Jump to content

Help! Can`t make up my mind beetwen 35mm Summaron f2.8 and Summicron V1


balzani_shots
 Share

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

My main goal is shoot B&W (but not only) on digital cameras.

Trying to choose beetwen a 1962 Summaron f/2.8 and a 1964 Summicron V1, both look in very nice condition, the price diference is 700€.

From what I`ve read here, these would be my favourite options. Opinions welcome, considering the price diference too.

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

That price difference sounds like peanuts seeing the astranomical heights the Summicron reaches these days. Either you've got a bargain on the Summicron or a very high price for the Summaron.

I have the Summaron and like it, but I like less than perfect lenses. I've also never tried that Summicron but have read a few times that the Summaron is just as good. All in all, if they are both in good condition, as you wrote, then I'd follow Andy's suggestion and go for the Summicron.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would choose one of them for the max aperture ONLY.

I use the two types for very long time ( in multiple units, each over time on film and sensor ).

They are from same period, so the Summicron can be used (not up to modern taste I must say) at f/2 while the Summaron can not.

The Summaron is great (even in modern taste) from wide open f/2.8.

Very good allaround lens but lacks the character of Summicron at f/2 of course.

 

The nice thing they share same mount, very robust even built from light aluminium.

https://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-wiki.en/index.php/Summicron_(I)_f%3D_3.5_cm_1:2

 

small front lens / bigger front lens (not so big so in use hood can be forgotten in my case)

 

https://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-wiki.en/index.php/Summaron_f%3D_3.5_cm_1:2.8

 

Edited by a.noctilux
Link to post
Share on other sites

Another thing that I overlooked.

Those are very old lenses, so the previous owners can have them more or less good/bad shape.

 

To limit risk, I'd take the best looking one.

My aluminium lenses have some scares on the mount, those traces show that the lenses had hard use or the ex-user didn't care for esthetics.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Ian spots it.

Take care of the closest distance marking 0.7 is fine ( if 0.65 that is unglogged/goggled )

here the two brothers (for size comparo)

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, a.noctilux said:

Another thing that I overlooked.

Those are very old lenses, so the previous owners can have them more or less good/bad shape.

 

To limit risk, I'd take the best looking one.

My aluminium lenses have some scares on the mount, those traces show that the lenses had hard use or the ex-user didn't care for esthetics.

Good advice is always welcome, one if from the oficial dealer and has been serviced, looks amazing, the other is from Leica Classic Online store (Condition A-), the best two I`ve found.

I usually pay atention to the mount but in pictures sometimes is not conclusive.

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, a.noctilux said:

Ian spots it.

Take care of the closest distance marking 0.7 is fine ( if 0.65 that is unglogged/goggled )

here the two brothers (for size comparo)

Could be twins... both are goggled.

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Goggled !

This one is not bad with 6 months peace of mind, Store Paris

depend on the M you want to use,

knowing that M3 type 35mm can be used on every Leica M.

I have one "M3 type" first, very affordable and very nice lens.

Then "M2 type" before selling the Summaron 2.8/35 "M3".

Still use the M3 Summicron though, the one with marks of use but as good as the other if heavier.

 

Edited by a.noctilux
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, balzani_shots said:

...the price diference is 700€.

I can only share ianman's comment in #3.

Summarons (all different versions) often suffer from degradation of the rear lens element. It may look foggy if you look closely at it. This must not necessarily have negative influence on the results but it can have so. Therefore my advise would be to look at the item before you buy it. I have not seen the same degradation with Summicrons even if they were much used. The results from the Summicron don't differ much as far as sharpness and contrast are concerned, if you don't compare both lenses fully opened (the Summicron of course is much softer at f/2 than the Summaron at f/2.8). 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, UliWer said:

I can only share ianman's comment in #3.

Summarons (all different versions) often suffer from degradation of the rear lens element. It may look foggy if you look closely at it. This must not necessarily have negative influence on the results but it can have so. Therefore my advise would be to look at the item before you buy it. I have not seen the same degradation with Summicrons even if they were much used. The results from the Summicron don't differ much as far as sharpness and contrast are concerned, if you don't compare both lenses fully opened (the Summicron of course is much softer at f/2 than the Summaron at f/2.8). 

 

This is exactly the kind of info I long for, can`t afford to spend money on someting that worries me, perhaps I should quit the Summaron. But even the Summicron doesn`t give great peace of mind, it was made when I was born... 57 years ago. I would feel better buying a more recent lens but I`m looking for something less clinical. I found an ASPH for more 500€ than the Cron V1, but is bigger, heavier and I believe it won`t help me getting the type of pictures I`d like to make. I have that kind of lenses already, don`t need another one. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Summicron has a unique rendering wide open for sure, unmatched by any other summicron and summaron
  • Summaron is a great performer but has no unique characteristics, it’s simply a great lens even wide open (depending on what you like this can either be a good or a bad thing)
  • Price difference ..makes me concerned though, looking at the market the summaron is definitely worth much less than the v1 (I’d say around 2000~3000eur less). So either the summaron is in great shape or the summicron is in poor shape.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Get a screw fit f3.5 Summaron and see how you like it. There are plenty around and it will be easy to sell if you don’t like it. Very neat and small. Add an M adaptor for use on an M camera and make sure the adaptor has the cutout to clear the infinity catch, lots of other threads about that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Pyrogallol said:

Get a screw fit f3.5 Summaron and see how you like it. There are plenty around and it will be easy to sell if you don’t like it. Very neat and small. Add an M adaptor for use on an M camera and make sure the adaptor has the cutout to clear the infinity catch, lots of other threads about that.

One of the ones I`m considering, but I think I need a faster lens, thanks

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its unique in a generic way.

There was a guy who did a review of all the 35mm summicrom versions and took identical pictures at different apertures using each version.

I earnestly started reading the review and looking at the images but after a while i realised they all looked the bloody same!!

Newer models are slightly sharper and perform better wide open and that's about it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, ianman said:

Could you post an example of the Summicron rendering?

I unfortunately don’t have it any longer and I forget which old pictures were taken with which lens. I did try all Leica 35mm lenses though, and the V1 is  my favorite, followed by the elmar 35mm f3.5 / summaron 35mm f3.5. Please note I enjoy classic rendering, not modern clinical rendering.

The other Summicrons are ok but nothing special; V4 is great too because it’s tiny and it’s sharp without being clinical, but bokeh wise the V1 is much more pleasing to my eyes. V2/V3/ASPH I did not enjoy them, especially the ASPH.

The summaron f2.8 was great too but did not have any special signature, it was just a sharp lens already at f2.8 (the V1 can’t be said it’s sharp at f2). I actually prefer the bokeh of the summaron 35mm f3.5 than of the f2.8 as it has a more unique rendering. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, shirubadanieru said:

I unfortunately don’t have it any longer and I forget which old pictures were taken with which lens. I did try all Leica 35mm lenses though, and the V1 is  my favorite, followed by the elmar 35mm f3.5 / summaron 35mm f3.5. Please note I enjoy classic rendering, not modern clinical rendering.

The other Summicrons are ok but nothing special; V4 is great too because it’s tiny and it’s sharp without being clinical, but bokeh wise the V1 is much more pleasing to my eyes. V2/V3/ASPH I did not enjoy them, especially the ASPH.

The summaron f2.8 was great too but did not have any special signature, it was just a sharp lens already at f2.8 (the V1 can’t be said it’s sharp at f2). I actually prefer the bokeh of the summaron 35mm f3.5 than of the f2.8 as it has a more unique rendering. 

 

Thanks, I`m actually gravitating between the V1 and the V4

Link to post
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, balzani_shots said:

Thanks, I`m actually gravitating between the V1 and the V4

Price wise the V4 makes more sense (V1 is double the V4 these days), but rendering wise I still prefer the V1 (it’s definitely softer wide open, but it has a more pleasing rendering to my eyes and the built quality / design is great too. Shooting them from f4 no difference)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...