28mm: Elmarit-M f/2.8 v4 E46 (11809) & Summicron-M f/2 ASPH (11604)

[F456]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

First, to set some parameters for the question near the bottom of this post:

-- just to stress that the f/2.8 lens in the title above is not an ASPH version, but the last of the previous non-aspherical ones and the first 28  to have the modern 46mm filter size.  And the f/2 lens in the title is the first Leica offering of that speed for a 28, released in c.2000.  Both look very similar cosmetically and both share the large plastic clip-on hood (code 12451). Off topic, though the hood is quite large and not universally popular I am happy with it: it's a lot smaller than many SLR combinations and in any case I use the Leica plastic 28mm finder as my most used bodies are an M3 and M4. Hence viewfinder blockage doesn't come into it — any more than fractionally anyway.

-- Second, my Leica use is restricted to film bodies (as above) and Ilford FP4 or HP5 b&w or Kodak Portra 160 / 400 (for general as much as portrait use — I use 50 or 90mm for portraits). So coding is irrelevant for purposes of this post, as are any references to earlier 28s v1-3 or any of the Elmarit ASPH versions.

-- Though in general I shoot much more with Leica 24mm and 35mm for street and people photography, especially in active situations, I do like 28mm for certain types of shot: hard to define what but mostly scenic with something dominant in foreground or fore- to mid-ground. 

-- When the v4 Elmarit first came out in the mid 90s (1996?) I used it from time to time, mainly outdoors, and was very impressed with it when I did.  Later I sold it for something else - another camera or something long forgotten, but eventually in the 2020 lockdown I ordered a mint condition secondhand Summicron ASPH, heavily influenced by the excellent photographs on Karl-Johan Vogelius's site taken with this lens. As in the title the example he used and the one that I bought were the first 28mm Summicron version made by Leica, as in the heading. I sold that eventually for an Elmar-M 24mm f/3.8 ASPH which will have to be prized from my cold dead hands, despite its slowish speed.

To get to the point, if anyone here has used both these two lenses in the post's title and has a view on differences between them (apart from the extra stop of the Summicron) I'd be interested. For the purposes of comparison the cost and difference in age are irrelevant. I know I could happily work with either, especially as the form factors are near-identical but I'd be very keen indeed to know what detectable differences there are, even if I never get to detect them myself in my use on film!  

By the way, another thing to ignore is future-proofing as I don't want to get into digital on M; I love the film experience and am happy to go Japanese for digital.  Film on M is wonderful therapy though!

 

Edited April 20 by F456

[adan]

Elmarit v.4 has more overall contrast (as opposed to optical edge contrast) than the Summicron v1. I found it to be a bit "hot" in contrasty sunlight - blown skins and inky impenetrable shadows in the same exposure.

Elmarit v.4 is a bit redder/warm in color rendition than the Summicron (or the larger v.3 Elmarit from the 1980s). Not signficant for B&W, but for color film (esp. slides) it can be hard to match (a different proportion of color transmissions, that is "toothpaste that cannot be put back in the tube" perfectly with post-processing).

For those reasons, I ended up with the Summicron over the v.4 Elmarit - on digital.

I used the Mandler/Canada v.3 Elmarit for years (film and digital) and that was my favorite - but at this point many are getting a bit long on the tooth, and starting to show their age sometimes in things like element separation or haze/flare.

Edited April 20 by adan

[JoshuaR]

I haven't used the pre-ASPH Elmarit, but as a devotée of the v1 ASPH Summicron, I'm stopping by to recommend the hood made by Squarehood. It's much smaller than the plastic one, looks amazing, and reduces the size of the lens substantially. The design helps with flare and offers some protection. I put it on the lens a while ago and will never take it off.

[F456]

5 hours ago, adan said:

Elmarit v.4 has more overall contrast (as opposed to optical edge contrast) than the Summicron v1. I found it to be a bit "hot" in contrasty sunlight - blown skins and inky impenetrable shadows in the same exposure.

Elmarit v.4 is a bit redder/warm in color rendition than the Summicron (or the larger v.3 Elmarit from the 1980s). Not signficant for B&W, but for color film (esp. slides) it can be hard to match (a different proportion of color transmissions, that is "toothpaste that cannot be put back in the tube" perfectly with post-processing).

For those reasons, I ended up with the Summicron over the v.4 Elmarit - on digital.

I used the Mandler/Canada v.3 Elmarit for years (film and digital) and that was my favorite - but at this point many are getting a bit long on the tooth, and starting to show their age sometimes in things like element separation or haze/flare.

Thanks for your experiences with the Elmarit v.4, Adan.  I will bear what you say in mind.  By the way I also used the 1980s' Mandler v.3 for a long time (while I was still very much a Leica new boy and still unfamiliar with everything lenswise apart from cheap zooms).  I liked it a lot and got (to my mind) great pictures with it but was seduced by the v.4 when that came out. Two of my favourite pictures were taken on Ilford HP5 with the v.4; I had them blown up, uncropped,  I don't seem to have taken more than a handful of colour pictures with that lens, looking back since my original post on this thread.

[F456]

5 hours ago, JoshuaR said:

I haven't used the pre-ASPH Elmarit, but as a devotée of the v1 ASPH Summicron, I'm stopping by to recommend the hood made by Squarehood. It's much smaller than the plastic one, looks amazing, and reduces the size of the lens substantially. The design helps with flare and offers some protection. I put it on the lens a while ago and will never take it off.

I have just looked at the Squarehood website. Yes, some very nice kit there; thanks for the tip.  I might consider once I've decided on which lens or whether to proceed at all.

Edited April 20 by F456
Squarehood, not Squarespace!

[vha]

As reading this more like “over the shoulder” its interesting to read about the difference of the V4, especially since ages ago i where curious about it, as well as reading great stuff of the v1 Cron.    Long time ago i had a year with only V3 Elmarit M and M6, 99% of film where kodak BW400CN and perhaps some ilford of sorts.  It was great,  and sometimes I still miss it, one carry everywhere kit and usable photos down to 1/15th of a second.

Tried the V3 Elmarit on M9M, and it did not feel the same,  could have been the copy or it did not match the “film” well
(especially since i treat digital as i did with film, you got to learn how it behaves in different situations,  and lenses it behaves well with) 

Thanks for insight.

[F456]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

2 hours ago, vha said:

As reading this more like “over the shoulder” its interesting to read about the difference of the V4, especially since ages ago i where curious about it, as well as reading great stuff of the v1 Cron.    Long time ago i had a year with only V3 Elmarit M and M6, 99% of film where kodak BW400CN and perhaps some ilford of sorts.  It was great,  and sometimes I still miss it, one carry everywhere kit and usable photos down to 1/15th of a second.

Tried the V3 Elmarit on M9M, and it did not feel the same,  could have been the copy or it did not match the “film” well
(especially since i treat digital as i did with film, you got to learn how it behaves in different situations,  and lenses it behaves well with) 

Thanks for insight.

In turn I'm interested in your comments as when I first tried Leica M digital (I bought 2 M8 cameras) I just couldn't get my 90mm late 1980s' Summicron to give me the focusing accuracy that I always had with it on the film cameras. Yet my extravagant purchase of the first 35mm f/1.4 ASPH version - not the limited edition double aspherical predecessor, I hasten to add! - focused perfectly at full aperture and seemed to show little of the notorious focus shift when stopped down a little way in the wider apertures. In the end I sold the M8s before they could develop coffee stains and suchlike!  I enjoyed them though, even if the shutter was a noisy R-series unit, which rather took away from the stealthy strengths of an M camera.

I tried the Kodak BW400CN, like you, and much preferred it to Ilford XP-1 and XP-2, though I still swear by Ilford for the traditional chemistry b&w films. Must post some pictures from FP4 and/or HP5 soon!

[F456]

Just to say that my Elmarit-M 2.8 / 28mm (v4 i.e. first E46 version) arrived today and in seemingly unused, new condition - even better than the seller's thorough photos suggest and at a very reasonable price, possibly partly a result of its being an uncoded lens. No drawback as I only shoot film with Leica . Another great buy from Schouten Select in NL.

As outdoor conditions today were favourable for the golden hour period an hour or two before sunset, I got straight out to take some hurried but carefully metered utilitarian shots of building exteriors, period doors and windows, street signs etc just as a check on the overall optical accuracy of the lens across most of the apertures. 

Despite 28mm not being one of my favourite focal lengths I am excited about this purchase as when the v4 first came out in c.1996 I was very pleased with the b&w outdoor and indoor shots I got with it (helped by the services of a much better printer than I could ever be).  This time I aim to give the lens a good taste of colour film too, almost certainly from the Kodak Portra range, pricey though it is these days.  As and when I have the chance and if I get any shots I am very happy with for content, light and composition I will post again.

I should add that though the v4 is larger than the Elmarit  ASPH versions that came out later it is still very petite compared with most, especially modern, SLR lenses — and even the plastic 12451 hood that tends to come in for internet criticism is by no means huge.  It does however take up v/f room but then again I don't find external finders a problem with wide angle lenses. 

[Mute-on]

Congratulations. I’ve always wanted to try a V4, and probably should have purchased one when they were far more affordable. I have the ASPH II and am pleased with it.

Try Ektar next to Portra 400 and 160. You will find decreasing saturation and colour depth in that order, the Portra 160 being the most ‘pastel’. Overexposing Portra only decreases saturation. Ektar seems to do best at box speed, but in good light. 
 

Enjoy!

Edited April 25 by Mute-on

[F456]

16 hours ago, Mute-on said:

Congratulations. I’ve always wanted to try a V4, and probably should have purchased one when they were far more affordable. I have the ASPH II and am pleased with it.

Try Ektar next to Portra 400 and 160. You will find decreasing saturation and colour depth in that order, the Portra 160 being the most ‘pastel’. Overexposing Portra only decreases saturation. Ektar seems to do best at box speed, but in good light. 
 

Enjoy!

I will certainly follow your tip and try Ektar. Last time I used that film it was available in 25 or 50 flavours (not sure which one of those) and I briefly tried the 1000 in a Contax T2 with some success, though I preferred the b&w T-Max 3200 when I needed fast film speed. Thank you for the tips about exposing Portra too. I love those two films, 160 and 400, but it's going to be interesting to add another string to the (rain)bow!

Incidentally, taking up your comment on the missed chance to buy a v.4, I was pleasantly surprised by the relatively low cost of this v.4 considering its superb condition — I can only assume that the jewel-like ASPH versions are more sought after and/or that the lack of 6 bit coding had a part to play. For me shooting film that has turned out to be an advantage! 

One other thing you may have known but wasn't obvious to me till today is that the grippable part of the aperture ring on the v.4 is much narrower than on the v.1 Summicron ASPH. And so a little harder to operate especially with the factory-supplied 12451 hood fitted, but as I shan't be using this for fast and furious shooting, again no problem.

 

Edited April 25 by F456
Added last §

[vha]

On 4/22/2025 at 11:22 PM, F456 said:

In turn I'm interested in your comments as when I first tried Leica M digital (I bought 2 M8 cameras) I just couldn't get my 90mm late 1980s' Summicron to give me the focusing accuracy that I always had with it on the film cameras. Yet my extravagant purchase of the first 35mm f/1.4 ASPH version - not the limited edition double aspherical predecessor, I hasten to add! - focused perfectly at full aperture and seemed to show little of the notorious focus shift when stopped down a little way in the wider apertures. In the end I sold the M8s before they could develop coffee stains and suchlike!  I enjoyed them though, even if the shutter was a noisy R-series unit, which rather took away from the stealthy strengths of an M camera.

I tried the Kodak BW400CN, like you, and much preferred it to Ilford XP-1 and XP-2, though I still swear by Ilford for the traditional chemistry b&w films. Must post some pictures from FP4 and/or HP5 soon!

I might be able to try my old v3 Elmarit-M again this summer, this time on the M10M, that would be interesting to see.

Especially since last time (and camera) i now use the 1.4 magnifier instead of the 1.25. Its kind of off topic in a way, bu  i find the digital Ms harder to focus than the M6,  it could also be that the photographer keeps getting older as well    Back to the topic,  I find the “film” in the M9M different to the M10M, it treats the highlights and shadows a bit different and that could perhaps change the feel of the V3?  Could it be the mid tones, or slightly better highlights?

Something felt better with BW400CN, but since its difficult to compare side by side now, it could be simply what  fujifilm calls colour memory, in this case tonality.  I felt that it did not look the same, but i might be some degree of incorrect.

Anyway, the 28mm sunmmicron stil tempts me, or a 28mm that would give me the right look

[F456]

On 5/1/2025 at 3:44 PM, vha said:

I might be able to try my old v3 Elmarit-M again this summer, this time on the M10M, that would be interesting to see.

Especially since last time (and camera) i now use the 1.4 magnifier instead of the 1.25. Its kind of off topic in a way, bu  i find the digital Ms harder to focus than the M6,  it could also be that the photographer keeps getting older as well    Back to the topic,  I find the “film” in the M9M different to the M10M, it treats the highlights and shadows a bit different and that could perhaps change the feel of the V3?  Could it be the mid tones, or slightly better highlights?

Something felt better with BW400CN, but since its difficult to compare side by side now, it could be simply what  fujifilm calls colour memory, in this case tonality.  I felt that it did not look the same, but i might be some degree of incorrect.

Anyway, the 28mm sunmmicron stil tempts me, or a 28mm that would give me the right look

I think your second paragraph says what I found when using my first and only digital M (the M8 in 2008). Which is why I only use the film M-system now and a different type of camera for digital. Add to that we are now over 15 years further down the line and, as you say, the photographer keeps getting older. Luckily now most of my film photography interest lies in the more scenic type of shot, where a more stopped down aperture is often best. I am not so much a wide open shooter now; my taste has changed and I appreciate automation for certain tasks such as sport or family pictures with animals and children. Shooting a Leica still gives me enjoyment though in all sorts of ways for the more quiet moments where once I liked it for busy and inconspicuous on the move photography.

Sorry I therefore have no experience of M9M or M10M and their tonal treatment. I struggle with those aspects with film but am generally able to make something of the shots from the scans and sparing use of the curves sliders in Adobe ACR. My best tool is my Sekonic meter in incident light-reading mode!

Edited May 5 by F456