Jump to content

The curious case for the 40mm Summicron... With images


Evo

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, james.liam said:

Forgive me for asking, but what differentiates these 40mm lenses aside from their tiny size & FOV? 

I’d be lying if I can see any distinctiveness that justifies the prices the Leica 40 Summicron now demands. 

It is probably the cheapest M mount Leica mid range lens you can buy other than ancient tat in poor condition. It is a not wholly dissimilar design to the Elcan Military 50mm, which fetches huge prices. Malcolm Taylor and probably other Leica lens gurus, can strip these lenses down and reassemble them with greater precision and with a small tweak, to optimise their performance for f2-2.8, rather than f2.8-f4 as original. Now it is not as good as the 35mm ASPH Summicron but I think it is very close in performance to the Series IV/V 50 Summicrons. They were originally probably not assembled with the same care as other more expensive Leica lenses and really do benefit from an expert service. I had mine coded as a 50/2 Summicron. Coding them as a 35mm lens will not work unless you modify the frame line tab, which, as I use it on my film CL, I did not want to do. 

Wilson

Edited by wlaidlaw
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, james.liam said:

 

...I’d be lying if I can see any distinctiveness that justifies the prices the Leica 40 Summicron now demands. 

IMHO, there are some M lenses that everyone should have.   The Leica 28mm f/2.8 Elmarit-M ASPH and the the Leica M 50mm f/2.8 Elmar-M (even though the prices on this lens are getting stupidly high) come to mind. 

IMHO the 40mm 'cron is probably one of those lenses. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not "boring lens" for me but "user better lenses" replaced it.

I used to like the Elmar-M 2.8/50 for its compactness, but as said the overall rendering is not there as nice as my other lenses.

Maybe the 6 blades aperture # (visible hexagones in most high light) or the fact that "must be collapsed/uncollapsed before /after use" ?

Now I much prefer one 50mm * which is almost as compact as Elmar-M but "better overall rendering and no more collapse/uncollapsed".

I wrote/said that the Elmar-M was fine lens with only four elements, but now I don't use/have it anymore.

Summicron-C and M-Rokkor 2/40mm are just another good surprise for me.

I had for long then sold them and now I reuse one M-Rokkor 40mm, very nice lens and so light and compact.

 

# as the "Ninja Stars" of Summilux-M 50mm asph. or Summicron-M 75mm asph. which "ruin a picture by those stars"

* Summarit-M 2.5/50mm

Edited by a.noctilux
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have commented on 40 Summicron-c before (short summary, I love it on digital and film both) but only recently I compared it’s weight to the tiny 5cm Elmar 3.5. Both weight the same! I don’t think there is another lighter lens in M mount. And it is sharp corner to corner on 24mp digital at f5.6-8 is a bonus too. 

Edited by jmahto
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, jmahto said:

I have commented on 40 Summicron-c before (short summary, I love it on digital and film both) but only recently I compared it’s weight to the tiny 5cm Elmar 3.5. Both weight the same! I don’t think there is another lighter lens in M mount. And it is sharp corner to corner on 24mp digital at f5.6-8 is a bonus too. 

Elmarit-C 40/2.8, same optical design as Elmar 50/3.5, 130g. Just a prototype lens though.

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 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, lct said:

Elmarit-C 40/2.8, same optical design as Elmar 50/3.5, 130g. Just a prototype lens though.

That is heavier than 40 Summicron-c (120g)

https://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-wiki.en/index.php/40mm_f/2_Summicron-C

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jmahto said:

Never weighted mine but Leica specs say 150g ("Poids: 0.150kg" below).

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

I just weighed it.

 

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

With cap and hood
 

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

On 4/17/2019 at 12:19 PM, wlaidlaw said:

The reputation of the 40C Summicron not focusing accurately on Leica M bodies arose due the timing of its production. The main M camera Leica was marketing at the time as the CL was the "interestingly" styled M5. It is true that the 40C will not focus accurately on the M5 but only the M5. It focuses perfectly accurately on all other M cameras both film and digital. I think we all know what a success the M5 was, to the extent that the M4 had to be reintroduced as the M4-2 and later the M4-P. The inaccuracy is due to the combination of the sloping focus cam on the 40C and the offset RF cam roller on the M5. 

Wilson

Hello Wison,

Do you have a photo of an M5 with an "offset RF cam roller"?

Best Regards,

Michael

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, james.liam said:

I remember reading something by E. Puts about this prototype and he thought it was a chien of a lens.  

To wit:

"At full aperture overall contrast is low, coarse detail is rendered with low contrast, but acceptable visibility. Finer detail is fuzzy and becomes blurred in the outer zones. At 1:4 overall contrast jumps up, improving the definition on axis, but in the field there is only marginal improvement. Stopping down further brings in the clear definition...in the field. But even at optimum aperture the performance is really below the standard of the day and it would have been bad for the reputation of Leitz if this...had become the standard lens for the CL."

E. Puts, Leica Lens Compendium, 2001, p.161

On the original subject (Summicron-C 40mm) I tried one just last summer. Slightly better than the existing 35 Summicrons in 1973 (v.2/3), not quite up to the 35 v.4.

But the odd frameline selection and inability to be coded (or even selected in the menu) made me pass. Just a historical oddity at this point.

 

 

  • Like 1
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...