Summicron 35 8 Elements V1 or Summaron 35 f2.8, what differs

[luisrq]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Summicron 35 M V1 and Summaron 35

[pippy]

Maximum aperture?

P.

Edited September 12, 2024 by pippy

[a.noctilux]

Same same ...

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

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

Same body and almost same rendering from 2.8 onward.

I use the two.

As Philip wrote,

f/2.8 Summaron and f/2.0 Summicron

[Jean-Michel]

If anyone want a 35 version  1, there are two available from https://www.camtecphoto.com/fr/collections/leica/demos-doccasion-etc

I had a goggled version that I let go, that was not the best decision I ever made!

[Pika898]

Price.

[lct]

Is there any point in acquiring a Summaron 35/2.8 if you already have a Summicron 35/2 v1? Just curious.

[shirubadanieru]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Rendering wide open? 

The summaron is quite reliable actually even wide open, which also means it doesn’t have the vintage-ness / flare / bokeh of the cron v1 wide open. For some people, who do not wish that look, the summaron is a better option since it’s cheaper and you get good reliable results from 2.8. But if you want the f2 look that you get from the cron, which to me, is amazing, then, the summaron will not give you that. 

[lct]

2 hours ago, shirubadanieru said:

Rendering wide open? 

The summaron is quite reliable actually even wide open, which also means it doesn’t have the vintage-ness / flare / bokeh of the cron v1 wide open. For some people, who do not wish that look, the summaron is a better option since it’s cheaper and you get good reliable results from 2.8. But if you want the f2 look that you get from the cron, which to me, is amazing, then, the summaron will not give you that. 

Thank you. Would you say the rendering is similar at f/2.8?

[shirubadanieru]

From what I remember, yes, but to be honest it’s been about 5 years or more since I last used the summaron, so I wouldn’t be able to compare directly. All I remember is that I get much more enjoyment using the summicron (that’s why I kept it), because wide open offers a unique rendering which I really like, and from f2.8 onwards is as sharp as any other modern 35mm.

[Ecar]

Both lenses were handy, so...

Totally unscientific, all handheld on the M11, but (as expected) different optical formulae produce different results, esp. in the oof areas.

First the 8e @ f/2, then @ f/2.8, then the Summaron @ f/2.8

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 September 13, 2024 by Ecar

[shirubadanieru]

The bokeh looks quite different, and also lens conditions can impact the rendering, as it seems the summaron is quite more contrasty. One thing I remember to be true & that theses shots are a good representation of is that the Summicron 8e bokeh always looks like it’s shot at a wider aperture than it actually was (ie. when I shoot it at f2 and I look at the OOF areas I feel like it’s as if it was shot at f1.4, and same if you compare here the f2.8 shots, the summicron OOF areas look as if it is a f2 shot whereas the summaron OOF is what you’d expect from a f2.8 shot. Not sure if I’m putting my point across clearly but..; p

Edited September 13, 2024 by shirubadanieru

[Ecar]

Your point is pretty clear to me. The Summaron does indeed show more contrast - possibly also due to a simpler formula, with less air-to-glass surfaces - although changing light may have played a part in the examples I posted. I agree that the Summicron seems to render somewhat faster than the actual aperture used, but neither of them is a "king of bokeh"... particularly in high-contrast areas, such as foliage or specular highlights. Their strong suit, especially the Summicron's, is tonal transitions, not oof rendering or sharpness. Both lenses are otherwise in great condition and were CLA'd not too long ago. Unlike the Summaron, the Summicron had a (Leica) UV filter on, but I wouldn't expect it to have an impact here.

[lct]

Summarons and Elmars were somewhat the poor man's Summicrons in the past like Tessars compared to Planars at Zeiss. Common point i seem to retrieve on the pics above is more contrast with less resolution although the web is not the best judge to check that.

[Erato]

42 minutes ago, lct said:

Summarons and Elmars were somewhat the poor man's Summicrons in the past like Tessars compared to Planars at Zeiss. Common point i seem to retrieve on the pics above is more contrast with less resolution although the web is not the best judge to check that.

I'd suggests "budget-friendly/less appreciated/entry level lens" instead of "poor man's lens".

[lct]

2 hours ago, Erato said:

I'd suggests "budget-friendly/less appreciated/entry level lens" instead of "poor man's lens".

My apologies if it is bad English but i was just referring to the Poor man's idiom as defined by this dictionary.

[Pyrogallol]

In the world of Leica "poor" is relative.

[lct]

3 minutes ago, Pyrogallol said:

In the world of Leica "poor" is relative.

In the world of watches too 😉