Why the Summarits lens are snubbed??

[bocaburger]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

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.

 

+1! My 40+ yr brand loyalty might stretch far enough to grant Leica benefit of doubt when it comes to the pricing of new, cutting-edge-design exotics eg the 0.95 Noct, 21 Lux, and 35 Lux-FLE, but when I see how they've engorged the prices for lenses that have been around for decades and I remember them at a third or quarter of their current cost only a few years ago...if I were just entering the Leica domain I would not even be considering buying any new Leica lenses other than the Summarits.

 

But the fact the Summarits aren't just flying off the shelves speaks volumes about the status-symbol mindset of Leica ownership. It's similar to the situation with Porsche, where despite the fact a Boxster or Cayenne handles as well or better than a base 3.6L Carrera, the latter is still the more coveted automobile at nearly twice the price of the former.

[lars_bergquist]

Some brands (no names!) do actually sell lines of lenses that are 'economy' or 'entry level' stuff that not only have more modest specs, but are actually lower in quality.

 

Leica laid themselves bare to suspicion in this direction when they did choose to list the Summarit lenses separately from the 'main line' Summicrons, Summiluxes and Elmarits. That was very stupid of them. They should merge the two lists as soon as possible.

 

Even better would be to abandon the superfluous names and just engrave all lenses "LEICA M-LENS 1:2/50MM" for instance. But some superstitious people do seem to think that there is some magical 'mana' in the old names. Still, some time Leica must move into the 21st century. Is it not enough to say just 'Leica'? It is enough for me.

 

LB

[Giacomo.B]

less than ten years ago, a 35 Summicron retailed for £895, an MP for £1800, and even a Noctilux for £1800,

 

Exactly in 2006/2007

 

@Double Negative, the rubber focus there isn't on 35 and 50 Summarit, for me the construction is the same of summicrons, only the "Aperture Barrel" (i don't know the name) is less softly when open and close the blades..

 

Ciao

 

Giacomo

[Double Negative]

Some brands (no names!) do actually sell lines of lenses that are 'economy' or 'entry level' stuff that not only have more modest specs, but are actually lower in quality...

 

Ha! Check out the Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 Mark II some time... Its nickname is "nifty fifty" and/or "plastic fantastic." Granted, it's a decent lens optically... But what a POS! Even the lens mount itself is plastic (along with just about everything else).

 

I'll take a "budget Leica lens" over that ANY day!

 

@Double Negative, the rubber focus there isn't on 35 and 50 Summarit, for me the construction is the same of summicrons, only the "Aperture Barrel" (i don't know the name) is less softly when open and close the blades..

 

True, I should've been more specific. I think you're thinking of the "aperture ring" and yes.

[Giacomo.B]

True, I should've been more specific. I think you're thinking of the "aperture ring" and yes.

 

Exactly "Aperture Ring" thanks!!

 

Ciao

 

Giacomo

[wattsy]

Granted, it's a decent lens optically... But what a POS...

 

I'll take a "budget Leica lens" over that ANY day!

 

Isn't the optical quality what really matters. That canon 50 is probably the best 100 quid's worth of lens you can buy.

 

The budget Leica 50 is around ten times the price of the Canon so it ought to be more desirable than the canon "POS".

[Double Negative]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Isn't the optical quality what really matters. That canon 50 is probably the best 100 quid's worth of lens you can buy.

 

The budget Leica 50 is around ten times the price of the Canon so it ought to be more desirable than the canon "POS".

 

Of course. Unless it breaks in half on you - which they're known to do! I had the "Mark I" which at least had a metal lens mount and focus/DoF scale. But I agree, for the money it gets the job done.

 

The problem with the Leica lens is it doesn't fit on the Canon and vice versa.

[luigi bertolotti]

Some brands (no names!) do actually sell lines of lenses that are 'economy' or 'entry level' stuff that not only have more modest specs, but are actually lower in quality.

 

Leica laid themselves bare to suspicion in this direction when they did choose to list the Summarit lenses separately from the 'main line' Summicrons, Summiluxes and Elmarits. That was very stupid of them. They should merge the two lists as soon as possible.

 

Even better would be to abandon the superfluous names and just engrave all lenses "LEICA M-LENS 1:2/50MM" for instance. But some superstitious people do seem to think that there is some magical 'mana' in the old names. Still, some time Leica must move into the 21st century. Is it not enough to say just 'Leica'? It is enough for me.

 

LB

 

Correct... but is worth noting that they used the Summarit brand also for S2 lenses... not exactly a "cheap" product line...; anyway, I feel not unpleasant that we Leica aficionados have well in our mind that if some lens named "Summicron" is introduced, is by sure a f2...

[Bobitybob]

Does 25cm make that much difference and how close do you need to get to focus, surly on an M9 and even an M8 that's just a small crop away!

 

I have the full set of Summarits and for an amateur user find them excellent value for money; they produce sharp images and so far after 18 months (I know that's not 50 years) of use have never been a problem.

 

I'm not sure why they get such a bad press, but I'm more than happy with mine.

[Double Negative]

^ I've seen Bob's shots - he speaketh the truth!

[jaapv]

Correct... but is worth noting that they used the Summarit brand also for S2 lenses... not exactly a "cheap" product line...; anyway, I feel not unpleasant that we Leica aficionados have well in our mind that if some lens named "Summicron" is introduced, is by sure a f2...

Agree, and the original Summarit was the -then- seriously expensive 1.5 5cm lens.

[rramesh]

I have read a lot of articles which allude to lower specification glass used in the new Summarit range, higher tolerances in manufacture and lower quality material in body. But I have not really seen any proof in reviews.

 

Can someone enlighten me on these aspects other than loose aperture rings, because even Summicrons and Summiluxes have had reported problems on the latter?

[Giacomo.B]

lower quality material in body.

 

The hood of my Summarit 50mm is metal, the hood of my Summicron 35mm Asph is plastic, in this case the quality is better on Summarit...

 

 

Ciao

 

Giacomo

[jaapv]

I have read a lot of articles which allude to lower specification glass used in the new Summarit range, higher tolerances in manufacture and lower quality material in body. But I have not really seen any proof in reviews.

 

Can someone enlighten me on these aspects other than loose aperture rings, because even Summicrons and Summiluxes have had reported problems on the latter?

Apart from the infamous K.R. which articles?

[rramesh]

Apart from the infamous K.R. which articles?

Besides KR, EP mentions in comparison between Summarit and Summicron "Apart form the different assembly and manufacturing technology, Summicron lenses have a long list of high-end properties like apochromatic correction, aspherical surfaces, exotic glass types, floating elements, and can focus more closely. Build quality is also a notch better and the selection of materials is different to ensure durability and longevity and accuracy under all conditions. Here the Summarit line has to prove itself over time." Again not much detail (what exotic glass not used?, what different manufacture?, what material not used? in Summarit) as I have seen build quality to be good for both.

[Fgcm]

I own and use summarits.

I love these lenses. They are Quite good.

 

I also set apart one of mine.

 

1. The focusing helicoid is a New design. Quite well done.

I guess it's bomb proof. The problem: many semmarits have an infinite stop just little Beyond true infinite.

This could be related to the helicoid design: The stop is fixed with a screw inside The Barrel. You cannot tighten without opening The barrel.

If you know your lens, This in not a problem at all.

 

2. The hood screws onto The barrel and is supposed to lock against a gummy o-ring. In my summarit 50 and 35 The o-ring is to thin to lock The hood. I fixed The problem with some thin tape on The tread.

On 35 i no more use The hood: it dose never flare, so Why to bother with The hood?

 

Conclusion: two minor problems for The lenses i most use and i most love.

My summiluxes are always home and summarits are always on my camera.

 

Fgcm

 

 

P.s. To set apart summarits is easy. You need a Philips screwdriver 00

I Was just curious to see Why k.r. Wrote about a lack of quality.

He is wrong and i think ha never opened a Summarit to look inside.

[lars_bergquist]

The more extreme the specifications of a lens are (great speed, very short or long focal length) the more it needs exotic and expensive glass if it is to have good image quality. If you are designing a 35mm lens with a speed of 2.5, then you can probably get very good IQ without using precious glass – so it would be insane to specify it. A sheer waste of money.

 

Similarily, good IQ with high speed may force you to use aspherical surfaces, floating elements or whatnot, which all cost a lot of money. Assembling such a lens to the tolerances necessary to make these techniques work well is also very costly. Believe me, the Gnomes of Solms do not do this just because the letters 'ASPH' look good on the front ring. They do it to get the performance. If they can get it in a simpler way, then they can share the cost reduction with the customer.

 

In the old days B.C. (Before Computers) designing a workable lens took several man-years of work. You then used and re-used that basic design again and again, exploiting not only the design work done but also the (hopefully) good reputation that this lens design had acquired. It was sensible to give that design a brand name, like Tessar or Elmar or Summicron or whatever, to tell the purchaser what he (yes, he) was buying.

 

Since the late 1950's, to Leitz/Leica, those names have been just speed classes. They tell us nothing whatever about the lens design; and the old designs are seldom relevant any longer in any case. So monikers like 'Summicron' or 'Summilux' are actually redundant: The lens speed is already engraved on the front ring for all to see, so why waste the space? "Leica M-lens" would tell me all I want to know: "This lens has a M bayonet and it is as good as we can make it, no kidding."

 

But I fear that such a sensible arrangement would not do. Moneyed idiots, a market segment that is not to be overlooked, will insist on the ancient incantations. They will have their way, as they always do. Just look around you.

 

LB

[earleygallery]

How many times have I read on this forum that "Leica must offer lower priced/entry level items" ? When they do just that, i.e. the Summarit lenses, they then get criticised for producing stuff that isn't as good, lower spec, cheaper materials blah blah.

 

Can't have it both ways.

[jaapv]

Besides KR, EP mentions in comparison between Summarit and Summicron "Apart form the different assembly and manufacturing technology, Summicron lenses have a long list of high-end properties like apochromatic correction, aspherical surfaces, exotic glass types, floating elements, and can focus more closely. Build quality is also a notch better and the selection of materials is different to ensure durability and longevity and accuracy under all conditions. Here the Summarit line has to prove itself over time." Again not much detail (what exotic glass not used?, what different manufacture?, what material not used? in Summarit) as I have seen build quality to be good for both.

proving oneself over time is not the same as being inferior.. E.P. is in his compendium very positive about Summarits.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[pgk]

Summarits represent an extremely high pinnacle of conventional spherical lens design. They do not use aspheric elements or other exotic technologies and counter this by retaining modest maximum apertures in order to produce superb image quality. I assume that, as Lars states, the use of conventional technologies has enabled Leica to offer them at prices substantially below that of lenses which do use numerous exotic lens technologies in order to overcome optical problems encountered when designing and building faster aperture lenses.

 

I've owned the 35 Summarit and used a 75 Summarit (borrowed from Leica) and have to say that I was impressed by the results and had no complaints about the build quality. In fact the 35 is the most flare resistant 35 in Leica's line up. I for one will not snub the Summarits and am currently debating about a 75.