Jump to content

40mm Leica Summicron as a compact lens?


stephengv

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 12/10/2018 at 11:22 PM, stephengv said:

Thank you. Looking at your gallery now. Great shots. By the way, do you have link on the thread adapter ring? thanks

Look at this one. Mine says E39 S5.5

https://m.ebay.com/itm/25-Discount-Adapter-Ring-Leica-E39-Filter-Summicron-C-S5-5-cap-/362385701128?_mwBanner=1&_rdt=1

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I use the Minolta CLE version of the 40mm f/2 myself, mostly on film but I do use it on my M10 from time to time. I had mine modified slightly so it has the focusing tab from the v4 35mm Summicron, much prefer the handling now. 

40mm is indeed an odd focal length for Ms due to their lack of framelines, but as was mentioned earlier, if you frame with the 35mm lines it is fairly easy to adjust to, especially on digital since you can instantly compare your composition to your result and make sure you're getting what you expect. But realistically once you adjust to it mentally it is not at all hard to use. Mine mostly lives on my M-A because it is just so small and light and on that film body the 35mm framelines actually are pretty darn close to what the lens sees at pretty much all but the closest distances (meaning under 1m), at least that has been my experience. 

On top of that, all the hassle would need to be worth it right? I personally think that the 40mm Minolta / Leica brethren are actually really wonderful little lenses and produce some of my favorite image renderings, on top of being my smallest of my 3 lenses.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 12/28/2018 at 10:23 PM, Archiver said:

Does it need to be a 40mm f2, or a Leica lens? The Voigtlander Skopar 35mm f2.5 II is a super tiny lens that will work with the framelines of your M240. Many consider it about as good as the Leica Summarit 35mm in terms of sharpness and overall image quality.

Excuse me, I read many of those statements as well, but it is nowhere near to Summarit, nor for sharpness, not for image quality. I had Skopar three times (same optics, different versions). Once I switched to Summarit it was nothing to compare.

Skopar is most boring, flat lens I ever used. It is only OK lens for color photography. 

Summarit images are something I would be never tired to look at. One of the few lenses which is super pleasing on digital screen and on darkroom print.  

Simply put, I don't think those from "many" who compares Summarit and Skopar ever used both lenses. And most likely never used both for darkroom prints. 

Mind you, I'm not wearing Leica only blinds. I went for Rokkor CLE 40/2 instead of Cron 40/2 and I use Jupiter-3 instead of 50 Crons (I have tried all non-ASPH ones).

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Ko.Fe. said:

Excuse me, I read many of those statements as well, but it is nowhere near to Summarit, nor for sharpness, not for image quality. I had Skopar three times (same optics, different versions). Once I switched to Summarit it was nothing to compare.

Thank you, I will look into the Summarit in time. I'm quite a fan of Voigtlander lenses, quirks and all, so I tend to trust the opinions of those who like the Skopar, too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

36 minutes ago, Archiver said:

Thank you, I will look into the Summarit in time. I'm quite a fan of Voigtlander lenses, quirks and all, so I tend to trust the opinions of those who like the Skopar, too.

 

At your service! I had Color Skopar original in 6x6 folder, I had Color Skopar 25 PII, Nokton 50 1.5 VM, Ultrons 35 1.7 and now 28 1.9 asph.

Ultron 35 1.7 is close to Summarit. Both are asph. And both are not flat rendering as Skopars 35. Unfortunately, VM version is not for fast photography (if not just most ugly lens by appeal) and LTM could have focus tab added, but it is prone to have loose lens block and for some reason too many copies of this lens already have problems with glass.

I'm also looking as OP for more compact lens and to me it seems to be Nokton 35 1.4. And this one is full of quirks and all :).

 

 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Ko.Fe. said:

Excuse me, I read many of those statements as well, but it is nowhere near to Summarit, nor for sharpness, not for image quality. I had Skopar three times (same optics, different versions). Once I switched to Summarit it was nothing to compare.

Skopar is most boring, flat lens I ever used. It is only OK lens for color photography. 

Summarit images are something I would be never tired to look at. One of the few lenses which is super pleasing on digital screen and on darkroom print.  

Simply put, I don't think those from "many" who compares Summarit and Skopar ever used both lenses. And most likely never used both for darkroom prints. 

Mind you, I'm not wearing Leica only blinds. I went for Rokkor CLE 40/2 instead of Cron 40/2 and I use Jupiter-3 instead of 50 Crons (I have tried all non-ASPH ones).

I can confirm that. The Color Skopar is a decent little lens, nothing against it, but any Leica 35 is simply better. Boring is a good description. I sold mine fairly quickly.

If you want a lens that rivals the Summarit or Summicron 35 asph (actually outperforms them IMO), have a look at the Zeiss Biogon-C

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Another vote for the C-Biogon 35/2.8. It is my favorite 35mm lens in good light but its high contrast won't please everybody. Contrary to Mr Rockwell's opinion, i don't see significant difference re sharpness with the Summicron 35/2 asph v1 but the Biogon has less flare and less CA albeit more vignetting than the latter. BTW Mr Rockwell doesn't seem to know that Leica sells an excellent E43 UVa filter (13032). Fits perfectly the C-Biogon 35/2.8 and is compatible with the superb Zeiss vented hood.  
https://www.leicacamerausa.com/filter-uva-ii-e43-black.html

Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as my copies are concerned, i would say that the Summicron 35/2 asph v1 has somewhat less macro contrast and a bit more micro contrast than the C_Biogon 35/2.8. May be subjective though and differences are not huge anyway. As for resolution, i don't see significant differences but i never used those lenses on high rez cameras.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Alex U. said:

. . . which is sharpness. Is it not just what the sharpening ruler in LR does too?

Not quite, but close ;) . Microcontrast is related to resolution in differentiating between line pairs. LR (over)enhances the contrast that is already present. "Sharpness" as such is not quantifiable.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

vor 18 Stunden schrieb jaapv:

Not quite, but close ;) . Microcontrast is related to resolution in differentiating between line pairs. LR (over)enhances the contrast that is already present. "Sharpness" as such is not quantifiable.

Oh. Things are never just simple. I know. Have a very happy new year 📷🥂

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 12/30/2018 at 11:59 PM, Ko.Fe. said:

 

At your service! I had Color Skopar original in 6x6 folder, I had Color Skopar 25 PII, Nokton 50 1.5 VM, Ultrons 35 1.7 and now 28 1.9 asph.

Ultron 35 1.7 is close to Summarit. Both are asph. And both are not flat rendering as Skopars 35. Unfortunately, VM version is not for fast photography (if not just most ugly lens by appeal) and LTM could have focus tab added, but it is prone to have loose lens block and for some reason too many copies of this lens already have problems with glass.

I'm also looking as OP for more compact lens and to me it seems to be Nokton 35 1.4. And this one is full of quirks and all :).

I've had the Nokton 35/1.4 for about ten years, and the Nokton 35/1.2 V1 for 8. The f1.4 is a great walkaround lens with character. Sometimes it has a circular flare which I really like, YMMV.

M9 + CV35/1.4 - Tower Calling Gundam by Archiver, on Flickr

This lens is what I use for night walkaround, as the f1.2 Nokton is just a bit too heavy for my liking.

M9 - By the water by Archiver, on Flickr

Not bad with landscapes, either.

M9 - Arashiyama Bamboo Forest by Archiver, on Flickr

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Since the subject came up - another new user of the Voigtlander 35 f/1.4 Nokton MC (multicoated).....

But first - the 40mm Summicron-C is a nice lens. Microscopically better than the contemporary 35 Summicron v.2/3. I would not argue against it, provided one can sort out the "viewinder problem" to one's satisfaction.

Back to the C/V 35 f/1.4. Compact, but not quite as compact as some may think. It overhangs the mount a bit (larger diameter at the base), and is more like a shortened C/V 40mm Nokton than a Leica 35 cron/lux non-ASPH. Takes 43mm filters (I have a step-ring to Leica-standard 46mm). Nevertheless, reasonably compact (shorter than a 50 Summicron, far shorter than a 35 f/1.4 ASPH).

As with the non-ASPH 35mm Summilux, it amounts to a decent 35mm f/2 with f/1.4 available for "emergency use only." ;) At f/1.4 the C/V lacks the Summilux's dreamy veil (more contrast) but shows local glows around highlights and is just - not - quite - crisp. At f/2 it is reasonably in the ball park of a Summicron v.4

Progressive focus shift from f/1.4 through f/4 - fortunately mine's link to the RF is "tuned" for f/2, the best overall shooting aperture, front-focusing at f/1.4 and back-focusing at f/2.8-4.

As I said, similar to 35 Summicron v.4 - center very sharp at f/2, but gets soft rapidly towards the corners. Requires stopping down to f/5.6-8 to get the corners to match the center, or shoot "rule of thirds" compositions. As a long-time 35 cron v.4 user and occasional non-ASPH Summilux user, I can live with it nicely.

The C/V also focuses to 0.7 meters - the main reason I am trying it (second being the price - US $425 used). Also, does not have the large protective Summilux rear-element baffle that occasionally causes mounting problems on digital Ms.

Some examples - woman at f/1.4, top-hat guy at f/2. The second shows that at f/2 the bokeh is pretty smooth - also the ring-flare Archiver demonstrates above goes away. At f/1.4 however, coma (butterfly wings to point light sources) near the edges gets absolutely psychotic! (See following post). As with several C/V lenses I've tried, often has good 3D effect and  tonal definition of details, even when the resolution is low.

All pix M10, ISO 1000-1600, slight sharpening applied.

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 adan
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Followup showing psychotic astigmatism/coma butterfly effects in point light sources at the edge of the frame at f/1.4 - Zowwee!

Also visible (smaller) in Archiver's ship-mast photo

Reduces by about 80% at f/2.

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 adan
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...