Summarit-M 35 f/2.4 ASPH

[SudaliuS]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hello everyone!
Found a Summarit-M 35 f/2.4 ASPH lens with mint condition. In box, with case and documents. For 1560 Euro. Thinking to get it. Because I don't really like my current Zeiss Biogon 35mm f/2.8. It's not so sharp on 2.8.
What do you think about Summarit-M 35 f/2.4? Is it will be better than Zeiss?
I heard that Leica native lens should be anyway better for Leica camera)

[Advertisement]

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

[TomB_tx]

I have the Summarit-M 35 (2.5 - same optics) and it it excellent - my main lens on the M10. However, the Zeiss Biogon 2.8 has an excellent reputation, and is reported to be sharper than the Summarit - but I doubt if you would see the difference in actual pictures. The only advantage of Leica lenses is the 6-bit coding for digital bodies, but you can add the coding to Zeiss or Voigtlander with a template to locate the marks.

I also have the Zeiss Biogon 35 2.0, which I'd rate about equal to the Summarit - but too big for my taste. I prefer the handling of the Summarit. The Zeiss 2.8 is rated better than the 2.0.

[Gregm61]

If you can afford it, I'd nab and keep it.

I had a set of the f2.4 Summarits a while back, the 35 and 75mm. Should have kept those and sold the Summicrons, but didn't.

The 35/2.4 is so sharp and a better handler of backlit shooting than either the 35mm f2 ASPH or f1.4 FLE.

 

[SudaliuS]

3 hours ago, Gregm61 said:

If you can afford it, I'd nab and keep it.

 

Thank you for your advice

[hansvons]

13 hours ago, Gregm61 said:

The 35/2.4 is so sharp and a better handler of backlit shooting than either the 35mm f2 ASPH or f1.4 FLE.

This.

However, I love the 35mm ASPH for its character (flare, curvature) despite being also very sharp. I use both, but prefer the Summarit for landscapes and the ASPH for people. 

The Summarit has a similar aspherical design as the Summicron ASPH but has one element left out. It was the first Leica 35mm designed for digital sensors without film in mind.

Sharpness-wise it’s close to the 35mm APO but much, much cheaper. Leica achieved that by using the best materials and tolerances (as usual) and lowering the bar in speed and minimum focus distance. 

In today’s market, it’s a bargain for a Leitz-made lens. Highly recommended!

(The f/2.5 and f/2.4 versions render identical pictures. It’s a matter of taste and money which one prefers.)

[hansvons]

20 hours ago, SudaliuS said:

For 1560 Euro. Thinking to get it. Because I don't really like my current Zeiss Biogon 35mm f/2.8. It's not so sharp on 2.8.
What do you think about Summarit-M 35 f/2.4? Is it will be better than Zeiss?

The price is right and even if the Summarit turns out not to be what you expected, it will be easily sold without loss.

The Zeiss Biogon is famous for its Zeiss-ness (bitingly sharp, cooler rendering, popping colours, high contrast). The Summarit is not bitingly sharp (it's very sharp though), the colours are nicely separated but not popping, and the contrast is high but not steep. The overall colour rendering is more on the modern Leica side, which tends to be neutral with a slight warmish tendency. Long story short: the Sumnarit’s virtues are unexcitingly normal.

Your Biogon should be pretty sharp at full aperture and at f/4 very sharp. That seems not to be the case. I’d guess you either have unrealistic expectations (don't think that) or your copy needs a CLA.

[lct]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Surprised to read your Biogon is not sharp enough at f/2.8. My Summarit 35/2.5 is not sharper there but significantly softer at edges and corners. I have no experience with the f/2.4 version though.

[JTLeica]

Unless you have a bad copy (maybe like I did too) the Zeiss Biogon is sharper than the 35 Summarit. Its higher contrast too.

So... hard to say. I also dont think near 1600 euros is a great price either, so I woudlnt rush into that one. I would at 1100 euros but not 1560. That seems top end.

Why not go for a Summicron instead, the new ASPH or one before are better than the summarit. From what I read the 35 summarit is a good lens but not a great one and the weakest of all the Summarits.

[SudaliuS]

4 hours ago, Al Brown said:

Your 35 Zeiss should be sharp wide open, there must be something wrong with it

Here is and example of Biogon 2.8 picture. JPEG wide open at 2.8.
First of all it has vignating and look at the corners and picture side! Nothing clean and sharp there
https://disk.yandex.ru/i/S0WODvfdapHb7g (you can download image clicking white button at the bottom)

Edited July 28, 2024 by SudaliuS

[SudaliuS]

1 minute ago, Al Brown said:

Did you buy used?

Yes, it was used and I bought it like my first lens after one hour of purchasing camera. I was so excited. I had 3 days for checking the lens, but I investigated my M11 and forgot to check all details of the lenses. Now I'm very dissapointed

[hansvons]

37 minutes ago, JTLeica said:

Why not go for a Summicron instead, the new ASPH or one before are better than the summarit. From what I read the 35 summarit is a good lens but not a great one and the weakest of all the Summarits.

I have both in near-mint condition, and both were serviced by Leica two years ago. I cannot corroborate any of what you read somewhere. They are quite different in rendering. Both are superb lenses. Read my post above. 

 

40 minutes ago, JTLeica said:

I also dont think near 1600 euros is a great price either, so I woudlnt rush into that one. I would at 1100 euros but not 1560. That seems top end.

I only buy freshly serviced lenses in very good condition. 1500 EUR for a great copy is not too expensive but realistic. 

[hansvons]

1 hour ago, lct said:

My Summarit 35/2.5 is not sharper there but significantly softer at edges and corners.

My copy is extraordinarily sharp in corners at f/2.8.

[hansvons]

20 minutes ago, SudaliuS said:

First of all it has vignating and look at the corners and picture side! Nothing clean and sharp there
https://disk.yandex.ru/i/S0WODvfdapHb7g (you can download image clicking white button at the bottom)

I didn't download the image but from what I see in the low-resolution JPEG, I can imagine that the lens is decentred causing the left side being softer than the right side. 

[SudaliuS]

4 minutes ago, hansvons said:

I didn't download the image but from what I see in the low-resolution JPEG

100% crop of the right side of image

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!

[SudaliuS]

3 minutes ago, Al Brown said:

Sell it and get another same one - or the Summarit you wanted at more than twice the price

This is definitely best option.

[costa43]

Your Biogon is definitely decentered. That lens is crazy sharp in all but the farthest corners. It happened to my Minolta 28mm quite recently. An easy fix from a decent tech. Personally I’d get it fixed and stick with that. It’s sharper than the Summarit and significantly cheaper, even after repair. Unless of course you like to buy new things like I do and then sod it, get the Leica. 

[RexGig0]

De-centered lenses can be repaired, though if a recent acquisition, perhaps it should be returned to the seller. There is no reason to think that a Leica-made lens will, necessarily, be a lesser lens, optically. Zeiss knows how to design lenses, and Cosina, who makes the Zeiss-branded 35mm ZM lenses, knows how to manufacture them. Cosina markets their lenses with the Voigtlander brand, having licensed the use of the name. Having said that, the Summarit 35/2.4 seems to be well-liked, by those who use it.

I have never used a 35 Biogon ZM or 35 Leica Summarit 35, but, have accumulated 35mm M-mount lenses with the Leitz, Zeiss, Voigtlander, and Leica brands on them, in that order. Summaron, Distagon, Color Skopar, and “Re-Edition” Summilux Steel Rim. All have reasons for keeping each of them.

[SudaliuS]

On 7/28/2024 at 3:59 PM, Al Brown said:

I agree this copy is not OK. But a brand new one should not perform like this. This lens should be super sharp even at its widest aperture of f/2.8 corner to corner. Your copy must have been either dropped

Today I've tested several lenses in store includes ZEISS Biogon T* 2/35 ZM. And I have the same result on my M11. On widest apperture I don't have details in the corners.
The seller said it is normal for all lenses to not have details on the widest apperture. I don't know. Is this something wrong with my M11 matrix?

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[JTLeica]

9 minutes ago, SudaliuS said:

Today I've tested several lenses in store includes ZEISS Biogon T* 2/35 ZM. And I have the same result on my M11. On widest apperture I don't have details in the corners.
The seller said it is normal for all lenses to not have details on the widest apperture. I don't know. Is this something wrong with my M11 matrix?

Sounds like a sales guy with generic photography knowledge and not specific lens knowledge.

The Biogon F2 you mention above, is not sharp at the edges or corners until maybe F5.6. The F2.8 Biogon you had is supposed to be sharper. Sharper still is the Zeiss 35mm F1.4 Distagon, The Leica Lux ASPH FLE, the 35 APO from Voigtlander and Leica. Other than the last two lenses mentioned, every single 35 on the market will be soft in the corners and edges wide open, to varying degrees.

It is definitely not your leica. If you want a lens that doesnt break the bank and is razor sharp everywhere at all apertures, you need to get the Voigtlander 35mm F2 APO Lanthar, or try and find another 35 F2.8 Zeiss Biogon. 

I tried a Biogon 2.8 (what you have) and my copy was also not sharp in the corners wide open.

60mp FF sensors pull even the best lenses to bits.

[lct]

Aside from very rare lenses, none is as sharp at corners as in the center of the frame, especially at full aperture. MTF graphs are self explanatory.