and fully up to current Leica standard. Both can be used wide open without any hesitation whatever.

 

The old man from the Age B.C. (Before Coating)

[menos I M6]

I have been through more 35mm lenses than I care for in my journey for The One.

 

I came to the conclusion, there simply isn't.

There are a few samples though, that are extraordinary good in all accounts and then there are the many "specialty lenses".

 

The absolute best all rounders for me (close focus, speed, handling/ ergonomics, performance from wide open, …):

 

Voigtlander 35 f1.2 Nokton v1 - a fantastic lens - only two negative points are size/ weight and the missing of a focus tab.

It's half stop more light over a modern 35 Summilux is real and can indeed be a deciding factor for a picture, when in dire need of light.

 

Leica 35 Summilux ASPH (non FLE) - this is simply my bread and butter lens, that just works reliably.

It doesn't show the image character though, I love most - the Voigtlander has an edge there (but lacks in ergonomics and fast operation).

 

Summilux pre ASPH "infinity lock"

- one of the specialty lenses.

"A dog", as people call it, it is optically - wildly flares, often unpredictably, has coma in spades and isn't really nice looking in situations wide open, where sharpness and detail are needed.

It in fact though has a certain look due to it's aberrations, that makes it look stunning for B&W shots in low light (if you can avoid the flare and the coma to wreak havoc in outer zones).

 

It's close focus is fantastic, making it to be my favorite pre ASPH (under 1m).

 

35 Summicron ASPH - rather heavy for it's compact size - in most accounts a modern, reliable Leica lens with little character or awesomeness.

I don't remember, when I used mine the last time.

It's seems, to be the first pick, if still compact, but razor-sharp, distortion free shots are needed from wide open - no pre ASPH comes close.

 

35 Summaron 3.5 LTM - a real stunner, this unexpected little performer - razor-sharp in the center, even wide open and a lovely, slightly swirly background rendering in the outer zones.

One of the smallest 35mm lenses, but not one of the lightest with it's heavy duty construction.

 

35 Canon f2 LTM - aka "Japanese Summicron"

I have two samples of the version 1 - a mechanical weak lens (most, I have suffered from loose optical cells in their focus mount).

It is though one of or maybe THE lightest, fast 35mm, I have tried.

I really like it's rendering with natural light falloff wide open.

It is already VERY sharp wide open (really only showing on a M8 sensor or maybe the M Monochrom ?). This is my bad weather and super light weight lens.

It really needs an additional lens hood, as it has strong veiling flare with aggressive side lighting (tip: it has the same slip on Ø42mm barrel, as the pre ASPH Summilux).

 

I have quite a few other 35mm lenses as well, but these few here really shine for what they do best.

 

If I need optical performance and a lens, that just works without me having to think about it, I just grab the Summilux ASPH (I tried a few FLE ASPH too, but find their mechanical feel much inferior and also don't seem to like the imaging difference in rendering to the ASPH - people all go gaga about the FLE being sharper and better, but to me other accounts weight heavier - I would drag around all these older "inferior" and "obsolete" lenses, if super-modern-sharp would be important).

 

I did a few comments on my blog recently regarding finding the favorite 35mm - it might be interesting.

 

Regarding the pre ASPH Summicron:

I happen also to repair and modify lenses and have a strong opinion about mechanical design - I would prevent the certain range of version 4 35mm Summicron lenses like the plague, as of Leica's use of inferior material for a stressed part of the lens body, wearing out over time, where properly built lenses in fact hold up for many decades without ill effects.

These version 4 samples arrive now at an age, where apparently some of them prove to fail.

I wouldn't be very happy, shelling out that kind of money for a very expensive doorstop, while many other lenses far less expensive perform nice as well.

 

I would always take the pre ASPH Summilux over a pre ASPH Summicron, provided I would have another (even inexpensive) good performing 35 (for example a Summarit f2.5).

As the pre ASPH Summilux really only sharpens up from f4/5.6 on, it really is a specialty lens, one has to love for it's look.

Some call it a dog, some just love it (I am obviously among the latter with reservations though).

 

Biggest surprise for me so far was the 35/1.2 Voigtlander - I didn't expect it to be THAT nice (if only it would operate more close to a 35 Summilux in ergonomics).

The impressive point for me is especially, what you get at a price point of ~900 USD second hand - no Summicron or Summilux can scratch that.

It is such a good lens, that often I take it over a Summilux, just because of it's special character (I call it an aspherical lens, that has the perfect balance in it's looks between the classic pre ASPH lenses and the modern ASPH lenses without the disturbing imaging flaws as come and CA).

It has a really gentle rendering with a beautiful contrast as well, looking much smoother, than the modern Leica ASPH.

 

35/1.2 Nokton

rainy shanghai | portrait - during a rain by teknopunk.com, on Flickr

 

35/1.4 ASPH

bandana girl by teknopunk.com, on Flickr

 

35/1.4 pre ASPH (later Canadian 1m close focus)

Untitled by teknopunk.com, on Flickr

 

35/3.5 Elmar (uncoated sample)

portrait - 3.5cm ƒ3.5 Elmar uncoated made in 1938 by teknopunk.com, on Flickr

[menos I M6]

Here is a sample for the Canon 35/2 LTM:

Untitled by teknopunk.com, on Flickr

 

I am fairly certain, that this shot was taken @ 21mm with the Konica Hexanon Dual 21-35, but the rendering is exemplary for this lens also @ 35mm - I love that lens (although it's usage @ 35mm is starkly handicapped by more finder blockage, than I like:

Untitled by teknopunk.com, on Flickr

[philipus]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Thank you very much to both of you for your detailed explanations. Dirk thanks also for posting the images, which I find very helpful.

 

In the time period since I started the thread I used a CV Skopar 35 2.5 extensively and found it to be OK but that I missed having a faster lens. So I sold the Skopar.

 

The minimum focusing distance is important to me. 1m is generally too little esp for a wider lens so I have decided that this rules out the Summilux I/II altogether when I will have only one 35mm lens.

 

The 1.2 Nokton seems interesting, and that is a very appealing photo you posted Dirk. The lens is very large though. I already find my 50 Asph quite large so I think that the Nokton is not what I am looking for in 35mm.

 

The v2-4 Summicron are definite possibilities and from what I have seen they can be found for reasonable prices. I might buy this until I can afford the Summilux Asph, which I have had my eyes on for a while, thinking/hoping it would be almost like the FLE but a bit less costly.

 

As regards flare, I am very impressed with the performance of the 50 Asph.

 

How would the v2-4 Summicrons or the Summilux Asph (non-FLE) handle flare?

 

Price-wise it seems to me the v2-3 Summicrons go for about 1000€, the v4 for a few hundred more, the Summicron Asph for just shy of 2000€ and the Summilux Asph for around 3000€ (though I have found one for less than 3000€ which might be a good deal).

[menos I M6]

The flare resistance of the Summilux ASPH (and also the 35/1.2 Nokton is impressive and absolutely in the same league, as the 50 Summilux ASPH.

 

Being wide angle lenses at 35mm though, one has to understand, that treated violently, they will show certain flair, if shot with extreme light sources in the frame, but veiling flare is extremely well controlled.

 

I did a (unfair) comparison, as I happened, to have both lenses in the pocket, that day of the Canon 35/2 LTM and 35 Summilux ASPH of a scene under a very strong street lamp at RFF:

 

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1743559&postcount=19

 

The Canon is typical high speed lens 1960's performance, while the Summilux ASPH really is one of the first super modern Leica lenses from the new age (which makes it such a rock solid, reliable performer).

 

Prices vary quite a bit with samples of the lens. Check out too good to be true deals - lenses offered under 3000 EUR (some, I have seen around 2700-2800 EUR) are really older samples and might involve work regarding adjustment.

Really late samples will still run from 3500 − 3800 EUR.

 

If the ASPH is really, what you like and prefer (you really need f1.4 over f2 ? - you really want a modern, contrasty performance ?), I wouldn't buy a Summicron, but save up for a Summilux.

 

For me, the imaging is extremely personal and I very often just can't stand the look of the modern ASPH and grab one of the vintage lenses instead.

If you generally prefer a more classic look a Japanese lens or even a nice condition Summicron really can safe a lot of money in the beginning.

 

Btw - no mention so far about the Hexanon 35/2 lenses - I am dying, to try out a Hex UC, similarly, as I would give an arm and a leg for a converted Nikon 35/1.8 ;-)

 

You could just shop for a Canon 35/2 LTM in the 400 − 500 USD range and try it.

If you like this, you might have a nice, fast 35mm, until funding a Summilux (and keeping it after for that different look).

[philipus]

Check out too good to be true deals - lenses offered under 3000 EUR (some, I have seen around 2700-2800 EUR) are really older samples and might involve work regarding adjustment. Really late samples will still run from 3500 − 3800 EUR.

 

Thanks again Dirk. The flare test is interesting also because it shows the imaging characteristics of the two lenses. The Asph really looks like an Asph. Like you, I also feels that this is sometimes not the look I am after. I have quite a few 5cm/50mm lenses of various older and younger vintages. With the 35mm focal length I will eventually also get various types of lenses but for now I will aim for one lens.

 

I only use film so f1.4 would mean much to me. Still the Lux Asph is a lot of money so I will start saving. One question though - you write that earlier samples may need adjustment. In which way?

 

I have read (drooled really) over Dante Stella's texts on the various non-Leica RF lenses. The Konica (that's the one, right?) seems very nice, looks like a Summicron.

[menos I M6]

Thanks again Dirk. The flare test is interesting also because it shows the imaging characteristics of the two lenses. The Asph really looks like an Asph. Like you, I also feels that this is sometimes not the look I am after. I have quite a few 5cm/50mm lenses of various older and younger vintages. With the 35mm focal length I will eventually also get various types of lenses but for now I will aim for one lens.

 

I only use film so f1.4 would mean much to me. Still the Lux Asph is a lot of money so I will start saving. One question though - you write that earlier samples may need adjustment. In which way?

 

I have read (drooled really) over Dante Stella's texts on the various non-Leica RF lenses. The Konica (that's the one, right?) seems very nice, looks like a Summicron.

 

Hey Philip, yes, I read many of Dante's articles as well and one of them was a great help for me, to decide on my (so far) only Konica lens.

The article, you linked is about the mighty 35/2 UC lens - a late low production lens with reportedly fantastic performance.

I would absolutely love, to get my hands on one of those, but prices are now outrageous, whenever one of these shows up for sale. Most of Konica's late high performance lenses were issued in limited production runs of just under 1000 − 2000 pieces only, so prices are on the high side.

 

The one I referred to, is actually the only other multi focal rangefinder lens, ever made by another manufacturer than Leica - the Konica Hexanon Dual 21-35 lens. It is first and foremost a 21/3.4 lens, about the size and weight of a Leica 21/2.8 ASPH.

Additionally, it has a second focal length setting of 35/4.

 

The lens was very popular among M8 shooters (if one could find a sample, as this is also a limited production lens - kind of a technology show off from Konica).

On the M9 I absolutely love this lens @ it's 21mm setting - just the perfect contrast with very high performance (on par with the Leica 21/2.8 ASPH in sharpness and distortion).

 

According to your description of your needs, I too think, that with just one lens, you might not get, what you want.

May I suggest a few points:

 

I use the 35/1.2 version 1 Voigtlander without any lens hood - comparing this in size and weight to my 35/1.4 ASPH, the 35/1.2 really isn't significantly heavier, nor larger.

It is no contest though, when comparing both lenses without hood, then the Summilux ASPH really is very compact.

The Voigtlander 35/1.2 ASPHERICAL really can be used without hood - it's very, very flare resistant - on par with the Leica lens (I love Cosina's marketing, having inscribed the ASPHERICAL exactly the same on it's beauty ring, as Leica did on the 35 Summilux in the 90's).

 

Seeing it from this perspective, the Voigtlander really could be used as the one fast lens (actually the FASTEST modern 35mm), you would want to use in low light or for the occasion of throwing things out of focus in back and fore grounds, when you need it.

 

As a second lens, a nice, fast classic lens (or even a single coated Voigtlander 35/1.4) could be used.

I really like the Canon 35/2 for this purpose, as it is one of the highest performing lenses in it's class and age and just doesn't add any weight or bulk to your bag, if you want such a lens as an option with you.

These lenses are often sold and bought on diverse fora, so you can try one and resell it easily, should you not like it (just specifically ask the seller about any mechanical play between optical cell and focus mount, as that is it's weakness).

There is a version 1 and a version 2 with slightly improved coatings - people pay about 50 − 100 USD more for version 2, which is mechanically identical (outside difference is in the print on the beauty ring)

 

This lens pairing nets you a very modern, high performing fast 35 with the 35/1.2 Voigtlander and a super small, lightweight, classic rendering lens with the Canon for quite a bit under 1500 USD.

Both lenses are quite stable in second hand prices over some time now and are regularly dealt - you won't loose money on this.

 

 

The pre ASPH Leica Summilux is a lens, which really is only for lovers of this very sample - are priced out of their performance range in my opinion - if you love this lens for it's flaws, one might even be willing to pay more, but it's not a sensible price range for this also mechanically weak lens, if you seek performance.

 

 

With adjustments of older ASPH Summilux lenses, I referred to the much discussed issue with focus shift (in my opinion a very bloated discussion, as EVERY single lens has a certain amount of focus shift, which is naturally limited in it's showing pin the print, by a properly made compromise adjustment of the lens, trying to "hide" the focus being off, once a lens is stopped down).

 

In my experience, late samples of this lens do not visibly show focus shift in combination with a properly aligned rangefinder on a M8 an M9.

I bought my sample new from Leica, just when the FLE lens was announced and it works perfectly out of the box without any need of specific adjustment.

 

I have tried many other (older) samples in shops on the same bodies and focus issues could be observed with some.

[algrove]

If your choices are now wide open then do not overlook Zeiss ZM lenses. Check the various threads here about them as some can be very intriguing.