Jump to content

Leica 35 Summaron ƒ/2.8 for the Monochrom?


james.liam

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The first step in the twelve step therapy for GAS is to recognise that "I need" means "I want"

You are in the fortunate position that the training into recognising that " I want" is not a valid reason for buying comes only in the last phase of the treatment.

 

This is a message from Gear Buyers Anonymous,

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 45
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Had the Summaron and loved it. Didn't like the handling, though- aperture ring is very narrow and too close to the focusing one. Smooth bokeh and surprisngly sharp results.

 

In the end I sold it and bought the C-Biogon ZM. Handling is much better, bokeh equally nice and this baby is sharp accross the frame!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I should never have allowed KEH ship the Summaron for a look-see ("return it no questions asked"). Mint condition, vintage 1962, smooth focus, snappy aperture ring detents, pristine glass and the barrel as if it had never been used. Damn them for under-rating an EX+. Thing is flawless.

 

Back in the box it goes before I do something I will regret...

 

:confused:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I should never have allowed KEH ship the Summaron for a look-see ("return it no questions asked"). Mint condition, vintage 1962, smooth focus, snappy aperture ring detents, pristine glass and the barrel as if it had never been used. Damn them for under-rating an EX+. Thing is flawless.

 

Back in the box it goes before I do something I will regret...

 

:confused:

 

I have one, minty, great lens, use it all the time. Why not keep it? Can't cost too much, right? Get that little hood for it and you're all set..

Link to post
Share on other sites

Out of curiosity, for those who've shot with the Summaron 2.8 and Summicron 8-element, what are the perceived differences at equivalent f-stops?

 

The Summaron is a simpler design (and as someone here clarified, of the same design at the older Nikkor 3.5cm/2.5) and I presume can't possibly perform at the level of the Summicron at any f-stop?

Link to post
Share on other sites

jaapv - When does the exciting electro-shock therapy come into your twelve step plan?

 

 

 

Rick

 

 

No need...they just use sticker shock. Quite often just seeing the price is enough shock to snap a person out of a GAS attack.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Malcolm Taylor once told me that the Summaron at f/2.8 is superior to the Summicron at that stop.

 

I don't see that with my copies. My Summicron 35 M IV has more contrast at 2.8, resulting in more sharpness impression than the Summaron 2.8 M at 2.8. These are very subtle differences and in no way justifying a choice for the one or the other.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see that with my copies. My Summicron 35 M IV has more contrast at 2.8, resulting in more sharpness impression than the Summaron 2.8 M at 2.8. These are very subtle differences and in no way justifying a choice for the one or the other.

 

IV is an optical design with coatings two decades newer so it stands to reason it would be so. It's against the 8-element I'm wondering about.

Link to post
Share on other sites

According to Puts the 8-element version Summicron is better in the centre at 2.8 than the Summaron

 

Makes sense; the Summaron was logically targeted toward the amateur market whereas the costlier Summicron probably for photojournalists and the like.

Link to post
Share on other sites

According to Puts the 8-element version Summicron is better in the centre at 2.8 than the Summaron

 

True, but again according to Puts the Summaron is an excellent performer and "better than the Summicron at 2.8" :D

 

The thing is, Puts is contradicting himself in his comments regarding the Summaron vs Summicron all the time, at least that is my impression. But see for yourself:

 

Puts on 2.8 Summaron (in Dennis Laney, Camera and Lens Pocket Book. 7th Edition. West Sussex 2002, p. 109)

"Vignetting is 2 stops and there is no distortion. The lens is an excellent performer and is better than the 8 element Summicron at f/2.8. Overall contrast is high and the central definition is very high, bringing in fine detail with clarity, and over most of the image area. Stopping down to f/4 increases micro contrast and now very fine detail rendered with the exception of the corners. Best aperture is f/5.6 where truly excellent image quality is delivered."
Puts on 8 element Summicron (Leica Lens compendium, as retrieved from here)
"At 1:2.8 contrast improves markedly and now centre quality is better than that of the Summaron."
Link to post
Share on other sites

If you can find it, there's a verity interesting LHSA PDF called "The 35mm f/2,8 Summaron: Legendary Lens?" Copyright 2005 by Seth Rosner .

 

In it, Seth scientifically compares the 35mm f2.8 Summaron to the 8 element and seven element Summicrons. His verdict, "it's the most desirable 35mm lens that Leitz/Leica has produced."

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...