Why the Summarits lens are snubbed??

[bocaburger]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I've seen and handled the Summarits. They seem as well-built as the more expensive Leica lenses of the current generation, that is to say, none of them seem as exquisitely made as the older generations. The Summarit 75 and 90 IIRC have rubber-clad focus rings similar to the later R lenses. The hoods are screw-on, with the thread timing set to stop the rectangular ones in exactly the proper orientation. Very nice engineering, but I wonder why it was chosen. There's the propensity for grit to get into fine threads, and I find putting them on more fiddly than the pushbutton or telescopic style, and I can't see where the economy is in manufacture. Given these lenses cost similar to used examples of the last-generation Leica lenses, and are said to perform quite similar to them, but are a stop or more slower, I have not been tempted other than by the 75, because there isn't a second-hand equivalent in size or price. But since it's a lens I rarely use, a CV 2.5 Heliar suffices nicely.

[Advertisement]

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

[vertekijker]

Check Erwin Puts on the Summarits:

Summarit range

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

Frans

[RobertJRB]

I always think a big part of this is from new leica users. With nikon and certainly canon the faster lenses are the better lenses. All canon L lenses are fast.

 

So when they start buying leica they automatically go for the summiluxes. I never see a new M9 user on FM forum starting with the (I think stunning) 50 summarit, only complaining about the long 50 lux waiting list. You are actually the first

 

Enjoy the M9!

[jaapv]

Jaap do you know where the summarit are produced??

Someone in Italy says that the Summarit are made in Japan and then assembled in Germany (Solms of course)

 

Ciao

 

Giacomo

 

If you visit the factory you can see the production line with your own eyes. The only thing Japanese about them is that Hoya is a major supplier of optical glass for Leica - for many lenses.

[Wolfgang Esslinger]

Had the 75 Summarit, its aperture turned loose on day 1. Later exchanged it for a 90 Summarit because I didn't use the 75 much. The 90 has so far behaved well ;-) So it's 1:1 as far as mechanical quality is concerned.

 

I also have two Luxes. Both have been to Leica more than once due to backfocus issues. The mechanics of the 50 lux are vastly inferior to the 90 summarit (but still within tolerance according to Leica).

 

So, as far as build quality is concerned, the summarits win, at least with this small base of n=4 lenses.

 

The trouble is when you like to take photos at low light you need luxes, esp. with Leica's ccd sensors.

[earleygallery]

 

The trouble is when you like to take photos at low light you need luxes, esp. with Leica's ccd sensors.

 

Or a tripod!

[Wolfgang Esslinger]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Or a tripod!

 

I did not dare to ask the guy to stop moving ;-) That's 1.4 / 1/60 at 640 ISO with 50 lux on M8 - taken in Newham!! ;-)

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!

[MarkP]

I think Rockwell has a lot to answer for in this debate, accepting that low price carries with it a perception of low quality (we know that is not the case for example with many of the outstanding Zeiss lenses).

 

Googling Leica lenses usually brings up the official Leica website, retailers and Rockwell at the top of the list. He comments on their high optical performance and fairly bluntly states that they are manufactured to a poor standard...as opposed to his unsubstantiated comments being of a poor standard.

 

For example I have a 1.4/35 Summilux FLE and 2.5/35 Summarit. When I want to travel light and/or know I will have no problems with low light, or want a bit more of that more traditional rendering I will take the Summarit with no hesitation.

 

Mark

[earleygallery]

I did not dare to ask the guy to stop moving ;-) That's 1.4 / 1/60 at 640 ISO with 50 lux on M8 - taken in Newham!! ;-)

 

Nice shot! You got out alive then!

[adan]

For me, the knock on the Summarits is that there have been better-specced used lenses - especially as to close-focus distance - available for less money.

 

Why pay $1500 for new Summarits when a used 90 f/2.8 or 35 f/2 that focused closer was available for sub-$1000?

 

Now that used prices for other lenses have skyrocketed, and used Summarits are coming on the market, they will likely get a better look.

 

I have a 75 Summilux for when I need f/1.4 or .75m focusing and am willing to carry the load - and a 75 Summarit for most of the rest of the time. Also a microscopic 90 f/2.8 that cost half as much as the Summarit - but it flares sometimes where the Summarit doesn't, so again, I pick the tool for the situation.

[akiralx]

Do you have factual evidence that the Summarits "..have little success"? My general recollection is that they enjoy great success with many members of this forum and beyond.

 

Regarding your assertion that "...they can not have the same quality of the big brothers Summicron and Summilux,..", I fear that claim cannot go unchallenged. There are only two significant areas where the Summicron is better: in close focus and at the widest respective apertures. In the normal working range I defy anyone to distinguish between results from competing lenses.

 

I have just returned from shooting in a specialist museum, using my 28mm Elmarit ASPH; 35mm Summicron and 75mm Summarit lenses. For my task those three lenses were ideal and each contributed to my coverage. In definition terms, there is little to distinguish one image from another. Certainly I do not feel let down by the Summarit.

 

Yes, I own the 35 Summarit and 35 Summilux FLE and during the day take the Summarit every time as the colour rendition seems richer.

 

In fact I have all four Summarits - the 50 and 75 are superb (I sold the 75 Summicron after shooting it alongside the latter for a while), and my only slight concern is that the 90 Summarit does not seem quite as sharp as the others, but that may be user error and/or the need for some adjustment common with longer lenses.

 

The 50mm I got last and find the sharpness wideopen amazing.

[Jeff S]

Check Erwin Puts on the Summarits:

Summarit range

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

Frans

 

And just to make sure the OP doesn't miss this, Puts concludes by saying: "I would even claim that the Summarit 35mm is better than the Summicron asph version."

 

Not everyone thinks these are inferior to some faster, more expensive versions.

 

Jeff

[nggalai]

Do you have factual evidence that the Summarits "..have little success"? My general recollection is that they enjoy great success with many members of this forum and beyond.

 

The impression that Summarits “have little success” might also be due to availability – while I’ve never seen a Summilux and only rarely a Summicron on a Leica dealer’s shelf here in Switzerland and Southern Germany, Summarits are pretty much omnipresent. I got my 50mm from a Nikon dealer; Leica-wise, apart from the Summarits, he only stocked Panaleica cameras.

 

Keeping in mind how the Summarits (also) were created for easier, faster, and cheaper production it’s not surprising. But one might get the impression M users are cueing up for the “good stuff” – hence to some the Summarits might appear to be sub-par. On the lines of “if they weren’t crap, they would be as sparsely available as the rest”.

 

Quite ironic, really, considering the moaning of many about lens availability.

 

For me, the knock on the Summarits is that there have been better-specced used lenses - especially as to close-focus distance - available for less money.

 

Why pay $1500 for new Summarits when a used 90 f/2.8 or 35 f/2 that focused closer was available for sub-$1000?

 

I chose the Summarit 90mm over the Elmarit as it was a tad lighter and more compact. Also, both lenses had the same close-focus distance (1m). The Elmarit was less expensive (second-hand shelf), but not by much.

 

Cheers,

-Sascha

[rramesh]

There are broadly 2 groups of folks buying Leica lenses. Those who use it to take great pictures and those who collect to resell later.

 

Unfortunately there is a lot of snob appeal in the later group who will not hesitate to buy a Noctilux or even a pure white M9-P for display in a cabinet never to use. Very similar to collectors of Montblancs who never even ink the pen or even open the sealed box for fear that their values will dip.

 

Sad to say many of these folks are in Asia. I have even heard camera dealers here tell me not to buy Summarits as they don't hold their value unlike the Summicrons or Summiluxes.

[michali]

Reading through this thread it's interesting to see that there's positive consensus from those of us who have owned and used Summarits about their quality.

 

Additionally, many here including myself prefer to use them for day to day shooting over the Summiluxes or Summicrons because of compactness and image rendering/quality. That's quite an endorsement I would say. All except for the "Leica guru" Ken Rockwell.....

[lars_bergquist]

To most people, even Leica people, photographic optics is Utter Mystery. So, being totally ignorant, they apply the criteria they use when buying a new car, or a new dishwasher:

 

• More expensive always means better.

• More of something – no matter what – is always better.

 

So, the Summarit lenses being less expensive, and slightly slower, means that they are inferior. Q.E.D.

 

Add to that the Bling Factor. A considerable slice of Leica M sales, in some quarters probably the vastly largest, is for bling. In a society where a person's standing does not depend on what he/she is, or does, or contributes, but on what he/she owns, well, bling rules. Because bling is expensive, and money rules.

 

Sorry about the he/she thing. I know, this is abject political correctness. In reality, I could well have written 'he' because hierarchy building is mainly a male thing. Women don't build hierarchies, or they build them by subtler means, opaque to mere males.

 

LB

[Giacomo.B]

Hello guys read this:

 

"the Summarits were not exactly taken seriously as Leica lenses since their introduction in 2006. This may be simply because they are sold at a much more competitive price than Leica custumers are used to.

 

From LFI 6/2011

 

I think that this summarizing all...

 

Ciao

 

Giacomo

[Double Negative]

I've yet to see a Summarit-produced photo and thought, "well gee, that sucks." In fact, they're quite pleasant in their rendering.

 

I actually kind of like their consistency in design and speed. The rubber focus ring while somewhat "unconventional" with M lenses is straight from their R and S lenses.

 

They're legit Leica lenses, come 6-bit coded and perform well. They're just seen as "budget lenses" by some I guess. Something has to give if you want to keep the price down. If that troubles you, fork out the extra cash and get a Summicron or Summilux, or... There's something for everyone. Okay, so they're not f/1.4 - but at f/2.5 they're still faster than f/2.8.

 

Considering the mechanical build of Zeiss ZM lenses, despite their awesome optical capabilities - the Summarits are definitely an upgrade. And while CV lenses are great too, their optical properties aren't quite up there (mostly barrel distortion, corners/edges), nor are the mechanics as "refined" (solid they are).

 

Personally, I think you'd be hard-pressed to be disappointed with any modern Leica lens, generally speaking.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[wattsy]

"the Summarits were not exactly taken seriously as Leica lenses since their introduction in 2006. This may be simply because they are sold at a much more competitive price than Leica custumers are used to.

 

I think it depends upon the Leica customer. I guess if you are new to the brand (and most probably photography) and only have the £3550 35mm Summilux, £5395 M9P and £7650 Noctilux as your points of reference, the £1250 asking price of the 35mm Summarit might seem a little too "competitive" (is that a euphemism for cheap?). However, if you are already familiar with the company's products and remember when, less than ten years ago, a 35 Summicron retailed for £895, an MP for £1800, and even a Noctilux for £1800, the cost of the Summarits should seem more than sufficient to be taken seriously. I don't know about anyone else but a £1250 camera lens is not something I'm going to sneer at.

[batmobile]

They are superb.

 

Within their speed range, they give almost nothing (if anything) up over faster lenses and have the advantage of low weight and smaller size.

 

I own a 35 and 75, as well as more expensive asph lenses. They are just as well made, but have different construction and amount of glass inside. Pick up a 35 lux II and it wil feel 'better made' than a 35 Summarit because it is twice the weight and has lots more glass inside, but better made? I see no evidence for this.