Summarits - A case study

[Fgcm]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The Summarit line is possibly the most controversial Leica product of the recent past.

Most customers undervalue the entire family as budget products, not worth it having. A few photographers praise the four Summartits as excellent lenses, at least on par, if not better, than the Summicron (I belong to this second group).

After the entire line has been discontinued, we can try to better understand what the Summarits where intended to be and why they have not been the huge success Leica hoped.

Waiting for the contribute of the many of us who own or have owned at least one of the four lenses, I start talking about the mechanics of the two little siblings: the 50 and the 35.

Searching on the Internet you will read some complaining about a supposed inferior mechanics.

The two Summarits are among the first Leica lenses having a focusing sub-assembly made of thwo different metals: brass and anodized aluminum. As far as I know, all previous normal and wide lenses have a brass only focusing assembly.

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!

The focusing cam (the black part in the image above) is really well machined and the cam is sloped.

As you see in the image above, to zero-in the cam at the infinite focusing position, the holes in the focusing ring are oval allowing to precisely set the relative position of the two parts. 

I wish to call your attention on this: only very few parts make entire focusing assembly.

This is a simple, well made, bomb-proof design. The Summarits have never been prone to show focussing issues. Truth be told, the very simple design is actually also very reliable.

But the highest level of precision and the fact that the focus ring is attached to the cam have a drawback: the tactile sensation while focusing is not always as smooth as we experience with the Summicron V. 

Is this a sub-par mechanics?

Not at all. The opposite is the truth. The mechanics of the two little Summarits (as well as the ergonomics) are well designed, precisely made and very reliable at the price of a very slightly imperfect feeling while focusing a new lens.

Conclusion: too many misunderstood the quality of the mechanics of this lens, which actually is very good, reliable and simple.

The two little Summarits, as well as the longer ones, are also optically amazing. Despite being so good, searching on the internet, you will find many bloggers complaining about a number of weird issues, ranging from light blobs to a supposed softness in the corners.

The light blobs never had been a real problem. In ten years, I had a single photo taken in Bryant Park with the 35 showing a purple reflection in a corner. All my other lenses showed something unexpected at least once in ten years, but I did not throw them into the bin for a single weird photo. This is not a real problem. Actually, I tried to replicate this blob, but I failed.

Corner softness is most often related to a very mild field curvature. Since I never shoot walls, this is not a problem and actually the two lenses are not at all soft in the corners if you take a photo at least some meters away from the subject. 

Too many take a photo of a wall from a couple of meters and then judge a lens, not realizing that this is the wrong way to check the performance of any lens not designed for macro photography.

I wish to add that al lenses, excepting the APO Summicron 50 and very few tele lenses, show at least a little of field curvature.

In my honest opinion, the two little Summarits are really awesome lenses, with a very natural rendering and nice colors.

Too many looked for the same fingerprint of the Summicrons. Realizing that the two lenses are so different, instead of understanding their strenghts, most customers decided that the Summarits were inferior, thus totally missing the opportunity to have a very neutral lens, capable of taking outstanding and natural looking photos.

Flock-thinking or, if you prefer, herd attitude, eventually killed the Summarit line.

[a.noctilux]

🚫

Leica tried hard to offer "less-expensive-but not less imaging-quality" camera or lenses, since decades.

In my view, I'm late fan of the Summarit-M lens line (35/50/75 f/2.5 ) , now I appreciate them very much.

Optically "optimized" modern lenses they are "neutral rendering" ( = not really characterial nor "too sharp" ) .

Maybe it's too late to compete with other brands which offer more ( F/1.7 or F/1.2 ) for the same money or less but quite decent.

Even the renew with F/2.4 (with naming "asph." for the 35mm and E46 filter size for all, MFD 70cm on 75 ) with many "upgradings" the line can not help to survive.

...

"Customers" killed the Summarit-M lens line.

 

Edited October 25, 2020 by a.noctilux

[Advertisement]

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

[Jeff S]

The guys at Leica Miami (Red Dot Forum) are putting together a petition to send to Leica requesting that the Summarit M line (f2.4) be revived.  

Jeff

[Marac]

I had the pleasure of 3 of this line 35/75/90 and they were all exceptionally good. At the time I aslo had the E58 Noctilux so no need to grab the 50mm.

 

[UliWer]

vor 29 Minuten schrieb Jeff S:

The guys at Leica Miami (Red Dot Forum) are putting together a petition to send to Leica requesting that the Summarit M line (f2.4) be revived.  

 

Well, a petition is no bad idea, though I fear it would only convince Leica, if every petitioner also signed a binding contract to buy a Summarit.

You can make a test in this forum: So many threads about "which lens someone should get". When is a Summarit mentioned, or is it mentioned at all? Or just  compare cases of a 50mm Summarit being mentioned with postings about a Noctilux. 

 

[Fgcm]

3 minutes ago, UliWer said:

You can make a test in this forum: So many threads about "which lens someone should get". When is a Summarit mentioned, or is it mentioned at all? Or just  compare cases of a 50mm Summarit being mentioned with postings about a Noctilux. 

I agree with you.

Right or wrong, the customers opted to buy other lenses, not the Summarits. The question is why did they?

Is it just a matter of being Leicamen as Ken Rockwell writes with a pinch of irony and a drop of sarcasm? Or other reasons should be factored in the equation?

[UliWer]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The idea "if I buy a Leica it must be really expensive" is very important for customers. I remember when I bought my first M6 more than 20 years ago, the dealer wanted to sell me an Elmar-M. I sneered at this offer and demanded the Summilux - thrice as expensive. The Elmar-M came ten years later. 

[lct]

I have three of them with two problems i haven't got with any of my 30+ Leica M and R lenses so far: a focus ring much too loose on the 35/2.5 and a broken aperture ring on my 75/2.5. None of my ZM and VM lenses got the same issues either. Hence my feeling of somewhat sub-par lenses i would not buy again, rightly or wrongly, if Leica didn't stop their production. Very good little lenses otherwise. I don't like much their screwing hood though. YMMV.

[Jeff S]

10 minutes ago, UliWer said:

The idea "if I buy a Leica it must be really expensive" is very important for customers. I remember when I bought my first M6 more than 20 years ago, the dealer wanted to sell me an Elmar-M. I sneered at this offer and demanded the Summilux - thrice as expensive. The Elmar-M came ten years later. 

I’ve written before that the Summarits might have been far more popular if the prices had been much higher and if they had been marketed and packaged accordingly.  The Summarits perform superbly, often with less flare or focus shift than Summicron counterparts.  
 

People continue to rave about expensive modern Leica lenses despite frequently loose aperture rings (three 50 APO M Summicrons I sampled), or sticky focus action (not uncommon with 50 Summilux ASPH), etc.

Jeff

[Kwesi]

Personally I feel that its Leica's fault that the line was not as successful as they had hoped.

Rather than crippling them with longer minimum focus distances and half stop slower lenses (35/50)  and rubberized focus rings(75/90) and subpar accessories like cloth lens sacks, they should have taken their cue from the very successful 28/2.8 ASPH and made a "budget" Elmarit 28,35,50 75 and 90 line that had the same materials and packaging as all other lenses and only differed in max aperture.

[plaidshirts]

I think opinions have changed over the last few years to where Summarits are now given their proper dues. Current used prices seem to support this as well. 
Thank you for the detailed breakdown of the lens. I’ve always liked my 35 but felt the focus ring was a bit too loose. Now I know why. 

[logan2z]

1 hour ago, plaidshirts said:

I’ve always liked my 35 but felt the focus ring was a bit too loose.

Same here. It's really the only "negative" I've ever found with the lens. I do prefer the more damped feeling of my Summicron V, but the looser feel of the Summarit certainly doesn't detract from my enjoyment of the lens. 

[cboy]

I remember a youtuber called them 'dogs' lol. He manly argued the resale value wasnt as great as 'exotic' glass

I always thought the summarits were given a bad wrap since it was viewed as a compromise/budget lens and suggested lesser quality, less exotic glass etc. A 'meh' lens since most who afford a leica would just bite the bullet and go for that extra 1/2 stop summicron. I remember the summarits were going for a really low price i believe 1200usd. I should of went ahead but the summicron was more alluring lol.

Mind you even Karbe i remember commented in a recent lens interview that the line was optically very good and wasnt valued as it should.

Maybe the idea of budget and leica dont work together. I dont know lol

Now prices have come up somewhat since the line has been scraped lol

Edited October 26, 2020 by cboy

[Bikie John]

I felt that price-wise the Summarits fell into a middle ground that wasn't likely to be attractive to anyone. Sure, they were a lot cheaper than buying Leica's more exotic glass new, but the USD1200 that cboy cites in the post above is not "cheap" for a medium-aperture 50mm. There are loads of good alternatives for less coin, whether with used Leica or other brands. Perhaps time has given us a better perspective, and maybe being discontinued has give them some nostalgic cachet.

For my part, I was always a fast-glass junkie, having spent a lot of time trying to shoot musicians in badly-lit bars. In film days it was a real struggle, even with Kodak or Ilford B&W ISO 3200 uprated in development it was difficult and I needed lenses that would hoover up every last photon. The latest bodies have incredible high ISO performance and fast lenses are not so essential, the f/2.4 or 2.5 of the Summarits might well be up to the job.

John

[cboy]

On 10/26/2020 at 12:10 AM, Fgcm said:

The two Summarits are among the first Leica lenses having a focusing sub-assembly made of thwo different metals: brass and anodized aluminum

Ahm. Forgive me if incorrect in saying that i thought brass and aluminium shouldnt be connected together as they are dissimilar metals that can cause corrosion??

Made me think whether this will affect the longevity of the line up or not as i was considering the 35mm summarit to replace my vm 35mm f1.4 and rokkor 40mm.

Probably im overthinking as i dont think if anyone has experienced corrosion on their lens lol

[astrostl]

Rubber focus rings is madness IMO. El cheapo brands are still solid metal, and solid metal is clearly valued by the Leica demographic.

[lct]

Many R lenses have rubber focus rings, the superb 280/4 for instance. Not that el cheapo but i see what you mean and i prefer metal too.

[Al Brown]

On 10/25/2020 at 3:10 PM, Fgcm said:

Corner softness is most often related to a very mild field curvature. Since I never shoot walls, this is not a problem and actually the two lenses are not at all soft in the corners if you take a photo at least some meters away from the subject.

I have bought a brand new Summarit 75/2.5 and it was severely decentered in one corner across a third of the image. Nothing to do with field curvature, more with QC.
My second one bought used is perfect.

[stephengv]

How good is the 75/2.4 Summarit? 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[jdlaing]

13 hours ago, stephengv said:

How good is the 75/2.4 Summarit? 

Very good.