What is the best value second hand M lens ? - 35mm M Summaron, Summicron or Summarit

[Rokkor]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi,

for an analogue M with a potential digital application in the future, I am looking for a 35mm lens. Second hand prices are high currently and in the budget friendly field I see the following options (besides Zeiss ZM35mm/2.8 and Voigtländer Ultron 35mm/2.0):

 

• Summaron 35mm /2.8

• Canada made Summicron 35mm/2.0

• Summarit 35mm/2.4

 

If we assume they can be had around +/-1000 bucks each - which route would you recommend?

I read that the Summaron is very vintage, the Canada Summarit an excellent choice and the Summarit has mixed reviews. Also as it is fairly new, I read it performs very well on digital cameras.

Thanks for your recommendations.

[a.noctilux]

 

As the three type user, I recommand the first one available of them, use it a while then "replace" if need be.

- Summaron 2.8/35 is very hard to beat if you use mostly b&w film, but on sensor ( color type not Monochrom ) best use one of the other two

- Summicron 35mm "II" ( this one ) it's one of the best mechanically build, much better than "IV" ( Canadian made ) : one of these can be best choice for film/sensor duo use

( have a read here ... )

- Summarit-M 2.5/35 my last 35mm is something else as "new Classic challenger", this one is my last favorite on film/sensor color or mono

( this thread can "help" )

 

Side note ...

if you refer to Summarit-M 35mm, there is no "Canada Summarit"

[wda]

The Summarit without a doubt. Save a little by seeking the earlier F/2.5 version which is identical optically.

[Ko.Fe.]

Summarit-M 35 2.5. It is incredibly good lens on b/w prints. Fine on color and with digital.

Cron and Summaron will show their age on digital and as with any old Leitz lenses it is gamble, IMO.

If no b/w film involved here is Color Skopar 35 2.5. And Nokton 35 1.4 II is awesome made lens. Both are well under used Summarit-M 35 even if new. Both are fine on color and digital and OK on b/w film. 

[Rokkor]

vor 2 Stunden schrieb a.noctilux:

 

As the three type user, I recommand the first one available of them, use it a while then "replace" if need be.

- Summaron 2.8/35 is very hard to beat if you use mostly b&w film, but on sensor ( color type not Monochrom ) best use one of the other two

- Summicron 35mm "II" ( this one ) it's one of the best mechanically build, much better than "IV" ( Canadian made ) : one of these can be best choice for film/sensor duo use

( have a read here ... )

- Summarit-M 2.5/35 my last 35mm is something else as "new Classic challenger", this one is my last favorite on film/sensor color or mono

( this thread can "help" )

 

Side note ...

if you refer to Summarit-M 35mm, there is no "Canada Summarit"

Thank you. I have seen the thread on the Summarit. And thank for sharing the links and your opinion. Great you know and use all of the three.

 

I did mean Canada Summicron. Sorry about that.

Besides the build quality would you recommend a Canda Summicron at all? Or is then the Summarit a better choice?

The Summicrons made in Germany are not easy to find reasonably priced. Usually around 700€ or dollars more....

thanks again. Great input!

[Rokkor]

vor 13 Minuten schrieb Ko.Fe.:

Summarit-M 35 2.5. It is incredibly good lens on b/w prints. Fine on color and with digital.

Cron and Summaron will show their age on digital and as with any old Leitz lenses it is gamble, IMO.

If no b/w film involved here is Color Skopar 35 2.5. And Nokton 35 1.4 II is awesome made lens. Both are well under used Summarit-M 35 even if new. Both are fine on color and digital and OK on b/w film. 

Thank you.

I can see your gamble aspect to used lenses. Some price expectations are insane. Thank you.

This is why I thought if the Summarit 35mm/2.4 could be a good compromise. Relatively new, but not very expensive as it seems the underdog somehow. And not very price stable after some years.

I wonder if the Summarit beats the Zeiss Biogon 35mm/2.8.

[Rokkor]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

vor 2 Stunden schrieb wda:

The Summarit without a doubt. Save a little by seeking the earlier F/2.5 version which is identical optically.

Thanks for this hint. Very helpful. Do you have a personal comparison to the Summicron?

[wda]

19 minutes ago, Rokkor said:

Thanks for this hint. Very helpful. Do you have a personal comparison to the Summicron?

Afraid not.  But from personal experience of the equally excellent 75 mm Summarit I would expect the 35 mm version to match current Summicron lenses and exceed the performance of older versions of the Summicron. You would certainly not be disappointed with its performance.

[a.noctilux]

Ah 35mm 😇.

 

My long story concerning 35mm Summicron IV .

- I first purchased second hand in the 1980's then have had more than dozen over time, as at that time, from 1990 to 2005,

I wanted "nice" one, but some needed repairs, I know now why, but not by then ...

Now I know that "Canada" or early "Germany" 35 Cron IV have some fragile plastic parts which could not stand "hard use"

(or miss-use like grabbing the hood when mount/unmount the lens, I've done that 😝)

- some buys/sells later, now I have two "nice" 35 Cron IV : one "Canada" and one "Germany" which I'll use (with care ! ) for decades to come

...

Now most of time I use Summarit-M 2.5/35mm happily ("normal use" of course).

Time to time I use my other 35mm lenses ( f/1.4 to f/3.5 ), as each IS different from others .

[pgk]

41 minutes ago, Rokkor said:

Thanks for this hint. Very helpful. Do you have a personal comparison to the Summicron?

I've had both. The Summarit flares less. Otherwise they are both good performers and neither will disappoint. Personally speaking I would say that for value, a 2.5 Summarit is hard to beat. Its a really nice little lens. I would have kept mine but I do shoot in low light so a Summilux replaced it and I'm happy with having done so - but if you don't need the extra stop and a third then the Summarit is a great choice even so.

[Ko.Fe.]

1 hour ago, Rokkor said:

Thank you.

I can see your gamble aspect to used lenses. Some price expectations are insane. Thank you.

This is why I thought if the Summarit 35mm/2.4 could be a good compromise. Relatively new, but not very expensive as it seems the underdog somehow. And not very price stable after some years.

I wonder if the Summarit beats the Zeiss Biogon 35mm/2.8.

Old Leitz lenses are often comes with fungus, separation and plastic focus tab on ELC is prone to crack and fail off. I went through many old Leitz lenses,  including Summaron. Sold them all. Best lens is new lens.

Zeiss 35 2.8 is very good lens on images it took. Ergonomic of ZM lenses are just terrible compared to Summarit-M 35.

35 2.4 is way too bulky for no reason, IMO. 2.5 is better lens with 39mm filter. And usually costs less.

 

[pedaes]

11 minutes ago, Ko.Fe. said:

35 2.4 is way too bulky for no reason, IMO. 2.5 is better lens

They are identical apart from hood and filter size. 

[lct]

1 hour ago, Rokkor said:

I wonder if the Summarit beats the Zeiss Biogon 35mm/2.8

The Biogon is hard to beat if you like contrasty lenses. Its only flaw is vignetting but otherwise it has less CA, less distortion and is sharper at corners and edges than the Summarit, at least my 35/2.5 copy. It looks also better made as far as my copies are concerned at least. I much prefer the clip-on hood of the Biogon too. Now it is a Zeiss design with less apparent DoF behind the plane of focus. Matter of tastes as usual.

[poli]

2 hours ago, Rokkor said:

Thanks for this hint. Very helpful. Do you have a personal comparison to the Summicron?

I've also had both

The Summarit 2.4 and the Summicron asph (v2). I could buy the Summicron 2nd hand for a nice price so I wanted to give it a go. To be honest, I did not see a difference. Sometimes I thought I saw a difference.

In the end I decided to keep the Summicron mainly because of the 39 mm filter, ,7 mtr. focus instead of .8 mtr. and I like the focussing of the Summicron a little better. The Summarit focusses very lightly. Almost too light. Also has a short focus throw. For me the Summicron was a bit better in that respect.

But all in all, they are both great lenses and you can't go wrong with either.  

[RF’sDelight]

+1  Summarit-M 2.5 or 2.4/35

I keep on recommending the Summarit line up which is somehow mistaken for »cheap« Leica lenses in the sense of inferior IQ. Probably developed with the Peter Karbe mantra »Stop down for what?« in mind, you get excellent performance with just a half stop below the Summicrons.

But… of course the Summarit rendering is more on the »modern« side where the Summaron and Summicron inhertit a bit more of Walter Mandler’s Leica glow. 😉

 

[Herr Barnack]

@Rokkor Of the three options, look for a Summarit 35mm f/2.4 would be my recommendation.  The f/2.4 Summarit lenses are overlooked due to their "slow" maximum aperture.  They are truly excellent lenses, though.

I have the 50/2.4 - it is just a great little lens.  I am regretting missing out on getting the 75/2.4 before Leica quit the Summarit line. 

I don't understand why they did that, but it is a shame that these lenses have been discontinued.

Edit:  Take a look at ebay - there are a few Summarit 35/2.4 lenses up for sale there.

 

 

 

Edited October 27, 2020 by Herr Barnack

[Jeff S]

The Leica Miami guys (Red Dot Forum) are putting together a petition to send to Leica to revive the M Summarit line.  
 

Jeff

[pippy]

3 hours ago, pedaes said:

They are identical apart from hood and filter size. 

In actual fact the 39mm filter thread makes the f2.5 the more attractive option IMO as I have (and use) such filters with my M Monochrom.

As far as the original question goes;

FWIW I have an old (1954) Summaron-M and, after it was treated to a CLA, it's perfect for my needs but if I was to go out shopping tomorrow I would probably go for a Summarit as a 'first option' 35mm. Although I don't have either of the shorter f/l Summarits I do have the 75mm and 90mm versions and couldn't be happier with how they perform.

Philip.

[Dennis]

No experience with any 35mm Leica. But I own the 35/2.8 ZM and it's wonderful. Very tiny and light, and as ICT is saying above, it's hard to beat. I used it in many type of different situations, and I never found an issue. Personally, I don't like the esthetics and the small focus knob, but the IQ is superb. Reviewed by Sean Reid as one of the best 35mm for RF

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Jeff S]

I’ve owned a 35 Summicron ASPH for many years.  It’s a fine lens, but the 35 Summarits are also excellent, with even less flare and focus shift.  I wouldn’t hesitate to buy a clean one from a trustworthy dealer. I did, however, recently pick up a very clean 35 f2.8 Summaron, with DAG CLA and warranty, to offer a different rendering alternative in conjunction with  my M10 or M Monochrom.  All good options if condition,  warranty/return policy and price are acceptable.

Jeff