Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have a copy of the 50mm f/2.4 Summarit M #11860.  It is not "less than" in any way when compared to my other M lenses, current or past. 

People who look down their noses at the Summarit line are entitled to think what they think but IMHO they are making a huge mistake.  Do M shooters look down on the 28mm f/2.8 Elmarit M because it is "cheap" or "slow?"  If so, they are either ignorant of the lens, steeped in elitist "price snobbery" or both. 

I have one regret about the Summarit series of lenses:  I regret not getting a copy of the 75mm f/2.4 Summarit M before Leica quit the entire line.

Edited by Herr Barnack
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't used my 75/2.4 nearly enough since I bought it a couple of years ago, but I was recently looking at some photos I shot with it and was impressed.  It's the only 75mm Leica lens I've ever owned so I can't compare it to Leica's more expensive offerings, but I can't imagine anyone being disappointed in the Summarit's performance.  A real pity that the line wasn't successful.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

My bet is that they will appreciate in value, substantially, over time.

Probably worth picking them up when bargains appear.

A 90mm Summarit M in mint condition, with the metal hood, just sold on FM.com for $775.  I'm thinking that was a bargain...

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Danner said:

My bet is that they will appreciate in value, substantially, over time.

Probably worth picking them up when bargains appear.

A 90mm Summarit M in mint condition, with the metal hood, just sold on FM.com for $775.  I'm thinking that was a bargain...

That is a very good price.  Leica Store Miami has a used one at $1695.

https://leicastoremiami.com/collections/used-m-lenses/products/used-leica-summarit-m-90mm-f-2-4-black-anodized-5?variant=34287958950019

Link to post
Share on other sites

Never needed this in-between light intensity, as all focal lengths of the Summarits were already bought second-hand in 2.0 or 1.4 and up to 75mm also in 2.8 / 3.5 or 4.0 (MATE); so the Summarits came much too late as a new purchase alternative.
Perhaps a not too beefy 'Tri-Summarit' would have been more successful?

Link to post
Share on other sites

So disappointed that this incredible line of lenses, arguably the truest modern day example of Leica’s deliverance of optical quality in small packages, was ultimately killed by a lack of customer interest. 

Way back in 2012, I wrote a short review of the 75mm Summarit; I still stand by my conclusions.

https://prosophos.com/2012/01/26/the-leica-75mm-summarit-f2-5/

—Peter.

 

  • Like 10
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

10 hours ago, Prosophos said:

So disappointed that this incredible line of lenses, arguably the truest modern day example of Leica’s deliverance of optical quality in small packages, was ultimately killed by a lack of customer interest. 

Maybe it's something like the McRib. Maybe it needed customer disinterest, to generate customer interest 😂

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Leica's introduction of the Summarit range was a good move as they were able to introduce quality lenses at a more affordable price point. 

Unfortunately, Leica compromised on packaging and accessories (cheaper case, optional hood, use of rubber bits. etc.) when all these could have been addressed with a marginal cost bump.

Their target market immediately perceived this as the introduction of a family of poor cousins. Once the mistake was made they could not rectify the situation.

 

Edited by rramesh
Link to post
Share on other sites

I love my little 75mm f2.5 and I find it punches far above its weight.  I don't even care too much about the rubber grip, but to be fair, I shoot TTArtisans and 7Artisans as well as Leica glass.  I don't really care too much about the label as long as the result is what I want.  I shoot a lot of portraits, but love my landscapes as well... I don't feel hindered with the 75 for both.

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 Photos By Cowz
  • Like 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been very pleased with results both near and far that my 90mm Summarit f2.4 produces - and it is considerably lighter (346g) than my 90mm Elmarit-R f2.8 (475g + 96g R to M adapter).  The only 'niggle' with it and my 75mm concerns the length of the hood and having to remove the thread-protection ring before the hood can be fitted.

BTW ref #21, I maybe should have added that the second photo is a huge crop of the first.

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!

Both M10M.

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

The big part of the Leica lenses exchange I think is in the used market. And in the used market you can buy better or equal lenses as the Summarits for less or the same money. My Summilux 35/1.4 Asph. costed me al little less more the price I sold my Summarit 35. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

FWIW for those wanting a 75/2.4 they can buy new, I own and recommend the Kipon 75/2.4 (video review on M, text review on Fuji). And it's all-metal, and has coding pits! And regarding the video, there are all-black ones like mine - orange is a variant. I do still hope Leica resurrects the Summarit in some way. But all-metal :P 

I think the sweet spot for f/2.4 stuff is "below" or "above" the easily-seen-and-focused standard 28-50 range. For me, I prefer 75 to 90 just because of the bigger framelines and f/2.4 to faster just because I have a greater ability to focus the thing. And on the wide side, I'm usually outdoors and well-lit.

Edited by astrostl
Link to post
Share on other sites

These are clearly excellent lenses. But I guess they never quite found a niche. For price-conscious buyers, Leica will always struggle to compete with its own back catalogue, and you could generally find a secondhand f/2 alternative for less, not to mention cheaper new offerings from Voigtländer, Zeiss and now the various Chinese brands. If you weren't price-conscious, you'd probably buy the Summicron anyway. So that leaves people who especially value small lenses, or who just don't want to buy secondhand. The 50mm must have been particularly hard to shift. It sold for maybe 70% of the price of the 50/2 (which isn't a large lens). Pretty much every other camera system offers a 50/2 or faster for about 1/10 of the price of the Summarit, and has done for decades. It's hard to escape the feeling that the maximum aperture was in this case dictated by product differentiation concerns rather than the physical limitations of lens design.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Summarits were one of first line of lenses that was geared towards the digital M (m8)along with a new design/ production philosophy that was meant to replace the elmar/ elmarit line.

The stigma of a poor mans leica gear was not helped with the fact it doesnt have as much distiguishable character wide open compared to the cron or the lux which was to be expected.

PersonalIy i myself found the character of the 50 & 35 f2.5 with subtle crispness but not as distinctly as pleasant as an elmar. Great overall compact lenses to use and fantastic day to day carry.

 

Edited by cboy
Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, epand56 said:

...My Summilux 35/1.4 Asph. costed me al little less more the price I sold my Summarit 35. 

You bought a used 35mm Summilux ASPH for a little less than the price of a new Summarit?

Philip.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Poorly marketed. Summarits could have been so much better to look at and feel. Initially an ugly hood that had to be bought separately. The 2.4 version was not much better. A longer minimal focus distance didn't help . If the lenses were better looking with nice hoods, possibly more retro, I'm sure they would have still been around. To me it was lack of thought by Leica. I wish Leica could produce lenses again that are smaller and slower.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 1/1/2021 at 1:28 AM, Herr Barnack said:

I have a copy of the 50mm f/2.4 Summarit M #11860.  It is not "less than" in any way when compared to my other M lenses, current or past. 

People who look down their noses at the Summarit line are entitled to think what they think but IMHO they are making a huge mistake.  Do M shooters look down on the 28mm f/2.8 Elmarit M because it is "cheap" or "slow?"  If so, they are either ignorant of the lens, steeped in elitist "price snobbery" or both. 

I have one regret about the Summarit series of lenses:  I regret not getting a copy of the 75mm f/2.4 Summarit M before Leica quit the entire line.

Do you think is worth it to get the 75mm Summarit 2.4?

Link to post
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, pippy said:

You bought a used 35mm Summilux ASPH for a little less than the price of a new Summarit?

Stephen, yes I did, it was almost 10 years ago. A friend of mine was selling the 35 Summilux Asph. for 1400 euros and the brand new Summarit 35/2.5 I had costed me 1500 euros. I've sold it for 1200 euros and bought the Summilux. I still have and use it. I had it 6bit coded by Will van Manen for 85 euros a coupe years after I bought it. It's the lens I will never give away.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...