What year was this lens manufactured? How much should it cost approx?

[LraStn]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm very new to Leica and debating how to build my kit. M10 on the way but I have no lenses yet. I found a 35mm 1.4 Leitz Wetzlar for sale somewhat locally but the owner doesn't know much about it. It's not close enough that I can easily drive and test it, but I am considering doing that as soon as I can. Can anyone send me any info on this lens, or what year this serial number would indicate manufacture? I looked at Ken Rockwell's serial number list and it would seem to indicate 1935. That doesn't seem likely. Would love to know how this lens should be priced/valued if it is in GWO. Thanks!! 

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!

[jaapv]

Sorry, the forum does not do valuations. For the value you could check concluded auctions for similar items on eBay The lens is most likely from 1974.

[nwphil]

just have to look around a bit and search some....

https://www.overgaard.dk/leica-35mm-Summilux-M-ASPH-f-14.html

https://kinetic.ink/blog/unsung-heroes-the-leica-35mm-summilux-pre-asph-v2/

and if indeed it is  a V2:

https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_trksid=m570.l1313&_nkw=Leica+35mm+Summilux+Pre-ASPH&_sacat=3323&LH_TitleDesc=0&_osacat=3323&_odkw=+Leica+35mm+Summilux+Pre-ASPH+v2

ps: KR it's at best...a source of humor and a reason to research better next time

ps2: please ask for advice about how to test rf lenses - more ever when you seem not to have a rf camera  in hand...(?)

ps3:(thanks 4 the reminder jaapv): prices on EBay are not a guideline - if anything try FredMiranda's , rangefinder forums for more realistic sell prices.

Edited November 6, 2019 by nwphil

[jaapv]

Well, one would have to take the cost of a CLA and coding by Leica into account anyway. If you buy it send it off. It will cost in the order of 350$ I would guess. Self-tresting is bound to miss something. If the glass is clear and the rings move more or less smoothly, it should be OK - if the price is right..

Some of the asking prices on eBay are downright silly, BTW. I would stick to the lower range.

[LraStn]

@nwphil I have an M10, so would certainly use it to test the lens but would welcome any advice on testing. I have checked everywhere I can for approx valuation, but it's hard to tell since the owner doesn't know much about it, which version, etc and the lens says UX on the barrel which I haven't seen in my research.  @jaapv noted re CLA and coding, thanks. 

[pedaes]

Welcome to the Forum and enjoy your M10.

As jaapv says, this is a 1974 lens built in the Leitz factory in Midland, Canada (not Wetzlar as you write).

It is the first 35mm Summilux made from 1961 to1995. It is not a high performer until f2.8. Unless it is exceptionally 'cheap', with elements clear of any haze or fungus it would be difficult to say it would be a good choice for a M10. 

Don't forget the excellent lenses from Voightlander and Zeiss. The Zeiss 35mm 2.8 Biogon for instance is an exceptional lens at a very good price (new).

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Yes,a modern Zeiss or Voigtländer lens would certainly outperform it for less money. But then it does have a pleasing vintage rendering.

[LraStn]

Thanks for the input everyone, much appreciated. 

[Michael Geschlecht]

1 hour ago, jaapv said:

Yes,a modern Zeiss or Voigtländer lens would certainly outperform it for less money. But then it does have a pleasing vintage rendering.

Hello LraStn,

Welcome to the Forum.

Hello Jaap,

Do you think that the more modern lenses would perform that much better at lens openings such as F4, F5.6 or F8?

Best Regards Both,

Michael

Edited November 6, 2019 by Michael Geschlecht

[jdlaing]

They would perform differently.

[Michael Geschlecht]

2 minutes ago, jdlaing said:

They would perform differently.

Hello JD,

Thank you.

How would they perform "differently"?

Best Regards,

Michael

[jdlaing]

Just now, Michael Geschlecht said:

Hello JD,

Thank you.

How would they perform "differently"?

Best Regards,

Michael

Modern coatings.

Different glass formula.

Moden designs of lens elements.

[Michael Geschlecht]

2 minutes ago, jdlaing said:

Modern coatings.

Different glass formula.

Moden designs of lens elements.

Hello Again JD,

I am sorry that I did not make myself clear.

In what specific ways would people see significant differences in photos taken with the various different lenses when they were all used at the same moderate apertures that I wrote about?

Best Regards,

Michael

[jdlaing]

17 minutes ago, Michael Geschlecht said:

Hello Again JD,

I am sorry that I did not make myself clear.

In what specific ways would people see significant differences in photos taken with the various different lenses when they were all used at the same moderate apertures that I wrote about?

Best Regards,

Michael

Clearer, crisper more modern rendering with higher contrast.

[nwphil]

3 hours ago, LraStn said:

@nwphil I have an M10, so would certainly use it to test the lens but would welcome any advice on testing. I have checked everywhere I can for approx valuation, but it's hard to tell since the owner doesn't know much about it, which version, etc and the lens says UX on the barrel which I haven't seen in my research.  @jaapv noted re CLA and coding, thanks. 

I can see what seems to be some wear or/and oil residue on the blades - a CLA is very likely needed, and maybe negotiated in price.

But instead of holding solely onto cost/value, which is the reasoning to choose a 35mm and an older version for you? FlickR could be a good place to look for rendering samples

[pedaes]

53 minutes ago, Michael Geschlecht said:

Hello Again JD,

I am sorry that I did not make myself clear.

In what specific ways would people see significant differences in photos taken with the various different lenses when they were all used at the same moderate apertures that I wrote about?

Best Regards,

Michael

Any shot that induces flair would be significantly different. Pays your money and makes your choice....

[LraStn]

@nwphil I’m trying to build a kit and not sure if 35mm/75mm Leica glass is the way to go for my needs (weddings and portraits), or 50mm/90mm Leica plus a 35mm Voightlander. And of course once I started digging into this question I discovered many layers of information, such as pre-ASPH vs. ASPH and so on. I know people complain of the newest lens looking ‘clinical’, but I love how sharp they are wide open. Coming from Canon, they look velvety in comparison and very rich. When I came upon this older 35mm while searching any and all sources for Leica glass, I wanted to look into whether or not it might be a good option for my starter kit. However I don’t want a lens that isn’t sharp at 1.4, or performs best at 2.8 and above. So I’ll sell half my Canon stuff and buy the best two Leica lenses I can afford for now. Focal length still TBD. My local rental shop (Capture Integration) carries Leica M glass at very reasonable rates, so I can supplement when need be. Ultimately I need at least enough range to do an engagement session without renting gear. 

[ianman]

4 hours ago, LraStn said:

the lens says UX on the barrel which I haven't seen in my research.

If you look closely you can make out the reflection of the letters "MMIL" in front of the "UX". I'm no expert but I'd bet on even closer inspection you would probably find that the "MMIL" is preceded by "SU".

For dating, I don't know why nobody has mentioned the wiki yet... https://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-wiki.en/index.php/35mm_f/1.4_Summilux_II

[nwphil]

1 hour ago, LraStn said:

@nwphil I’m trying to build a kit and not sure if 35mm/75mm Leica glass is the way to go for my needs (weddings and portraits), or 50mm/90mm Leica plus a 35mm Voightlander. And of course once I started digging into this question I discovered many layers of information, such as pre-ASPH vs. ASPH and so on. I know people complain of the newest lens looking ‘clinical’, but I love how sharp they are wide open. Coming from Canon, they look velvety in comparison and very rich. When I came upon this older 35mm while searching any and all sources for Leica glass, I wanted to look into whether or not it might be a good option for my starter kit. However I don’t want a lens that isn’t sharp at 1.4, or performs best at 2.8 and above. So I’ll sell half my Canon stuff and buy the best two Leica lenses I can afford for now. Focal length still TBD. My local rental shop (Capture Integration) carries Leica M glass at very reasonable rates, so I can supplement when need be. Ultimately I need at least enough range to do an engagement session without renting gear. 

Coming from canon too, and loving my zeiss lenses (sorry), I was very much undecided  - mostly because ended liking both renderings of the Noct 50mm -about getting the "glow" or the "clinical" look.

If I was in your shoes, and looking to get something different from what canon and other ef mount lenses can offer, likely would veer towards the more unique/classic glow /vintage look....but that's me - I am not the one paying for the lens or running your business

Have you rented any of those M lenses available locally? I know that it can feel like a bit of waste doing the renting, but nothing like trying them out and see the results by yourself.

I would look more as getting something unique out rather than replacement - but if you want sharpness wide open, you might need to shell out more money, and chase the modern versions

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[jdlaing]

52 minutes ago, ianman said:

If you look closely you can make out the reflection of the letters "MMIL" in front of the "UX". I'm no expert but I'd bet on even closer inspection you would probably find that the "MMIL" is preceded by "SU".

For dating, I don't know why nobody has mentioned the wiki yet... https://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-wiki.en/index.php/35mm_f/1.4_Summilux_II

The 1.4 gave it away for me. 😀