Summicron 90mm f/2 1973

[jip]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hello guys,

 

I recently ordered a Summicron 90mm f/2 from 1973 (latest model before the Summicron-M 90mm f/2. It's in great shape and the optics are clear, only a few really small specs which do not affect the pictures taken with the lens according to the seller.

 

I didn't pay too much for it.

 

I was wondering if anyone else has this lens, and what they think about it! Here is a picture of my lens.

 

I'll be getting it next monday, so my own pictures will follow!

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!

[Michael Geschlecht]

Hello jip,

 

Welcome to the Forum.

 

This 1st optical version 90/2 is somewhat larger & heavier than its 2 successors. It is considered a good lens, especially when stopped down a bit, but not the equal of either of its successors. It does have the advantage that it comes apart for use w/ a Visoflex II, IIa or III which neither of its successors does. For the unscrewed lens head to be used on a Visoflex II, IIa or III it needs adapter 16462 to which can be added extension tube 16474. These are sometimes found in their earlier form ZOOEP & OUEPO respectively. BTW: there are a number of variants of 16462 w/ different code #'s. Welcome to the World of Leitz/Leica.

 

This lens head w/ 16462, etc, can also be used on a 1st version Leicaflex w/ a 14127 or 14127*. Or it can be used on a later SL, etc, w/ the same 14127 if you figure the "0" point yourself (not difficult). You can also use it w/ an SL, etc, w/ a 14127* (a factory "0" 'd 14127), or a 14167 which is a simplification of a 14127* which does away w/ the need for all the additional odds & ends necessitated by the Original Leicaflex's external light meter.

 

It can also be used on a Bellows I (not to infinity) or II (to infinity) w/ a 16598. Or on a Bellows R for close-up photography by adding a 14127/27*/67 & etc to what is needed for the Visoflex.

 

Best Regards,

 

Michael

[gyoung]

I don't think that's the first version, rather its successor with fixed head

 

Gerry

[luigi bertolotti]

I think that it's indeed a 1st version, in terms of optical design : not the 1st as for finishing and barrel design (it had many variants). Not a masterpiece imho - use with care at f2...

[scsambrook]

This looks exactly like the one I had quite a few years ago and which was the "second" version of the 90mm Summicron. The optical head was indeed removable fom mine.The "first" one was in a differently styled mount and - if I read Puts' correctly - was different optically as well. (But my copy of Puts' book is at home . . . so I may be mistaken.)

 

And with all due respect to Luigi Bertolotti, it is actually an extremely nice lens to work with - the only real care you need to take when using it at f2 is not to step backward and trip over something:)

[doubice]

This is the second version, as far as optical design is concerned and its head does come off to be used on the Visoflex II and III housings via the 16462 focusing adapter.

 

Cosmetically, it is the 'third version of the second version' ......... :

 

1) Silver chrome mount, with scalloped focusing and f-stop rings

2) Black chrome mount, with scalloped focusing ring and ribbed f-stop ring

3) Black chrome mount, with ribbed focusing and f-stop rings

 

There are of course other minor variations - this list just mentions the major differences.

 

I am sure I understand what Luigi means by being careful when using this lens at f:2. Not only very shallow depth of field so, focusing has to be very precise but, also performance at f:2 is not up to today's standards. This lens tends to be rather soft at that aperture and prone to flare.

 

Nevertheless - in its time, it was an excellent lens. And 'its time' was the 1960's.......

 

Cheers,

 

Jan

[gyoung]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Apologies, I hadn't realised that the head came off any but the first version

 

Gerry

[jip]

Hello guys, thanks for all the response, I got this lens pretty cheap and it is pretty much in a mint condition as you can maybe see on the picture I posted, once I get the lens I'll give it a go and post some pictures here.

 

Jip

[luigi bertolotti]

This is the second version, as far as optical design is concerned and its head does come off to be used on the Visoflex II and III housings via the 16462 focusing adapter.

 

Cosmetically, it is the 'third version of the second version' ......... :

 

1) Silver chrome mount, with scalloped focusing and f-stop rings

2) Black chrome mount, with scalloped focusing ring and ribbed f-stop ring

3) Black chrome mount, with ribbed focusing and f-stop rings

 

There are of course other minor variations - this list just mentions the major differences.

 

I am sure I understand what Luigi means by being careful when using this lens at f:2. Not only very shallow depth of field so, focusing has to be very precise but, also performance at f:2 is not up to today's standards. This lens tends to be rather soft at that aperture and prone to flare.

 

Nevertheless - in its time, it was an excellent lens. And 'its time' was the 1960's.......

 

Cheers,

 

Jan

 

Sorry Jan, why do you speak of a 2nd version as optical design ? Afaik the Summicron 90 had only two glass schemas - the 6 elements that endured for 20+ years and the 5 elements of 1977 (1980 officially) - with the completely new body. The very first ones (SOOZI and SOOZI-M) were indeed of very different shape - with separate hood - but I think that lenses' assembly was the same of the displayed item.

[jip]

The ones with the screwmounts had different and inferior optics to my knowledge.

[doubice]

Sorry Jan, why do you speak of a 2nd version as optical design ? Afaik the Summicron 90 had only two glass schemas - the 6 elements that endured for 20+ years and the 5 elements of 1977 (1980 officially) - with the completely new body. The very first ones (SOOZI and SOOZI-M) were indeed of very different shape - with separate hood - but I think that lenses' assembly was the same of the displayed item.

 

Luigi,

 

My text was supposed to read "This is the second version; as far as optical design is concerned its head does come off to be used on the Visoflex II and III housings via the 16462 focusing adapter".

 

I responded in haste and did not proof read whether what I wrote made sense. Indeed the first and second versions were optically identical.

 

Cheers,

 

Jan

[jip]

Hello guys, as promised I would upload some images from and taken with the Lens on arrival.

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!

[jip]

Here are 2 images I took with the lens on my M8

Both are taken at f/4

On the red flower you can see I didn't use a UV/IR filter on the lens, will pick one up this week.

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!

Edited May 21, 2012 by jip
added the aperture used.

[lars_bergquist]

That old long-focus 90mm Summicron did in fact exist in two versions that differed not only in their mounts, but also optically, enough to matter, though they did share the same general double-Gauss six-element layout:

 

The first one (1957–1959) was the SOOZI (for LTM, SOOZI-M for M-mount) with the separate, free-form hood. This one was quite soft wide open and improved only moderately at mid-apertures. It seems to have been the origin of that "especially suitable for ladies' portraits" marketing spiel.

 

The second one (1959–1979, ## from 1,651,000) was the SEEOF, SEEOF-M or SEEOM or 11123 with the built-in telescoping hood. It had a re-computed lens head and was distinctly sharper wide open. It was in fact sharper at f:2 than its successor, the 1980–1998 code 11136, though this was better stopped down. This lens was also offered as a lens head for Visoflex use (code ZOOEP). Some of these had aperture pre-selection mechanisms.

 

Much early literature was written by collectors that could see (and were mainly interested) in odd outside variations of mechanics and finish, but did not understand the internal optics, and really were not that interested. They brought a philatelic attitude to Leica historiography, which was unfortunate. Many misunderstandings and conflations resulted.

 

The old man from the Brass Age

[jip]

Thanks for your response, I do know this is one of the latest lenses before the Summicron-M 90mm f/2 after this one only a little more then 100 were made.

 

This particular lens is in great shape, and the lenses are clear, no oil on the blades etc etc.

[lars_bergquist]

The estimable Tom Abrahamson (originally not only a compatriot of mine, but from the same town, so he must be trustworthy) once told a cautionary tale for long-focus 90mmm users. He was walking around with a SEEOM on a M3 hanging by its strap around his neck, when the load suddenly ripped out one of the strap lugs. The lens made a Stuka dive and landed hood first on his big toe which was quite a bit worse for wear. It healed eventually. But the hood did not. It became permanent free-form sculpture, like its counterpart on the SOOZI, and would never collapse again. Not more than it had already done, at least.

 

The old man who knew SOOZI like you know SOOZI ...

[luigi bertolotti]

I'm happy to have something in common with Abrahamson !!! But with a better end... my SEOOF (not for the same accident, but exclusively for my stupidity) had the hood deformed knocking on a rock... but I roughly counter-deformed it and it is still rectractable except for the last 2mm about... Leitz lenses of that times were really well made... : apart this minor issue, the lens has nothing bad (and anyway, to be sincere is about ten years I use it no more...)

[jip]

I will be carefull with the sun cap.

[jc_braconi]

Here are 2 images I took with the lens on my M8

Both are taken at f/4

On the red flower you can see I didn't use a UV/IR filter on the lens, will pick one up this week.

Do you have a 1.25 or 1.4 magnifier on your viewfinder ?

If not I recommend the use of one of them with the M8 and long focal lens ( at large aperture ) for a more accurate focusing.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[jip]

Not yet, but I was looking for one, because indeed everything under F4 is hard to focus, especially close up... Thanks for the tip!!

 

You recommend a 1.25 or 1.4 for the 90mm on M8?

 

Thanks!