Any love for the lowly 35 Summaron?

[colint544]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Stumbled on a Red Dot Forum youTube video from four years ago - a discussion on 35mm lenses. The two presenters had every type of Leica M 35mm lens on the table in front of them. The video is two hours long. I hadn't time for that, but scrolled along to see what they thought of the 35 Summaron.

They waxed lyrical about the FLE, the various pre-asphericals, the Summicrons - especially the eight element - the special editions, and then went to questions from viewers. One of the viewers asked why they hadn't mentioned the Summaron. One presenter rummaged through the collection, and held up a Summaron 2.8, but said it wasn't a lens he could get excited about. He said it wasn't good on digital, could maybe be 'fun on an M3'. Fine if you want something 'finicky, and the lowest contrast Leica lens. Mushy and unusable for the most part'.

Seemed a bit harsh. I have a 35 Summaron 2.8, and I think it's a gem of a lens. Handles brilliantly, and sharp at all apertures. Lovely tonality. Beautifully built. I've been surprised how well it performs on my M11 and M9M. 

Few pictures from the M9M and Summaron 2.8. Anyone else like this lens, or is it just me?

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!

[Advertisement]

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

[Smudgerer]

22 minutes ago, colint544 said:

Stumbled on a Red Dot Forum youTube video from four years ago - a discussion on 35mm lenses. The two presenters had every type of Leica M 35mm lens on the table in front of them. The video is two hours long. I hadn't time for that, but scrolled along to see what they thought of the 35 Summaron.

They waxed lyrical about the FLE, the various pre-asphericals, the Summicrons - especially the eight element - the special editions, and then went to questions from viewers. One of the viewers asked why they hadn't mentioned the Summaron. One presenter rummaged through the collection, and held up a Summaron 2.8, but said it wasn't a lens he could get excited about. He said it wasn't good on digital, could maybe be 'fun on an M3'. Fine if you want something 'finicky, and the lowest contrast Leica lens. Mushy and unusable for the most part'.

Seemed a bit harsh. I have a 35 Summaron 2.8, and I think it's a gem of a lens. Handles brilliantly, and sharp at all apertures. Lovely tonality. Beautifully built. I've been surprised how well it performs on my M11 and M9M. 

Few pictures from the M9M and Summaron 2.8. Anyone else like this lens, or is it just me?

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!

No Colin, its not "you" at all. It probably didn't have enough "re-sale or retail" value for the folks at Red Dot, so why would they mention it?

It's a gem.

I had, then sadly lost, this lens and dammit Colin you've just reminded me to look for a replacement, thanks a lot!

Cheers........

 

[colint544]

5 minutes ago, Smudgerer said:

No Colin, its not "you" at all. It probably didn't have enough "re-sale or retail" value for the folks at Red Dot, so why would they mention it?

It's a gem.

I had, then sadly lost, this lens and dammit Colin you've just reminded me to look for a replacement, thanks a lot!

Cheers........

 

Haha, yes - it did cross my mind that perhaps they were cynically writing off the Summaron to sell more profitable lenses. If it's any consolation, I'm on my second copy of the Summaron. Had one, sold it, missed it, bought another one.

[roydonian]

I inherited a 35mm Summaron from my father 50 years ago. Although I subsequently purchased a 35mm Summilux so that I could take photographs of tomb interiors in Egypt (back in more enlightened days when this was permitted), the Summaron remains my favourite in this focal length. Last year I made my first visit to Athens since the early 1980s, and the Summaron was  near-permanently on my camera.     

[colint544]

2 minutes ago, roydonian said:

I inherited a 35mm Summaron from my father 50 years ago. Although I subsequently purchased a 35mm Summilux so that I could take photographs of tomb interiors in Egypt (back in more enlightened days when this was permitted), the Summaron remains my favourite in this focal length. Last year I made my first visit to Athens since the early 1980s, and the Summaron was  near-permanently on my camera.     

It's just the perfect size and weight for an M.

[roydonian]

True - and it is from an era when the focussing tab was an integral part of the focussing ring and not just a piece of plastic.

 

 

[Mute-on]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

My first two Leica 35mm lenses were 35/2.8 Summarons (M2 non-goggled type), acquired around 20 years ago. I had them both fully overhauled at Kanto Camera in 2019. I adore them both, and have no other Leica M 35mm lenses. As much as I’d like to try a modern Leica 35mm lens (Summicron or Summilux), I really don’t feel I’m missing out on anything on film or my M262.

Mechanically, they have no equal, other than the 8 element Summicron. A wonderful lens to handle and use. 

[Ecar]

Why "lowly"? Sure, compared to the 8e Summicron it's one stop slower and its construction feels slightly lighter, but it's an excellent lens in its own right. And so is the (even slower) Summaron 35/3.5 btw. Prices of the f/2.8 seem to have been going up lately. Perhaps sufficiently so that it could justify its inclusion in their next video...

A couple of pictures (already posted years ago on the forum), 1st with the 35/2.8 on the M9 and 2nd with the 35/3.5 on the M9M

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!

 

[Smudgerer]

49 minutes ago, colint544 said:

Haha, yes - it did cross my mind that perhaps they were cynically writing off the Summaron to sell more profitable lenses. If it's any consolation, I'm on my second copy of the Summaron. Had one, sold it, missed it, bought another one.

I was going to add Colin that the Summaron 35 is a perfect match on the M9M as you show in the two images above, my lens went walk-about when I still had my M9M with me, ( the M9M is on a sort of permanent "loan" to a friend in SA ), so I can still see that in the images made back then with the M9M and the Summaron.........On film of course the lens is lovely, that's what it was made for, I'm not sure if that "magic" would be there with the newer Monochrom sensors.

[colint544]

17 minutes ago, Mute-on said:

My first two Leica 35mm lenses were 35/2.8 Summarons (M2 non-goggled type), acquired around 20 years ago. I had them both fully overhauled at Kanto Camera in 2019. I adore them both, and have no other Leica M 35mm lenses. As much as I’d like to try a modern Leica 35mm lens (Summicron or Summilux), I really don’t feel I’m missing out on anything on film or my M262.

Mechanically, they have no equal, other than the 8 element Summicron. A wonderful lens to handle and use. 

Yes, the Summaron 2.8 is built to the same standard as the eight element - like a bank vault. 

[colint544]

8 minutes ago, Ecar said:

Why "lowly"? Sure, compared to the 8e Summicron it's one stop slower and its construction feels slightly lighter, but it's an excellent lens in its own right. And so is the (even slower) Summaron 35/3.5 btw. Prices of the f/2.8 seem to have been going up lately. Perhaps sufficiently so that it could justify its inclusion in their next video...

A couple of pictures (already posted years ago on the forum), 1st with the 35/2.8 on the M9 and 2nd with the 35/3.5 on the M9M

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!

 

Really lovely tones there. The Summaron is anything but lowly - I would never sell mine. That thread heading is just having a gentle dig at the guy in the video who is so disparaging of Summarons.

[pippy]

I 'only' have the f3.5 Summaron (a 1954 version in M mount) and love how it renders; especially when used with the M Monochrom.

These lenses come from a time when Leitz were doing everything to the highest standard. Build-quality is absolutely second to none. Handling is perfect. Size is perfect. It even takes 'regular' 39mm filters unlike the 1966-1995 (30 years!) Summilux lenses which require Series VII filters used in conjunction with their dedicated hood...

I've had mine since 1980 when I bought my M2 and it remained my only 35mm until November 2021. It did benefit from a good CLA-ing a few years back and it once more performs as good as it would have done when it left Wetzlar some 70 years ago.

As it happens I was out using it just a fortnight ago and had posted one of the day's snaps in a current thread on Monday so I may as well post it here as well. The camera was the Monochrom and there was a Leitz Red Filter on the lens;

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!

Philip.

[colint544]

10 minutes ago, Smudgerer said:

I was going to add Colin that the Summaron 35 is a perfect match on the M9M as you show in the two images above, my lens went walk-about when I still had my M9M with me, ( the M9M is on a sort of permanent "loan" to a friend in SA ), so I can still see that in the images made back then with the M9M and the Summaron.........On film of course the lens is lovely, that's what it was made for, I'm not sure if that "magic" would be there with the newer Monochrom sensors.

I think you're onto something. The Summaron has a gorgeous rendering on film. With digital, I've only tried it on the M9M and M11. The slightly lower contrast, I think, helps on the modern, contrasty sensor of the M11. And, for that matter, the M9M. Might be a different story on something like an M11M.

[pippy]

Just for fun here's another snap (posted in April so still on the desktop) taken with the Summaron / Yellow Filter on the M2 way back in around 1994. Collonades and Walkway, St Peter's, Rome;

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!

These days for 35mm stuff I usually use a '74 Summilux with the M-D Typ-262 but with the Monochrom I still prefer to shoot with the Summaron.

Philip.

Edited September 4, 2024 by pippy

[colint544]

5 minutes ago, pippy said:

I 'only' have the f3.5 Summaron (a 1954 version in M mount) and love how it renders; especially when used with the M Monochrom.

These lenses come from a time when Leitz were doing everything to the highest standard. Build-quality is absolutely second to none. Handling is perfect. Size is perfect. It even takes 'regular' 39mm filters unlike the 1966-1995 (30 years!) Summilux lenses which require Series VII filters used in conjunction with their dedicated hood...

I've had mine since 1980 when I bought my M2 and it remained my only 35mm until November 2021. It did benefit from a good CLA-ing a few years back and it once more performs as good as it would have done when it left Wetzlar some 70 years ago.

As it happens I was out using it just a fortnight ago and had posted one of the day's snaps in a current thread on Monday so I may as well post it here as well. The camera was the Monochrom and there was a Leitz Red Filter on the lens;

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!

Philip.

Beautiful, and a great advert for the Summaron 3.5. 60+ years ago, I guess it would have been hard to imagine the lens being useful so far into the future, and on a technology unknown at the time.

[wizard]

I have inherited a 3.5/35mm LTM Summaron from my father, and have later bought a 2.8/35mm Summaron LTM for my IIIg. While both are lovely lenses, my 2.8/35 is optically siginificantly better than the 3.5/35, so good in fact that it is almost impossible for me to tell the results apart from those of my goggled Summicron 35mm 8-element, which sits on my M3. Haven't tried both lenses on digital yet, but will do so soon and expect them to perform satisfactorily at least.

Edited September 4, 2024 by wizard

[spydrxx]

I began Leica life many years ago with a Summaron 35/2.8 whic served me well. Somewhere in the 1990s I got the idea that a more modern rendering was what I wanted and sold it for a 35 Summicron. It was just too much, but by the time I realized it, prices on the Summaron had shot up. After careful consideration I picked up a 35/3.5 Summaron and have been quite happy with it both on film and digital. Part of my decision was to be able to use it on my recently acquired Barnacks as well, and now I'm happy as a clam.

[colint544]

18 minutes ago, wizard said:

I have inherited a 3.5/35mm LTM Summaron from my father, and have later bought a 2.8/35mm Summaron LTM for my IIIg. While both are lovely lenses, my 2.8/35 is optically siginificantly better than the 3.5/35, so good in fact that it is almost impossible for me to tell the results apart from those of my goggled Summicron 35mm 8-element, which sits on my M3. Haven't tried both lenses on digital yet, but will do so soon and expect them to perform satisfactorily at least.

I had an eight element a long time ago, and used it on my M6 and M9. Like you, I can't really distinguish between the quality of images from those pictures and the ones from the Summaron.

I'd say they were both slightly lower contrast than you get with modern aspherical lenses, but still exceptionally sharp. With digital, you can always nudge the contrast up if required. Much harder to reduce it in a contrasty image.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[colint544]

8 minutes ago, spydrxx said:

I began Leica life many years ago with a Summaron 35/2.8 whic served me well. Somewhere in the 1990s I got the idea that a more modern rendering was what I wanted and sold it for a 35 Summicron. It was just too much, but by the time I realized it, prices on the Summaron had shot up. After careful consideration I picked up a 35/3.5 Summaron and have been quite happy with it both on film and digital. Part of my decision was to be able to use it on my recently acquired Barnacks as well, and now I'm happy as a clam.

Prices for Summarons are definitely creeping up.

[colint544]

FWIW, an image taken on an M11 and the 35 Summaron 2.8.

I find there's a touch less of that biting contrast you can get with, say, the 35 Summilux FLE.

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!