Name change from 50mm f1.5 "Xenon" to "Summarit" and one further question...

[pippy]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Pardon my ignorance if this is an old chestnut and is well-known in Leica-world but when did the name-change occur for the Xenon to become reborn as the Summarit?

Most sources I've seen so far say the Summarit appeared in around '47 yet this link states that 103 examples of the 50mm f1.5 'Summarit' lens were made / assigned in 1939;

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-wiki.en/index.php/Summarit_f%3D_5_cm_1:1.5

Furthermore almost all of the post-war Summarits I've seen pictured have the aperture-selecting index-mark / triangle on the rotating ring and the aperture markings engraved on the body of the lens yet some (all from 1957?) have the aperture settings marked on the rotating ring and a fixed index-mark engraved on the body of the lens. Am I correct in thinking there was a sea-change in the way these lens-markings / reference points were implemented towards the end of the 1950's? Anything to do with the Schneider / Taylor-Hobson connections?

I've seen images from Percole and his wonderful Fontenelle Betriebs. Sob. 105 with the latter arrangement (post #5 in the link below) and I am curious as to how things progressed in the evolution of this lens...

https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/316324-summarit-f5cm-115/

Thanks in advance!

Philip.

Edited January 31, 2021 by pippy

[TomB_tx]

Puts says Leitz production records suggest the Xenon was made by Schneider for Leitz, while the Summarit was at least assembled at the Leitz works. He also suggests any coated Xenons were made uncoated pre-war, and would have been disassembled and coated by Leitz from old stock after the war.

[pippy]

11 hours ago, TomB_tx said:

Puts says Leitz production records suggest the Xenon was made by Schneider for Leitz, while the Summarit was at least assembled at the Leitz works...

Thank you, Tom. I was aware of the Schneider / Leitz change but does Puts (or anyone else who is well-informed) make mention of the lens being named a "Summarit" pre-WWII? So far the link I posted in the OP is the only place I've ever seen the Summarit dating from as far back 1939.

Philip.

[TomB_tx]

Ah..Now I understand. The table in Puts' Leica Chronicle indicates the block of numbers 490001 to 492000 was originally allocated to Xenon in 1939 - but then adds an entry that 491898-492000 to Summarit. He also notes that while the Xenon was in the catalog and sold post-war, this was old stock from pre-war production. He indicates that while the first batch Summarit numbers cover a range of 102 that it is not known how many were actually produced. Perhaps this was a trial production at the Leitz works instead of Schneider, with the name change necessary by agreement with Schneider.

 

[pedaes]

FWIW, in his  History of Leica Lenses Jim Lager says the f1.5 Summarit was introduced in 1949 for public sale as a "basically improved Xenon" (better performance a f1.5).

Laney also says 1949, and the Xenon to 1950. It seems coating of the elements is the critical factor, without Xenon and with Summarit. No other change.

I would think any pre '45 Summarits were military issue, as the military controlled the coating technology.. Just a suggestion!

[pippy]

1 hour ago, TomB_tx said:

...He indicates that while the first batch Summarit numbers cover a range of 102 that it is not known how many were actually produced. Perhaps this was a trial production at the Leitz works instead of Schneider, with the name change necessary by agreement with Schneider...

Thank you for the further clarification, Tom. This is exactly what I was wondering.

Does anyone have any ideas about the second question raised in the OP? - i.e. this bit;

"...almost all of the post-war Summarits I've seen pictured have the aperture-selecting index-mark / triangle on the rotating ring and the aperture markings engraved on the body of the lens yet some (all from 1957?) have the aperture settings marked on the rotating ring and a fixed index-mark engraved on the body of the lens...(etc.)"

There have been posts where members also state that their aperture's direction of travel are made with a reverse orientation from the current 'norm' (and I quote : "which drives me mad!") but I suspect (although I could well be completely wrong!) that they are confusing the direction the numbers go (in the two versions listed) with actual aperture change. By this I mean when the lens is viewed from the position of someone with the camera around their neck and looking down at the ring, on those lenses with a 'fixed' index mark/rotating aperture-scale ring the f16 setting is furthest right and with those with a fixed aperture scale/rotating ring the f1.5 setting is furthest right yet the widest aperture is still obtained when the ring (of whichever style) is turned fully to the right.

By way of illustration (not my lenses);

Index mark fixed on barrel / aperture marks on rotating ring / f16 furthest right;

https://collectiblend.com/Lenses/images/Leitz-50mm-f1.5-Summarit-(BM,-late).jpg

Aperture scale fixed on barrel / index mark on rotating ring / f1.5 furthest right;

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/265008748033?chn=ps&norover=1&mkevt=1&mkrid=710-134428-41853-0&mkcid=2&itemid=265008748033&targetid=1140323547790&device=c&mktype=pla&googleloc=1006886&poi=&campaignid=12125451281&mkgroupid=117045676499&rlsatarget=pla-1140323547790&abcId=9300480&merchantid=115501471&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIlb_Qo4TJ7gIVFuDtCh26pwABEAQYBiABEgIBFvD_BwE

...so, as can be seen, f1.5 is still set at the same point (ring furthest right) regardless of which way the numbers run.

Philip.

 

Edited February 1, 2021 by pippy

[Pyrogallol]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Yes. I think it is just that Leitz Standard is to turn the aperture adjustment ring to the right to open up the aperture , as seen from above with the camera held in front of you.

While Schneider’s standard was to turn it to the left.

My 1938 Xenon and 1952 Summarit.

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 February 1, 2021 by Pyrogallol

[pippy]

16 minutes ago, Pyrogallol said:

Yes. I think it is just that Leitz Standard is to turn the aperture adjustment ring to the right to open up the aperture......While Schneider’s standard was to turn it to the left...

Thank you for that, Pyrogallo, especially the photo of the '38 Xenon which clearly shows the reverse orientation.

Having seen your picture I was interested to check a couple of things and my Zeiss 50mm f2 collapsible Sonnar from my 1938 Contax II as well as my 1959 "Leitz Wetzlar" 21mm f4 Super-Angulon (which, of course, was made by Schneider) have the 'Zeiss' orientation.

Thanks again everyone!

Philip.

[UliWer]

Well,  for Leitz lenses there is no rule. Starting with the 5cm Elmar the index for max. aperture was on the right side (if you look at the lens with the camera body on the viewer`s side). Same for the 5cm Hektor and the 3.5cm Elmar.  But for the very early 9cm Elmar, the Summar and the 13.5 Hektor it was opposite: max aperture on the left side.  For the 9 cm Elmar it was changed to the opposite direction after the war (perhaps earlier), but the first collapsible 90mm Elmar swapped again to "left-to right". The 2.8cm Hektor had right to left, same as the "Berg-Elmar". The 7,3cm Hektor had left to right. The Summarex like the Summarit closed right to left, while the Schneider Xenon as can be seen on Pyrogallol's example had the opposite direction. The Super Angulon which was a real Schneider design closed right to left for the first 4/21 version, but left to right for the later 1:3.4 version. The 90mm Summicron which has so many little alterations started with the left-to-right direction, then it was changed to the opposite in the Sixties only to switch back some years later. 

The Summitar and 5cm Summicron kept the "Summar Standard" left to right, even the 5cm Elmar in M-mount adopted it  - and it still rules today until someone in Wetzlar may have an idea...

Never ever think that Leitz followed any standards - variation was their realm. 

Edited February 1, 2021 by UliWer

[UliWer]

vor 25 Minuten schrieb pippy:

my Zeiss 50mm f2 collapsible Sonnar from my 1938 Contax II

Yes, the Zeiss Contax lenses strictly kept the standard with index of max aperture on the right side. When I use the lenses I alway have to look which way to turn. I first thought this was an "opposition" design towards Leitz, until I realizied that many Leitz lenses from the same time had the same pattern. 

Edited February 1, 2021 by UliWer

[willeica]

On the left is No 740189, a Summarit LTM lens from 1949 with Taylor, Taylor & Hobson engraving and U.S. Pat . reference which has the moving aperture point and the widest aperture on the right. On the right is No 1517946, a Summarit LTM lens from 1957 with a fixed aperture point and widest aperture point on the left. I also have No 1298207 a Summarit M from 1955 which has the moving aperture point and the widest aperture on the right.

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!

In his book Lager just refers to the change from moving aperture to fixed aperture point. While he does not record the SN of the change, the earliest one he shows with the revised set up is No 1419946. He also shows 1418443 which has the 'old' arrangement. Both 141xxxx examples shown are Canadian lenses. When the Summilux appeared it too had the 'new' arrangement, which remains the case to this day. 

William

 

[Pecole]

Just to provide some more "discussion/hypothesis" material : in my Fontenelle collection, I had the lowest serial for Summarit 491932, but serial 490115 as highest for Xenon. Further comparisons enhance the difficulty in dating Summarit's serials :

- The first photo hereunder shows fundamental construction differences between nº1298859 and nº1527577 : on the first, the aperture scale is fixed and engraved on the barrel, the triangle reference index on the next mobile ring, with the closing of diaphragm going to the left. On the highest number, the aperture scale is engraved on the mobile ring, and the closing is going to the right. Worth maybe to note (second photo) that front engravings are also different : in two parts readable from front on the first, in round facing lens' center on the second.

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!

 

To follow are two images of Summarit nº956466 and nº1119860 showing the same constructrion differences, but this time the front engraving is round (and facing exterior!) on the lowest serial and in two parts on the highest...

                

And I will finish with two photos of Xenon lens with very close serial numbers : 376562 and 376648. Despite this "close" fact, there are differences, even more important than these of Summarit : the nº376562 has three knurled rings, nº3766546 four. And as for front engravings, it is still more curious : the first has "Leitz Xenon f=5 cm 1:1.5 Nr 376562" ONLY, without name of the company, the second one the full game with British and US patents details.

[pippy]

9 hours ago, Pecole said:

Just to provide some more "discussion/hypothesis" material : in my Fontenelle collection, I had the lowest serial for Summarit 491932, but serial 490115 as highest for Xenon....

Thank you, Pecole, for these details as the 491932 lens was / is clearly one of the first batch of the 103 Summarits mentioned in the first link in the OP (# 491898 - #  492000) and confirmed by Tom in post #4 as dating to 1939.

I've also just realised that I mis-spelled your name in the OP so my sincere apologies for getting that detail wrong.

Philip.

Edited February 2, 2021 by pippy

[sandro]

My Summarit # 1099454 dates from 1953, it has the smallest aperture on the right of a fixed aperture point. The engraving is like Pierre showed in his first photo, the lens on the right, where yopu read the engraving both top and bottom without turning around the lens. It is the M version.

Lex

Edited February 3, 2021 by sandro

[pippy]

Mine is # 1099308 so just 146 different from your own example!

This ('our') batch featured both LTM and M-mount versions. Mine is the latter. Out of curiosity what mount does yours have? From what those better-informed than myself have related our two were from a batch of 2,000 whose serial numbers were allocated in '53 and were finished in both mount-versions. As the M3 wasn't released until Spring(?) '54 it's a fair assumption that mine - although 'dated' 1953 - was given final assembly in 1954 (or later).

Philip.

Edited February 3, 2021 by pippy

[sandro]

Philip, mine is the M version as well, I added it to my previous post. When I compare images of the LTM version with my own M version it doesn't seem strange that this batch was from 1953, since it doesn't seem a miracle to add either the bottom with the screw mount or the M-mount bottom. Final assembly may have been from 1954, but then again, the serial numbers at Leitz often don't seem to be a system to rely on completely. Changes in batches etc. have occurred many times.

Lex

[wlaidlaw]

At the other end of manufacturing I have a 1959 Summarit (LTM), which because of its T,T & H links, I normally leave on my Reid and Sigrist Model 3, another Leicester based company. T, T & H is now the financial holding company that owns Cooke Optical. I should also have a contemporary 1959 50 Summilux, which I bought S/H in 1967, after working all summer as a welder at the Dounreay Plutonium Breeder Nuclear Reactor, in the far north of Scotland . I had been given an M4 body as my 21st present but no lens to go with it, other than a borrowed very tatty pre-war 3.5 Elmar. Sadly the Summilux disappeared along with a whole lot of other stuff in a house move in 1983. A whole tea chest got stolen. 

Wilson

[Andy_Shields]

On 2/2/2021 at 6:03 AM, willeica said:

On the left is No 740189, a Summarit LTM lens from 1949 with Taylor, Taylor & Hobson engraving and U.S. Pat . reference which has the moving aperture point and the widest aperture on the right. On the right is No 1517946, a Summarit LTM lens from 1957 with a fixed aperture point and widest aperture point on the left. I also have No 1298207 a Summarit M from 1955 which has the moving aperture point and the widest aperture on the right.

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!

In his book Lager just refers to the change from moving aperture to fixed aperture point. While he does not record the SN of the change, the earliest one he shows with the revised set up is No 1419946. He also shows 1418443 which has the 'old' arrangement. Both 141xxxx examples shown are Canadian lenses. When the Summilux appeared it too had the 'new' arrangement, which remains the case to this day. 

William

 

A redditor just posted a question about his Barnack Leica and I asked him if he realized that he had a 1949 production Summarit. In researching his lens I came across your reply to this post. All these years later he has lens 740204. Amazing to me that 70+ years later a lens that was made on the other side of the world pops up that was made 15 pieces after yours. 🙂