Leica Classic Series Lenses: How do you rank them?

[shirubadanieru]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi everyone, now that Leica has released the Summaron 28mm, Thambar 90mm, Noctilux 50mm f1.2, and Steel Rim Summilux 35mm reissues (maybe more coming soon?), I wonder how people like them VS the original (or put it another way, how well did you think Leica re-issued these lenses and stayed true to their essence).

From what I heard from peers, and my own experience with the lenses this is a quick summary of how I perceive them, but wanted to hear other’s thoughts too if you don’t mind sharing.

Summaron 28mm:

• The first, and probably still the most true-to-essence of the original lens reissue? Have only heard positive comments about this lens. 
• Personally I never tried the original, but loved the reissue. For those who had both, do you feel it’s a good reissue? Or do you still prefer the original?

Thambar 90mm:

• Ok, maybe this one is the most true-to-essence to the original? I have owned both, and I do think that the reissue captures the essence of the original lens beautifully. I could also sense the care and time Leica put into releasing this version.
• While a very limited lens in usage, it is also one of the most unique ever made. It seems that those who love it, really love it. That being said, it’s potentially the least popular reissue simply due to the limited applications it has VS the other reissues.

Noctilux 50mm:

• My personal experience is a bit mixed with this one, but also never had the chance to try the original. How would you compare them? While I liked the rendering wide open I felt that due to weight/size/distortion, I was better suited with a pre-ASPH Summilux 50mm.
• That being said, in general I’ve heard good things about this one from those who use it, but also heard that it is a bit different from the original. Seems LLL has potentially made a more true-to-essence remake just recently? 

Summilux 35mm:

• This was my most anticipated reissue, but also the one that left me the most disappointed. While the lens is still beautiful, it failed to capture the essence of the original both from a body design perspective, and rendering. Built quality, packaging, hoods, were all below par when compared to the original. Leica didn’t seem to care too much about this reissue to be honest when compared to what they did with the previous lenses.
• I still love the rendering of this reissue, and the compact body design, but only when viewed in isolation. When you put it next to the original, the original looks way better wide open (the glow is not as smudged), and the build quality of both the lens and hood is a step above the remake. 
• I see that some people do love this remake, while others hate it. 

 

If anyone would like to share their thoughts / experiences, please go ahead : ) And as a bonus, what is the next reissue you’d like Leica to release? For me it would be:

- Summicron 35mm 8 elements (LLL already showed them the way to do it right)

- Summilux 50mm Chrome

- Summar 50mm rigid

- Elmar 50mm or 35mm f3.5

Edited August 23, 2024 by shirubadanieru

[Advertisement]

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

[fil-m]

Thank you! You described them so well, that there is not much to add on my side.

Indeed, in my view and experience, both the Summaron and Thambar are exceptional reproductions, beautifully made and packaged. They are both unique lenses, the first being so compact, practical as a "point & shoot" street lens and with a specific signature (despite the 5.6 aperture), while the second is a quite unique "artistic" lens though targeting a very specific audience.

The Noctilux and Summilux are not thorough reproductions (unlike the Summaron and Thambar):

• The Noctilux 50/1.2 is a bit less subtle in terms of signature and more contrasty than the original - which I do not own; I only spent a few hours with it making some shots. It is well made. Still, I kept the reissue as it is an amazing lens on its own, compact enough for the large aperture, having a unique rendering, and progressively becoming sharp stopped down. If only it was capable of focusing down to 0.7m... I tend to use it more way often than the Noctilux 50/1 due to the more compact size and easier handling.
• The Summilux 35 reissue hasmuch more glow than the original and is more contrasty. I compare it to my first batch v2 which supposedly share the same glass as the original steel rim (serial number starting with 216). I sold the reissue after a few months because I prefer to use my v2 and I don't like redundancy or keeping lenses unused. Paradoxically, I still highly recommend the Summilux 35 reissue because on its own, it is quite unique: small, compact, beautiful rendering at 1.7-2, sharp enough when stopped down, amazing rainbow effect :). At 1.4 it is still capable of making beautiful shots though under some conditions the glow could become excessive (when for example the subject is exposed to a strong light source). Assuming I did not have my early v2 that I acquired in the past at a low price, I'd get the reissue without hesitation as it is still way cheaper than the original and still good on its own. 

 

[Anbaric]

They should do the (collapsible) Summitar next, complete with that massive hood contraption. But please just make it E39 this time.

[Mute-on]

Since dropping the Summarit 2.5/2.4 line, I would love to see the 2.8 designs brought back. Specially the 35/2.8 Summaron. The discontinued (in 2007) 50/2.8 Elmar-M should be brought back, too.

The most modern designs (APO Summicrons) are only increasing in size and weight. This is leaving the essence of Leica’s heritage; small and light, behind.  For those for whom lens size and character are more important than outright optical perfection, these reissues are endlessly appealing.

[shirubadanieru]

1 hour ago, Anbaric said:

They should do the (collapsible) Summitar next, complete with that massive hood contraption. But please just make it E39 this time.

Ahah that hood is indeed iconic! And yes Leica please do not change the original size of the lens…seriously. 

[shirubadanieru]

3 hours ago, fil-m said:

Thank you! You described them so well, that there is not much to add on my side.

Indeed, in my view and experience, both the Summaron and Thambar are exceptional reproductions, beautifully made and packaged. They are both unique lenses, the first being so compact, practical as a "point & shoot" street lens and with a specific signature (despite the 5.6 aperture), while the second is a quite unique "artistic" lens though targeting a very specific audience.

The Noctilux and Summilux are not thorough reproductions (unlike the Summaron and Thambar):

• The Noctilux 50/1.2 is a bit less subtle in terms of signature and more contrasty than the original - which I do not own; I only spent a few hours with it making some shots. It is well made. Still, I kept the reissue as it is an amazing lens on its own, compact enough for the large aperture, having a unique rendering, and progressively becoming sharp stopped down. If only it was capable of focusing down to 0.7m... I tend to use it more way often than the Noctilux 50/1 due to the more compact size and easier handling.
• The Summilux 35 reissue hasmuch more glow than the original and is more contrasty. I compare it to my first batch v2 which supposedly share the same glass as the original steel rim (serial number starting with 216). I sold the reissue after a few months because I prefer to use my v2 and I don't like redundancy or keeping lenses unused. Paradoxically, I still highly recommend the Summilux 35 reissue because on its own, it is quite unique: small, compact, beautiful rendering at 1.7-2, sharp enough when stopped down, amazing rainbow effect :). At 1.4 it is still capable of making beautiful shots though under some conditions the glow could become excessive (when for example the subject is exposed to a strong light source). Assuming I did not have my early v2 that I acquired in the past at a low price, I'd get the reissue without hesitation as it is still way cheaper than the original and still good on its own. 

 

Thank you that’s a great addition to my comments. I also sold the reissue within one month. But these days I feel more accepting of it as a good option to the always increasing price of the original. I just look at it not as a reissue of the original, but a pre-ASPH lux v3 that can use filters.

[shirubadanieru]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

42 minutes ago, Mute-on said:

Since dropping the Summarit 2.5/2.4 line, I would love to see the 2.8 designs brought back. Specially the 35/2.8 Summaron. The discontinued (in 2007) 50/2.8 Elmar-M should be brought back, too.

The most modern designs (APO Summicrons) are only increasing in size and weight. This is leaving the essence of Leica’s heritage; small and light, behind.  For those for whom lens size and character are more important than outright optical perfection, these reissues are endlessly appealing.

Oh yes the summaron 35mm f2.8 is a lovely one as well; there were at times rumors that Leica would reissue it but it never happened. 

I agree…I refuse to mount lenses that weight more than 250g on my Leica tbh, and that is also why 35mm is, to me, the perfect focal length for a Leica (small and light lenses…although even the new Summicron and Summilux 35mm are too long, heavy and fat). 

[shirubadanieru]

26 minutes ago, Al Brown said:

Most people were most disappointed with Steel Rim re-edition. It was big shoes to put themselves into for Leica.
The absolute re-issue winner is LLL as OP wrote with the 8-element. Amazing and fantastic.

And what is coming next is most likely something from @shirubadanieru list.

Even if the optics were more similar to the v2 than the SR, they could’ve at least kept the body size/shape huh..and put more care into it not like an an asterisk at the end of the M6 release, with a hood that doesn’t even fit ahah

LLL remakes are indeed amazing, I wonder if anyone here has used the Noctilux f1.2 remake already. 

[grahamc]

49 minutes ago, shirubadanieru said:

Even if the optics were more similar to the v2 than the SR, they could’ve at least kept the body size/shape huh.. 

Yep... image shows quite well how different they are once you look past the obvious same finish colour/font colours . 

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!

[rsh]

I use the 50 Noctilux and 35 Summilux ReIssues almost exclusively with the M10-M.  To me, both are lovely lenses.

[shirubadanieru]

8 hours ago, rsh said:

I use the 50 Noctilux and 35 Summilux ReIssues almost exclusively with the M10-M.  To me, both are lovely lenses.

Yeah like I mentioned in isolation, the 35mm Summilux reissue is a good lens for people who don’t want the super sharp harsh rendering (+ larger size) of ASPH lenses. It’s great you can buy such a lens new with warranty from Leica.
 

While I don’t have experience with the original Noctilux (if someone has please share), the original steel rim (& the v2 Germany, especially titanium) are just a better lens than the reissue both in terms of rendering and build (of course all of this is subjective to each person’s preferences). To me the biggest disappointment was Leica calling this lens a reissue and then not putting the care into it (as it did with the other reissues), and creating a lesser product than the original (you’d expect with all the technological advances in manufacturing that it would be the opposite), and changed the size and usability for the worse (for example, the original allows using filters and the hood at the same time whereas the new one it’s either a hood or a filter, or a rounded hood (which was never the hood made for the SR) screwed on top of a filter). If they were going to not do an exact replica then at east thy could’ve improved it where it mattered by making it focus to 0.7m  

With all this being said, I’d still much rather buy this lens over any ASPH lens made from Leica today, because like you said, it still is a lovely lens especially when compared to the modern designs.

Edited August 24, 2024 by shirubadanieru

[rsh]

Neither lens is a perfect replica but the images are to my liking.  At 71, I am glad I am still here and try not to complain too much except for the upcoming election where I am tempted to write in the late Lewis Grizzard for President and the late Col Bruce Hampton for Vice President.

[Alberti]

Quote

Please  -  share your thoughts / experiences, please go ahead . And as a bonus, what is the next reissue you’d like Leica to release?

Like many say, it is not about sharpness. It is about rendering. There is something to the Leica-look. Several designers catered to a style of shooting – the rangefinder experience. These designers are cherished. And hence their designs are candidates for re-editions.

- Well, Mandler is the bokeh specialist so to say, he already has his legacy (35 Lux-II) + I suggest also 35mm Summicron-IV; 

- Helmut Marx is the aspherical genius; he has his 50 Noctilux/1.2 + what else, I saw he also had a . .  Summaron-M 35 mm f/2.8 Asph? I read he also designed an Elmar 50mm 3.5 Asph. 

- Max Berek does not have his legacy yet ; his designs of the 50mm 3.5 Elmar and 50/Summar/Summarit merit attention;

+ But 'other hidden gems in the Leica Lens Lineup' exist, such as designed by teams that for instance include Walter Watz. One can think of the Summicron-C 40mm F2. A true gem which to me renders like the Cron-IV. Next beauty is the 28mm Minolta (a Leitz design..., Desch?) 

So there is enough in the drawers of the main castle in Solms. Looks straight forward.

Still some remarks. As mentioned by some, the re-issue engineers keep true to most aspects of design of the original lens, but increase the contrast through new coatings. 

My Summaron-M 28mm has such good coatings, that at the back it looks as if  there is no lens . . . For the rest - The hood of the Summaron-M 28mm is as heavy as some other 28mm lenses on their own 😉. Ergonomically, the shade is a crazy thing to mount, & a dustcap is then not possible to mount. So - I never use it the shade.  I have an old single coated similar lens with flush colours but that does stay better into the corners in sharpness and lighting. The re-designers could have improved such aspects subtly; they already changed some small aspects of the lens too, so why not go a step further? Anyway, the colour rendition is modernly great. 

A good candidate for a re-issue  is the ELC Summicron 35mm version IV. I was so stupid to trade it in. The version IV has so much extra charm compared to my 8E (which I might add also renders super in most aspects but the IV'th space is nicer, the theatre so to say, the presentation of a scene). Note that by increasing the contrast as is de rigeur nowadays, the personality might dissappear. I have the impression the ELC is subtly different from the later Wetzlar.  

The Elmar 50mm 3.5 LTM, I have 1956/S. This Berek design is a very interesting lens. My lens is soft and but also sharp close-up; but it is also the first lens in which I see that there is a difference in handling vertical and horizontal lines - on a brick wall some cement border/lines get vague in one direction, while the lines in the other direction stay rather good. A re-issue with such problems is not interesting at all.  As the marketeers tend to say 'exact copy' and stick to that to the ridiculous it would not be interesting. The four element (Tessar) 50mm f/3.5 had several versions from other brands, some were APO, such as in an Alpa rangefinder mount. So an improved quality is possible. Marco Cavina wrote about dismissed design evolutions by Helmut Marx who drew an Asph version that was impossible to make cheap. So: get them out of the archives, they can now be made easily. But - a 'formal re-edition request' would aim for a version with collapsible head, but why not a rigid version? And then, the OP has written about the earliest concoctions of the Elmar lens with glass types that were only available in the first batches (Cavina: "Schott supplied Leitz with a glass that was not perfectly identical to the previous Goertz one, thus requesting a revision of the scheme". Why not review those very intricate aspects? The market might just jump at that: a rigid first version . . . or an original Marx redesigned-Elmar, a rigid one being Asph APO, while retaining some character. An Elmar AA. Haha.

I borrowed a 50mm Summar, and yes I liked its rendering. The pastel is what I remember, and that of course is on a conflict course with modern high-contrast coatings. The pastel colours have a strange aspect too - it allows you to see the shadows. Maybe the later 50mm Summitar rigid by Berek again, would be interesting even more. I tend to interpret that design as being a re-development of the rare Tropen-Summar. 

The old lenses on the market (on the shelves, out of the closets, often retrieved from leather pouches) have their flaws: haze, fungus, separation, cleaning marks. Still they have admirers.

Leica redesigns are True to the Original in extremo like sticking to a screw mount while that is not necessary at all - but a new adagium of Leica also seems to be that 'if it is heavy, people spend more'. So we get extra heavy brass versions. But for many lighter lenses are a joy to use. I like that Lighter Lens Lab. I had a 50mm Lux-A Black Chrome for some time. Didn't like it. It fell out of my hands. 

Secretly things are traded off in re-editions. Like shirubadanieru and I also said about a filter/hood problem (35mm Summilux reissue; 28mm Summaron-M. Or the change in rendition due to more colour contrast (in itself nice that is). Still these aspects are acceptable against the alternative: fog, haze. Scratches. Separation. Fungus. Oil. Mis-alignments from dropping. Etc. Etc.

 

Edited August 24, 2024 by Alberti

[costa43]

Steel rim - This is the only one of the classic line I have tried and also the most disappointing for me due to the expectations I had. I much prefer the original pre asph. This re-issue is too sharp stop down for my liking and at wider apertures it just doesn’t have the same look imo. The glow is not as organic and the sharpness that exists underneath all the coma on the original is not there on this one.
Thambar - a bit too much for my liking but I’ve seen some amazing landscapes with this lens from others who know how to get the most out of it. 
Noctilux - I’d like to try this lens but cannot justify the size and cost over my pre asph v3. I’ve always been more enamoured by images I’ve seen with the Noctilux f1

Summaron - this is the one I want to get my hands on the most. I’d like to try it on film. The rendering looks lovely. 

I think I read a rumour somewhere that the next re-issue will be the v1 Summilux. Personally, I would be keener on the 8 element but like mentioned, LLL have nailed that one, so it would have to be something really special. 

[evikne]

48 minutes ago, costa43 said:

I think I read a rumour somewhere that the next re-issue will be the v1 Summilux. 

I have also heard it will focus to 0.7m, unlike the original. Maybe they have learned this time.

[pippy]

On 8/23/2024 at 7:28 AM, shirubadanieru said:

...Summar 50mm rigid...

This would be a very interesting subject for re-creation / re-issue.

From Leica's point of view not only users but collectors would be keen on having such a lens and Leica could also milk their target-market by offering the lens in Nickel, Silver-Chrome, Black-Chrome and Black-Paint versions! Phew!!!

I know that there was a respectful 'nod' towards the Rigid Summar in the shape (literally) of Voigtlander's Limited Edition 50mm f2.0 Heliar Rigid from several years back but that lens was a fair bit larger than 'the original' so it would be nice if Leica brought out a version which faithfully captures the dimensions of the Real-Deal.

Philip.

 

[a.noctilux]

13 minutes ago, evikne said:

I have also heard it will focus to 0.7m, unlike the original. Maybe they have learned this time.

The long to short focus then.

I know that the 0.7m mini focus would be nice but precise focus would be lost.

Like the former 1.4/50 that I have and the two are quite different in real life use

old E43 1m then new E46 70cm compare the focus throw

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!

[costa43]

51 minutes ago, evikne said:

I have also heard it will focus to 0.7m, unlike the original. Maybe they have learned this time.

Could be a very interesting release. The minimum focus was a big miss by Leica on the steel rim reissue. It’s the one thing that I miss from the pre asph I have. My copy goes down to around 0.85 and it’s limiting at times. 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[RexGig0]

My ability to contribute is extremely limited, because the Sixties-vintage Summilux-M 35 I handled and test-shot was a Version II, but, I very much prefer the handling qualities of the Re-Issue/Classic. A compact lens can be nice, on occasion, but on the size scale, there is a point of diminishing returns. I like to be able to grip a lens barrel, when moving about. In my past, I was conditioned to keep my right hand free, in order to be able to quickly grasp a piece of emergency equipment. Presently, my right hand is not aging well. So, my reason for preferring the Re-Issue is practical, not optical, so, I am actually glad that the Re-Issue did not faithfully reproduce the size of the original. 35mm is my utility/scrambling-about focal length. I do wish that the Re-Issue could focus closer than it does.

I own a Thambar-M 90mm Classic, but am unlikely to ever see a 9cm classic. I own a vintage 28mm Summaron, but have yet to handle or see a Summaron-M. I am unlikely to ever have an opportunity to see or handle any version of the f/1.2 Noctilux. (We live in the southern tier of “fly-over country,” in the USA; not much Leica “culture” down here.)

 

 

 

Edited August 24, 2024 by RexGig0

[a.noctilux]

I'm happy user of Summaron-M 5.6/28mm.

The material choice is top, only E34 filter size is odd for me.

I'd prefer old style A36 size.

Happily the rendering of new lens is much more pleasant than the old LTM 2.8cm a friend loaned me.