What does the schema of the Summilux-M version 1 look like?

[Alberti]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Recently I have been looking at some older Leica lenses, such as the Summilux.

But I am a bit confused about the versions. 

The information on the Leicaforum WIKI differs from the expertise that Marco Cavina sheds on the subject.

1) The WIKI gives a structure/schema for the version one similar to the version two - and just based on that, the version 1 is a good buy probably:

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!

  

2) On the other hand, Cavina shows that the first version is derived from the Summarit F1.5; the basic structure is the same but the glasses and coating have been improved a lot. The structure thus is like the Taylor and Hobson 50mm F1.5. This is in line with what Puts writes in the Compendium of 2005.

That makes the first Summilux in name only a good buy, in fact, it is a (good) further derivation of the Summarit F1.5

Puts:

So I tend to think that the WIKI page is wrong. 

And my pondering on the first version has been stopped . . . 

{I found no way to contact the WIKI owner and I'm not an expert to change it}

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[adan]

Leica Wiki has the incorrect "schema."

The v.1 does have the two separate thin rear elements in the style of the Summarit. But made with more advanced glass types developed in the 1950s. And more modern "hard" single-coating.

[Runkel]

The Wiki is wrong.  It uses the same image reference for both.  http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-wiki.en/index.php/File:S5014.jpg

Good. catch.

It's interesting to observe the similarity between the v1 diagram and the Noctilux 1.0 diagram.  Noctilux has an air gap between the second and third elements--and glass types, of course.

 

[Alberti]

The  Summarit F1.5   is said to have

• a very particular crescent-shape form of the bokeh balls, more like from the 1001-nights, and in some cases very pleasing (but not allways)
• often somewhat pastel-like colours, quite something else than the 'dense' color rendition typical for what Mandler is famed for.
• a relatively high contrast wide open (specifically for black- and white)

Looking at Flickr with as reference these descriptions I recognize that bokeh fingerprint in the pictures with the Summilux version 1 - but I cannot comment on the color density. That looks at least neutral.

indeed the F1 Nocti has a similar schema but mucho wider and modern glass; evidently that says notsomuch  😴 I need to have a hands-on with the Lux version 1 I'm afarid. See for myself.

The Summarit F/1.5 for comparison and the F/1:

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!