Jump to content

The Leica Forum uses cookies. Read the privacy statement for more info. To remove this message, please click the button to the right:    OK, understood.

Photo
- - - - -

What's the deal with all the different 35mm summicron versions?


  • Please log in to reply
25 replies to this topic

#1 pinchers of peril

pinchers of peril

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 87 posts

Posted 19 April 2018 - 16:08

Advertisement (Gone after free registration)

Sorry if this has already been discussed.  I am interested in getting a Leica 35mm summicron but there are so many dang versions of the thing.  I know that some are asph and so that is a different beast but even with the non-asph there are so many different versions.  Anybody have a good resource to make sense of what is out there.  I know there are some "made in Canada" etc.  Are there any specific versions considered better or worse?  Thanks

 



#2 pinchers of peril

pinchers of peril

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 87 posts

Posted 19 April 2018 - 16:20

Follow up question, is there any way (just by looking at the lens itself) that you can tell what version it is?  Will the serial number give you that information?  Thanks.



#3 ianman

ianman

    Erfahrener Benutzer

  • Members
  • 1,750 posts

Posted 19 April 2018 - 16:23

A good place to start may be the wiki.


Ian Mantripp

 

flickr  |  SoundCloud


#4 pinchers of peril

pinchers of peril

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 87 posts

Posted 19 April 2018 - 16:33

I found some information there, but nothing about how the lenses compare to each other. 

 

A good place to start may be the wiki.



#5 ianman

ianman

    Erfahrener Benutzer

  • Members
  • 1,750 posts

Posted 19 April 2018 - 16:50

ok, then a quick search returned Thorstens take on the Summicron 35... http://www.overgaard...cron-M-f20.html  I didn't read it, but there seems to be at least photos of each and some comparison table.  There may (or may not) be some useful information on Ken Rockwells site. I think there is a PDF of Erwin Puts book available.


  • pinchers of peril said thank you to this

Ian Mantripp

 

flickr  |  SoundCloud


#6 ianman

ianman

    Erfahrener Benutzer

  • Members
  • 1,750 posts

Posted 19 April 2018 - 16:56

I think there is a PDF of Erwin Puts book available.

 

There are some here.  You'll probably find some useful info in the Leica Lens Compendium.


  • pinchers of peril said thank you to this

Ian Mantripp

 

flickr  |  SoundCloud


#7 Chubkins

Chubkins

    Advanced Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 93 posts

Posted 19 April 2018 - 17:01

not the most informative but interesting to peruse:

 

http://www.streetsil...micron-versions

 

that was a simple google search for "35mm summicron comparison"


Edited by Chubkins, 19 April 2018 - 17:02.


#8 Michael Geschlecht

Michael Geschlecht

    Erfahrener Benutzer

  • Members
  • 7,129 posts

Posted 19 April 2018 - 18:43

Hello Pinchers of Peril,

 

Welcome to the Forum.

 

After you do your research you will find that all of the 35 mm Summicron lenses are good lenses by today's standards. Altho some versions may be a little better at "something or other" in a certain situation or at a wider aperture. They all give pretty much the same results at F 4, F 5.6 & F 8.

 

Which, for many people, is where most of their photography is.

 

Best Regards,

 

Michael


  • pinchers of peril said thank you to this

#9 Ko.Fe.

Ko.Fe.

    Me likes M-E

  • Members
  • 966 posts
  • LocationCanada, ON.

Posted 19 April 2018 - 18:51

Google - Erwin Puts' Leica Compendium. Old version is available. It will explain the optical differences.

For how it looks check here - https://kenrockwell..../sharpness.htm 


  • pinchers of peril said thank you to this

#10 JohnnySeven

JohnnySeven

    Erfahrener Benutzer

  • Members
  • 318 posts
  • LocationToronto
  • City / Ort:Toronto

Posted 19 April 2018 - 19:11

You cant go wrong with any Summicron as long as its in good shape.  They all have their charms.  I have a V4 midland and I love it more that the new ones.


  • lambda and pinchers of peril said thank you to this

#11 Chubkins

Chubkins

    Advanced Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 93 posts

Posted 19 April 2018 - 19:13

Google - Erwin Puts' Leica Compendium. Old version is available. It will explain the optical differences.

For how it looks check here - https://kenrockwell..../sharpness.htm 

 

link doesn't work



#12 evikne

evikne

    Erfahrener Benutzer

  • Members
  • 132 posts
  • LocationNorway

Posted 19 April 2018 - 19:14

Maybe a bit off topic, but I am concidering buying a Summicron pre-asph v4. How is the sharpness and bokeh at f/2 compared to a Summilux pre-asph stopped down to f/2?


"Aperture is only for depth of field, not light control" – Peter Karbe


#13 ianman

ianman

    Erfahrener Benutzer

  • Members
  • 1,750 posts

Posted 19 April 2018 - 19:15

Google - Erwin Puts' Leica Compendium.

 

Or just read the previous posts for links.


Ian Mantripp

 

flickr  |  SoundCloud


#14 a.noctilux

a.noctilux

    Arnaud (I'm just amateur)

  • Members
  • 1,233 posts
  • LocationMontpellier, Occitanie

Posted 19 April 2018 - 19:19

Choosing is personal thing depend on what one's need in "lens rendering".

 

Comparing Leica lenses from different versions is something very hard and loss effort anyway.

 

In the past, I had no choice of 35mm Summicron for M.

My first was the version IV in '80's.

Over time, I have/had other versions of 35 Cron.

 

A phrase to differenciate them from my own experience over time:

 

Version I (dixit 8 elements) soft with little contrast at f/2 and much better contrast from f/2.8 and very good after that

 

Version II and III same optical 6 elements more contrast at full open and almost equal from f/2.8 better "flat field" but less "romantic than 8 element"

 

IV (7 elements) is another step (not much) in contrast full open,

 

Asph. version is the best contrast rendering at f/2 and keeping that closed down

 

 

 

To resume:

each version is different and as good from about f/4 or f/5.6 on 3 dimensions subjects.


  • pinchers of peril said thank you to this

#15 chris_livsey

chris_livsey

    Erfahrener Benutzer

  • Members
  • 2,145 posts

Posted 19 April 2018 - 19:20

link doesn't work

https://kenrockwell....n/sharpness.htm


Edited by chris_livsey, 19 April 2018 - 19:22.


#16 a.noctilux

a.noctilux

    Arnaud (I'm just amateur)

  • Members
  • 1,233 posts
  • LocationMontpellier, Occitanie

Posted 19 April 2018 - 19:25

Maybe a bit off topic, but I am concidering buying a Summicron pre-asph v4. How is the sharpness and bokeh at f/2 compared to a Summilux pre-asph stopped down to f/2?

 

Same "look", at f/2 as it's rougtly the same optical formula between the two.

 

Summilux-M has no screw in filter and focus to 1m except "M3 version" to 65cm.

 

Summicron-M 35 v. IV has screw filter thread E39 and focus to 70cm.


  • evikne said thank you to this

#17 a.noctilux

a.noctilux

    Arnaud (I'm just amateur)

  • Members
  • 1,233 posts
  • LocationMontpellier, Occitanie

Posted 19 April 2018 - 19:49

250px-M-35f2-ii.jpg120px-S352%2B.jpgFrom Wiki https://www.l-camera..._Summicron-M_IV

 

 

450px-M-35f14-iit.jpgFrom Wiki https://www.l-camera...1.4_Summilux_II

 

Those are beautifully made with different look.

Here we can see that the Summilux is as compact as Summicron.

 

Not the case with Asph. versions of them.

 

2009_2_22_1741_00001.jpg

 

comparison of my "old stable of 35mm for M" (middle is Summicron-M 2/35 asph.)

I regret a little bit the 35 Lux Ti when it was sold and bought one "black" after some time :P.


Edited by a.noctilux, 19 April 2018 - 19:59.


#18 pinchers of peril

pinchers of peril

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 87 posts

Posted 19 April 2018 - 19:52

Wow thank you everybody for all the info.



#19 pgk

pgk

    Photographer

  • Members
  • 7,913 posts
  • LocationNorth Wales

Posted 19 April 2018 - 20:27

In essence lens design has improved over the years and the 35mm Summicron/Summilux versions have followed this pattern too. The most noticeable difference in performance is at full aperture. Later versions perform 'better' at full aperture than the earlier ones. The pre-aspheric lenses all have sufficient residual aberrations to limit their wide open performance somewhat more than the aspheric lenses, but to some their lack of full correction can produce a pleasanter and smoother look than that from the aspheric versions. Stopped down all will give pretty good images so really its the wider apertures where differences are more noticeable.Earlier lenses are softer at full aperture than later ones and can exhibit a 'glow' which again some rather like.

 

You may want to think of the varying performance in terms of being craftsmanlike in earlier lenses and precision in later lenses ;).

 

FWIW you might find this of interest: http://marinewildlif...ric-summilux-m/


Edited by pgk, 19 April 2018 - 20:30.

  • pinchers of peril said thank you to this

Paul

www.marinewildlife.co.uk

 

"Procrastination is the thief of time" - Edward Young from "Night thoughts" 1742-1745 - no forums then!


#20 microview

microview

    Erfahrener Benutzer

  • Members
  • 2,060 posts

Posted 19 April 2018 - 23:30

https://antiquecamer...ronmlenses.html for lens serial numbers, types and desciption of construction differences – I have found this useful in the past.


  • pgk and pinchers of peril said thank you to this


0 user(s) are reading this topic