Jump to content

Summar 5cm variations


Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hello Pierre,

 

Your message box here on the Forum seems to be filled.

 

There is someone writing here in the Historica Section who is writing in Spanish. If you, or someone else reading this, can read Spanish it would be good to read his Thread, the title of which is in Spanish, to see if it is possible to help him.

 

Best Regards,

 

Michael

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I said before that I would post a photo of my 12 Summars with some attempt to categorise them. While van Hasbroeck attempted to categorise the Summar and, indeed, other lenses, there are more variations than he lists, but all of the lenses I have can be related to one of the 10 variants that he listed.

 

First of all here is a photo of my lenses.

 

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!

 

In order to make some sense of what I have, here are some codes which I have made up. Apologies if these are confusing. I should, perhaps, consider putting these into a spreadsheet after I get some comments back. The first lens below is rigid and all of the remainder are collapsible.

 

Ni = Nickel

Chr = Chrome

BR = Black Ring

N f2.9 = No f2.9 mark

f2.9 = f 2.9 mark

NIR = No infra red mark

IR = Infra Red Mark

SL = Slot in aperture bezel

NSL = No slot in aperture bezel

Mtr = Metres scale

Ft = Feet Scale

N/Co = No Coating

Co = Coating

VH = van Hasbroeck category number

 

Front row from left to right

 

1. SN 186431, Ni, Nf2.9, NIR, NSL, Mtr, N/Co, VH1

2. SN 193632, Ni, BR , f2.9, NIR, SL, Mtr, N/Co, VH4

3. SN 194902, Chr, BR, f2.9, NIR, SL, Mtr, N/Co, VH5

4. SN 195070, Chr, f2.9, IR, SL, Mtr, N/Co, VH7/9

5. SN 207716, Chr, f2.9, NIR, SL, Mtr, N/Co, VH7

6. SN 208040, Chr, f2.9, IR, SL, Ft, N/Co VH9

 

Back row from left to right

 

7. SN 229767, Chr f2.9, IR, SL, Mtr, Co, VH9 

8. SN 256786, Ni, f 2.9, IR, SL, Mtr, N/Co, VH8

9. SN 267515, Chr, f2.9, IR, SL, Mtr, Co, VH9

10. SN 346687, Chr f2.9, IR, NSL, Ft, N/Co VH9/10

11. SN 422925, Chr, Nf2.9, IR, NSL, Mtr, Co, VH10 (red dot on front ring)

12. SN 468879, Chr, Nf2.9, IR, NSL, Ft, N/Co, VH10

 

As I have mentioned before, this started as an 'accidental collection' from lenses that came with different cameras and it was only after I noted the variations in my collection that I started to collect individual lenses. Only 7 and 9 above appear to be identical, but 7 has a violet coating, whereas 9 has a blue coating. 4 above is a bit of a mystery, but it seems that it has a later mount with IR marking with an earlier lens head from a non IR model. 10 is also interesting as it appears to cross 2 van Hasbroeck variations, f 2.9 , but no slot. There are some variations missing from my collection, including the f18 version of the rigid model, the chrome rigid model and the Tropen Summar.

 

I'd welcome any comments from fellow forum members. This certainly shows that Leica varied its lens output quite a bit over short periods of time. One of the reasons for some of the variations above was the short 'shelf life' of the Agfa Colour system.

 

Notwithstanding the 'bad rap' which the Summar sometimes receives, all of these lenses have excellent optical quality. One or two have some minor haze, but that can add to the magic.

 

William

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 9
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Hello William, thanks for posting the photos of that fascinating other Summar. I would say indeed that red dot may indicate that it is coated. And I understand your remark about the colours of the coated and uncoated Summars, but is is fascinating how that coated one would hold up against more modern lenses.

Lex

I also have a coated Summar, which i shoot at f:2 or F:2.5 most all the time for the swirly Bokeh effect. I especially love it on my Sony APS-C Nex 7 DSLM. I own elmars, summars, summircrons, summilux; all in 50mm. I love the Summar 5cm effect when coated. I plan to get a rough uncoated 5cm soon, disassemble it, clean and try it! I did that to my 73mm Hektor and the lens marveled me. Secret is you MUST service the uncoated leitz lenses, every 20 years. In areas of the world where the humidty is > 55% R.H., every 10 years is a MUST! 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I said before that I would post a photo of my 12 Summars with some attempt to categorise them. While van Hasbroeck attempted to categorise the Summar and, indeed, other lenses, there are more variations than he lists, but all of the lenses I have can be related to one of the 10 variants that he listed.

 

First of all here is a photo of my lenses.

 

attachicon.gif All Summars-.jpg

 

In order to make some sense of what I have, here are some codes which I have made up. Apologies if these are confusing. I should, perhaps, consider putting these into a spreadsheet after I get some comments back. The first lens below is rigid and all of the remainder are collapsible.

 

Ni = Nickel

Chr = Chrome

BR = Black Ring

N f2.9 = No f2.9 mark

f2.9 = f 2.9 mark

NIR = No infra red mark

IR = Infra Red Mark

SL = Slot in aperture bezel

NSL = No slot in aperture bezel

Mtr = Metres scale

Ft = Feet Scale

N/Co = No Coating

Co = Coating

VH = van Hasbroeck category number

 

Front row from left to right

 

1. SN 186431, Ni, Nf2.9, NIR, NSL, Mtr, N/Co, VH1

2. SN 193632, Ni, BR , f2.9, NIR, SL, Mtr, N/Co, VH4

3. SN 194902, Chr, BR, f2.9, NIR, SL, Mtr, N/Co, VH5

4. SN 195070, Chr, f2.9, IR, SL, Mtr, N/Co, VH7/9

5. SN 207716, Chr, f2.9, NIR, SL, Mtr, N/Co, VH7

6. SN 208040, Chr, f2.9, IR, SL, Ft, N/Co VH9

 

Back row from left to right

 

7. SN 229767, Chr f2.9, IR, SL, Mtr, Co, VH9 

8. SN 256786, Ni, f 2.9, IR, SL, Mtr, N/Co, VH8

9. SN 267515, Chr, f2.9, IR, SL, Mtr, Co, VH9

10. SN 346687, Chr f2.9, IR, NSL, Ft, N/Co VH9/10

11. SN 422925, Chr, Nf2.9, IR, NSL, Mtr, Co, VH10 (red dot on front ring)

12. SN 468879, Chr, Nf2.9, IR, NSL, Ft, N/Co, VH10

 

As I have mentioned before, this started as an 'accidental collection' from lenses that came with different cameras and it was only after I noted the variations in my collection that I started to collect individual lenses. Only 7 and 9 above appear to be identical, but 7 has a violet coating, whereas 9 has a blue coating. 4 above is a bit of a mystery, but it seems that it has a later mount with IR marking with an earlier lens head from a non IR model. 10 is also interesting as it appears to cross 2 van Hasbroeck variations, f 2.9 , but no slot. There are some variations missing from my collection, including the f18 version of the rigid model, the chrome rigid model and the Tropen Summar.

 

I'd welcome any comments from fellow forum members. This certainly shows that Leica varied its lens output quite a bit over short periods of time. One of the reasons for some of the variations above was the short 'shelf life' of the Agfa Colour system.

 

Notwithstanding the 'bad rap' which the Summar sometimes receives, all of these lenses have excellent optical quality. One or two have some minor haze, but that can add to the magic.

 

William

can you shot a larger web photo? Top down, more light into the lenses? Thanks Don

Link to post
Share on other sites

 I can confirm that SN 186431 (Rigid) has a round iris and about 12 blades. SN 193632 ( Collapsible nickel with black rim) has a hexagonal iris and about 10 blades. I use the term 'about' as my eyesight is poor and the blades overlap. 

 

Here is an article about the Summar which I wrote some time ago.

 

http://macfilos.com/photo/2016/12/1/leitz-summar-review-the-last-rose-of-summar

 

I intend to do a deeper study of the lens, possibly with others, springing off from my own collection. There are other variations, not mentioned above, including the short-lived 'f18 version' and the presence of lugs on the aperture ring.

 

As for the coatings, these give a look more attuned with modern eyes, but, for me, the real magic comes with the uncoated versions.

 

 

William

Edited by willeica
Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting!

In 1961 I worked for the Optische Industrie De Oude Delft a few months before going to the Delft University. 

In 1960 during my military service a colleague officer (higher rank!) made very decent pictures with an Old Delft 35mm.

That was my inspiration to go to them.

Jan

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

12 blades on mine, SN 217254 with Agfa system features, easily counted if you unscrew the front group which can be done without any screws being removed, just a firm turn counterclockwise.

The blades are dome shaped and there are so many, even though "only" a hexagon is formed, because, as I understand it, the collapsible mount restricts the blade width so more need to be fitted to overlap each other as the aperture closes otherwise there would be gaps between the blades.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

12 blades on mine, SN 217254 with Agfa system features, easily counted if you unscrew the front group which can be done without any screws being removed, just a firm turn counterclockwise.

The blades are dome shaped and there are so many, even though "only" a hexagon is formed, because, as I understand it, the collapsible mount restricts the blade width so more need to be fitted to overlap each other as the aperture closes otherwise there would be gaps between the blades.

 

God bless your endeavour, Chris. I said it is 'about' 10 with the hexagon, so 12 would also do. The earlier lens with the round iris is more clearly 12 bladed. Van Hasbroeck 's book confirms the change in iris shape.

 

William

Link to post
Share on other sites

My Summar (serial 345460 and the common variant) has a hexagonal "hole" so not sure how many blades. The bowed diaphragm looks identical to the one on my later type Summitar. The rumour was that in the early 1950's Leica did a stock take of all the spares they had dispersed around Wetzlar for bombing protection during WW2, after the rebuilding at Wetzlar was complete. They found a whole lot of stock of unused Summar diaphragms, so decided to use them up on Summitars. My father had wanted to buy a IIIf and Summicron in 1953 in New York but it was out of his dollar budget, even with the contribution from Cunard for the theft from his hold luggage. Foreign exchange controls were very tight from the UK at that time, even for business travellers, so he ended up with a IIf and Summitar. After he had bought, he realised he could easily have asked his New York agent to pay the difference and then added that on to the next commission payment. 

 

I am going to try to remove the front element on my Summar tomorrow to give it a clean with IPA (no not India Pale Ale). I do have a small size strap wrench to help. 

 

Wilson

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am replying on my cell, hope this works? ( it didn't) The 10 blade aperture, makes circular aperture. The hexagon is a six blade dome shaped aperture. 12 blades were never put into a Summar 5cm m39 Ltm lens to the best of my research knowledge. I am gathering info for my next article  for Camerashopper Magazine. Can you send me a photo of the aperture with the front element off? Text it to 412-378-2034.... My interest will be the difference in BOKEH. THE ROUND diaphram should perform better than a hexagon shape.

   Coated Summar's also perform differently than uncoated?. So we have 10 blade coated and uncoated. 6 blade, coated and uncoated. Naturally the lens need to be clear to get true accurate results......gets tricky, I only own the coated 1938 version. Only the early serial #'s are 10 blades- Regards, Don@eastwestphoto   

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I am replying on my cell, hope this works? ( it didn't) The 10 blade aperture, makes circular aperture. The hexagon is a six blade dome shaped aperture. 12 blades were never put into a Summar 5cm m39 Ltm lens to the best of my research knowledge. I am gathering info for my next article  for Camerashopper Magazine. Can you send me a photo of the aperture with the front element off? Text it to 412-378-2034.... My interest will be the difference in BOKEH. THE ROUND diaphram should perform better than a hexagon shape.
   Coated Summar's also perform differently than uncoated?. So we have 10 blade coated and uncoated. 6 blade, coated and uncoated. Naturally the lens need to be clear to get true accurate results......gets tricky, I only own the coated 1938 version. Only the early serial #'s are 10 blades- Regards, Don@eastwestphoto   

 

 

I can send you a photo tomorrow. I managed to get the front element off  my Summar but even with a strap wrench it was very tight. You would have needed to have hands like a gorilla to have unscrewed the front section, without a wrench. I have a feeling from memory, that my father's coated Summar had a circular aperture diaphragm. My Summarit has a circular aperture, with a lot of blades, which I will try to count tomorrow. This may account, together with the amount of spherical aberration, for its wonderful swirly bokeh. According to Alan Starkie, who has just rebuilt the Summarit, if the diaphragm falls apart on the work bench when the lens is disassembled, it is close to impossible to reassemble correctly. 

 

Wilson

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I am replying on my cell, hope this works? ( it didn't) The 10 blade aperture, makes circular aperture. The hexagon is a six blade dome shaped aperture. 12 blades were never put into a Summar 5cm m39 Ltm lens to the best of my research knowledge. I am gathering info for my next article  for Camerashopper Magazine. Can you send me a photo of the aperture with the front element off? Text it to 412-378-2034.... My interest will be the difference in BOKEH. THE ROUND diaphram should perform better than a hexagon shape.
   Coated Summar's also perform differently than uncoated?. So we have 10 blade coated and uncoated. 6 blade, coated and uncoated. Naturally the lens need to be clear to get true accurate results......gets tricky, I only own the coated 1938 version. Only the early serial #'s are 10 blades- Regards, Don@eastwestphoto   

 

 

You should be able to easily see the difference in bokeh in the photos in my article which I linked earlier as there are examples of the results with both types of iris in the photos in the article. If I were asked to swear on it I would say that the Rigid model with a round iris has 11 blades. I have not taken it apart and don't intend to do so. It is very tight and after Wilson's experience I would not risk it. I have not fully checked my later Summars for 6 blade aperture, but I have noted that later lenses appear to have larger blades. All of my Summars are in excellent optical and mechanical condition. Bokeh is very much a matter for personal taste and subjective judgement. My points about coated and uncoated lenses stand and these are not just based on this lens, but is also on other lenses such as the 50mm Elmar, where I have even more copies.

 

 

 Foreign exchange controls were very tight from the UK at that time, even for business travellers, so he ended up with a IIf and Summitar. After he had bought, he realised he could easily have asked his New York agent to pay the difference and then added that on to the next commission payment. 

 

 

Wilson

 

You are a brave man Wilson to take your lens apart. As for the IIf, I find it to be much nicer to use than the IIIf as it is much cleaner on the right hand side, particularly if you can get a IIf Red Dial with a 1,000th top speed.

 

William

Link to post
Share on other sites

 According to Alan Starkie, who has just rebuilt the Summarit, if the diaphragm falls apart on the work bench when the lens is disassembled, it is close to impossible to reassemble correctly. 

 

Wilson

Summarit has very similar mechanical construction as Summar. Assembling blades is not so  complicated. For the first time it took me 3-4 hours, before I found a correct way to do it. Now it is an excercise of less than 1 hour. Using few photos from my archive I prepared a short description how to do it, pdf formart due to the size.

Photos are showing an early nickeled collapsible Summar. It has 12 blades. I do not have rigid Summar to chek, I will then check how many blades are in later collapsible Summars of mine.

Assembling of aperture blades in Summar 5cm.pdf

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Summarit has very similar mechanical construction as Summar. Assembling blades is not so  complicated. For the first time it took me 3-4 hours, before I found a correct way to do it. Now it is an excercise of less than 1 hour. Using few photos from my archive I prepared a short description how to do it, pdf formart due to the size.

Photos are showing an early nickeled collapsible Summar. It has 12 blades. I do not have rigid Summar to chek, I will then check how many blades are in later collapsible Summars of mine.

 

Thanks Jerzy. You have more than convinced me that I should not go near any dis-assembly of my Summars. As regards putting it all back together again, what might take you 3 or 4 hours would probably take me 3 or 4 months, or perhaps never.  It is also re-assuring that you found 12 blades in the aperture mechanism of an early Summar. That means that my ageing eyesight is not so bad after all.

 

William

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is really not so complicated, William. Just some patience :-)

picture of three collapsible Summars - early, medium and pretty late - all of them have 12 blades

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!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Jerzy. I will leave this kind of thing to people like yourself. A repair guy that I use here in Dublin takes photos of all stages of his work, so that he knows exactly where everything was when he started. He recently sent me some photos of a Zorki, which he repaired for me, while it was in a completely dis-assembled state.

 

William 

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK guys the startling news is that the hex diaphragm model has 12 not six blades. See my photos below and you can count the pivot axes of the blades. I am not sure this is the same diaphragm as my Summitar as it looks slightly less bowed but I have not taken the front off my Summitar to check, looking direct at the diaphragm rather than through the front group. The lens elements either side of the diaphragm were really pretty clean, which gels with the two owners from new, IIIa camera that it came on, having had a CLA a couple of years ago. This was supposedly by Peter Grisaffi of CRR in Luton just before he retired. However, I doubt it was him, as the slow speeds are somewhat sluggish and Peter would never have released a camera in that condition. 

 

I know the lens could do with having its interior paint renewed or at least touched up but it is not a lens I will be using a whole lot, with Elmar, Hektor, Summitar, Summarit, Summicron V and Summilux III as 50mm LTM alternatives to choose from, all in excellent condition. 

 

Wilson

 

PS While I was drafting this post and taking the pictures, I see that Jerzy has beaten me to it with the information that the hex diaphragm models have 12 blades. W

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 by wlaidlaw
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...