Jump to content

Leitz 35mm 3.5 Summaron


sksaito

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I've been looking into buying a Leitz 35mm 3.5 Summaron. I see that some have the serial number in the front of the lens while I can't find the serial number anywhere. How does one tell when the lens was made if the serial number cannot be found?

Link to post
Share on other sites

x

The only Summaron 3,5 which has not the s/n around the front ring is the 1st version, made only in screw mount, easily identified by the fact that it has the A36 slip-on filter mount - to say, the classic Elmar (and other prewar lenses) filter mount.

 

But it has anyway the s/n in front : it is engraved (sometimes, but not always, filled with white paint) in the black ring around the front glass element. If you look at the pic of this lens in the Wiki section, it's well visible (though NOT white - painted), and also, just for example, in this lens for sale : https://www.leicashop.com/vintage/summaron-a36-3535cm-p-159.html. Indeed, if you have just a picture of the item you are considering, it can be not visible, depending on the angle of taking.

 

The later versions of the Summaron 3,5 have a std. E39 filter mount, and the s/n engraved on the front ring together with the usual other identifying writings (Ernst Leitz Wetzlar Summaron f 3,5 etc...)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I see it. The s/n is very tiny, uncolored so I had to use a flashlight to see it. But I see it now. Another question, then. How is this Version 1 Summaron optically different than the later versions? I shouldn't be lazy and search this info myself but I thought this would be quicker to ask.:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

The lens schema of the Summaron 3,5 remained unchanged during its life and its variants (5 or 6) : so there is not to expect different results (I have 4 of them... ;) they do perform the same) ; of course, being an old lens, there can be conditions' issues that can alter rendering : typically, coating "integrity"... btw coating could be the only thing that slightly changed during Summaron's lifecycle : it was a rather "new" technology when the lens was announced, and it was surely "tuned" in those years.

 

BTW... the Summaron 35 2,8 is generally regarded as a better lens... but there are people (like me) who have a singular passion for the old 3,5... :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Yes... there is at least one E39 item with the V1 mount : Lager writes it was an experimental item : never saw one in the marketplace, as far as I remember.

An interesting "special" of the Summaron 3,5 is the "Postkamera" model... a set which sometime does appear for sale.

 

to illustrate Luigi talk :

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!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes... there is at least one E39 item with the V1 mount : Lager writes it was an experimental item : never saw one in the marketplace, as far as I remember.

An interesting "special" of the Summaron 3,5 is the "Postkamera" model... a set which sometime does appear for sale.

 

This is the only known sample in existence... photographed many years ago in the US : at the time J. Lager was preparing his wellknown "Lenses" book (then collecting photographic material for the purpose).

As far as I remember this lens should be in the name of Mr. Leitz in the registers.

Sorry for the the picture quality...

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!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
The lens schema of the Summaron 3,5 remained unchanged during its life and its variants (5 or 6) : so there is not to expect different results (I have 4 of them... ;) they do perform the same) ; of course, being an old lens, there can be conditions' issues that can alter rendering : typically, coating "integrity"... btw coating could be the only thing that slightly changed during Summaron's lifecycle : it was a rather "new" technology when the lens was announced, and it was surely "tuned" in those years.

 

BTW... the Summaron 35 2,8 is generally regarded as a better lens... but there are people (like me) who have a singular passion for the old 3,5... :)

 

The 35mm 2.8 Summaron is better optically than the 3.5 Summaron in what ways? I've never had the pleasure of ever using a 2.8 Summaron; I always thought it's only advantage was the faster f stop and optically it was pretty much the same as the 3.5.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The 35mm 2.8 Summaron is better optically than the 3.5 Summaron in what ways? I've never had the pleasure of ever using a 2.8 Summaron; I always thought it's only advantage was the faster f stop and optically it was pretty much the same as the 3.5.

 

It is reported that the 2,8 used new rare earth glasses, which, besides allowing a "stretching" of the max aperture, led to better overall contrast.

The lens' design in itself (6 elements - 4 groups) is indeed the same.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is reported that the 2,8 used new rare earth glasses, which, besides allowing a "stretching" of the max aperture, led to better overall contrast.

The lens' design in itself (6 elements - 4 groups) is indeed the same.

 

Thank you. One more questions. Do Summarons with "goggles" or viewfinder attachments have the same lens design as the ones without? I know that the focusing distance can vary but lens wise are they the same? I have an M3 as well as other M's. I believe the goggles fit all M's, even an M7 or M9. So I thought if optically the Summarons with and without goggles are the same, I should get the ones with goggles so I can use on my M3 as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is reported that the 2,8 used new rare earth glasses, which, besides allowing a "stretching" of the max aperture, led to better overall contrast.

The lens' design in itself (6 elements - 4 groups) is indeed the same.

 

I'd call it the main progress made with the 2.8-Summaron, that it was as good as the 3.5-version with half a stop more light. Only at the extreme corners the newer version gets weaker than the precedessor, though you wan't notice this in practice. It is not easy to compare contrast with the two Summarons. Both versions often have some fog on the backward lens, which in some cases may lead to less contrast and in some cases has no effect. So it could be that one really compares different states of the lenses and not different versions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

BTW... the Summaron 35 2,8 is generally regarded as a better lens... but there are people (like me) who have a singular passion for the old 3,5... :)

 

I have and used both of them and what I can tell, IMHO, is that the 3.5 gives a warmer rendering of colors (on film & dias) than the 2.8 no matter the aperture used...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you. One more questions. Do Summarons with "goggles" or viewfinder attachments have the same lens design as the ones without? I know that the focusing distance can vary but lens wise are they the same? I have an M3 as well as other M's. I believe the goggles fit all M's, even an M7 or M9. So I thought if optically the Summarons with and without goggles are the same, I should get the ones with goggles so I can use on my M3 as well.

 

Yes, goggled and ungoggled share the same optical cell... I think that, at factory level, the optical cells in themselves were assembled maybe without even "knowing" if they were to be inserted in a goggled or ungoggled mount.

And yes, a goggled version fits any M, including the digitals, and activates the 50mm frame, with correct field of view thanks to the enlarged view given by goggles : only the Leica CL can't mount them.

The minus point of the goggled items is carrying... they are less pocketable, but there was a fine leather case with strap, made for them (which is not impossible to find).

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not able to find new A36 yellow filters in the U.S.. Is it not made anymore in this size and I have to buy classic used filters specifically made for the early 35 3.5 Summarons?

 

Look for original Leitz A36 filters : they fit the Summaron 1st ver. and are easy to find and not costly (Leicashop of Wien usually has many... and other dealers too, by sure)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...