jc_braconi Posted January 23, 2010 Share #41 Posted January 23, 2010 Advertisement (gone after registration) tobey, Only later did Leitz make an attached UN-REMOVEABLE finder that adjusted the view through the M3 camera finder (lens item 11107 SOONC-MW) from 1956, The Summaron 3.5/35 for M3 are all with DETACHABLE viewfinder already posted here in "A little..." Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 23, 2010 Posted January 23, 2010 Hi jc_braconi, Take a look here Summaron-M 35mm f/3.5 for M2. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jc_braconi Posted January 23, 2010 Share #42 Posted January 23, 2010 The Summaron 2.8/35 is UN-DETACHABLE as the Summicron 2/35 and the Summilux 1.4/35 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpattison Posted January 23, 2010 Share #43 Posted January 23, 2010 (edited) Sorry guys I stand corrected with the 11107 SOONC-MW. It actually said removeable in Lager's book, I guess I speed read! So JC, does removing the eyes affect the focusing of that model? The lens I have shown, tobey, is the first type for M3, without fittings for the eyes. Regards, John Edited January 23, 2010 by jpattison re-read Lager Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpattison Posted January 24, 2010 Share #44 Posted January 24, 2010 Thinking about it, the attached lenses will make the rangefinder wider field, so the lens focusing cam would have to be made to move the follower, and adjust the camera focusing patch, differently to compensate. Is this why the SOONC-MW can't be used without them, and why they fixed the v/f lenses on the later f2.8 ? John Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jc_braconi Posted January 24, 2010 Share #45 Posted January 24, 2010 So JC, does removing the eyes affect the focusing of that model? Yes absolutely, we have spoke along in this forum some years ago, think you undesrtood well in your following post, the goggles compense, not only the field of view, but the rangefinder view also. At the beginning it was not easy to accomodate the lens with goggles in the photographer bag so they used the removable goggles to be stored in a little bag as the one for the Summicon DR. Next they supplied a shell shape leather bag to carry the fixed goggles on the 2.8 lens, see the one in the last pict posted. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpattison Posted January 24, 2010 Share #46 Posted January 24, 2010 Thanks, JC. tobey, my apologies! Does anyone else own a single piece DoF band 1955 model (made just before the detachable v/f model) ... like mine? John Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hookonclassic Posted February 5, 2010 Share #47 Posted February 5, 2010 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hmm...interesting findings, didn't know variation of 35mm Summaron until coming across this thread. I think this is the original M2 mount version discussed earlier...the DOF scale is tapered...there is a "2" marking on the M mount recessed catch, no idea on this marking...from the serial no....year 1958...amazing condition for a over 50yrs old lens ... A beautiful little chrome classic... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted February 5, 2010 Share #48 Posted February 5, 2010 (edited) YEA ! That's IT ! The elusive M2 version... nice to see one !!! Is the body chromed brass or is it alu like the 2,8 ? Which is its weight ? Very intriguing the "2" marking... Summarizing the Summarons 3,5... 1) SM version A 36 2) BM version for M3, ungoggled 3) BM version for M3, ungoggled "1955 type" 4) SM version E 39 5) BM version for M3, goggled (hum..single variant ? maybe the removable goggles had 2 different finishings ? Ask JC...) 6) BM version for M2 Do I miss some variant ? Let's speak of details about "red dot", meters/feet etc... ... or... items with "factory hued/fixed BM adapter" like in Summicrons and others... Edited February 5, 2010 by luigi bertolotti Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hejenk Posted February 5, 2010 Share #49 Posted February 5, 2010 The Summaron 2.8/35 is UN-DETACHABLE Dear JC What is the hood you show with the Summaron 2.8/35? And your collected cameras and lenses look soooo nice! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hookonclassic Posted February 5, 2010 Share #50 Posted February 5, 2010 YEA ! That's IT ! The elusive M2 version... nice to see one !!! Is the body chromed brass or is it alu like the 2,8 ? Which is its weight ? Very intriguing the "2" marking... Summarizing the Summarons 3,5... 1) SM version A 36 2) BM version for M3, ungoggled 3) BM version for M3, ungoggled "1955 type" 4) SM version E 39 5) BM version for M3, goggled (hum..single variant ? maybe the removable goggles had 2 different finishings ? Ask JC...) 6) BM version for M2 Do I miss some variant ? Let's speak of details about "red dot", meters/feet etc... ... or... items with "factory hued/fixed BM adapter" like in Summicrons and others... Hi Luigi, It is definitely chrome brass and not aluminium. It weights like the old 50mm f2.8 collapsible Elmar, guess is around 200g. This one BM uses E39 filter. Can the "2" marking indicate it is for M2 mount? JC should be able to confirm that... Rgds Thomas Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted February 5, 2010 Share #51 Posted February 5, 2010 (edited) Dear JC What is the hood you show with the Summaron 2.8/35? And your collected cameras and lenses look soooo nice! IROOA, similar but not equal to earlier ITDOO... and both of them had their own variants... IROOA : 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! ITDOO : (can't compete with the splendid gear presentations of JC... ) Edited February 5, 2010 by jc_braconi Luigi I just corrected the chronology Quote Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ITDOO : (can't compete with the splendid gear presentations of JC... ) ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/44776-summaron-m-35mm-f35-for-m2/?do=findComment&comment=1213986'>More sharing options...
jc_braconi Posted February 5, 2010 Share #52 Posted February 5, 2010 (edited) Dear JC,What is the hood you show with the Summaron 2.8/35? And your collected cameras and lenses look soooo nice! Luigi have already answered to you I will add : IROOA / 12571 & 12571 J If you recheck the hood which is with the Summicron 2 you must find some special shape... I milled it to be able to fit the release arm when reversed it on lens for storing with caps Thank you for your appreciation. Can the "2" marking indicate it is for M2 mount? JC should be able to confirm that... I think that number question is to be linked with the thread about the numbers engraved on the infinity catch plate, to be find in this forum. Edited February 5, 2010 by jc_braconi Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jc_braconi Posted February 5, 2010 Share #53 Posted February 5, 2010 (edited) YEA ! That's IT ! The elusive M2 version... nice to see one !!! Is the body chromed brass or is it alu like the 2,8 ? Which is its weight ? Very intriguing the "2" marking... Summarizing the Summarons 3,5... 1) SM version A 36 2) BM version for M3, ungoggled 3) BM version for M3, ungoggled "1955 type" 4) SM version E 39 5) BM version for M3, goggled (hum..single variant ? maybe the removable goggles had 2 different finishings ? Ask JC...) 6) BM version for M2 Do I miss some variant ? Let's speak of details items with "factory hued/fixed BM adapter" like in Summicrons and others... You can see on my post 2 different removable goggles paint 1) glossy 2) cracked. and the Summaron 2.8 and the Summicron are with "factory hued/fixed BM adapter" Edited February 5, 2010 by jc_braconi Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpattison Posted February 18, 2010 Share #54 Posted February 18, 2010 My thoughts on the (Luigi's) type 3 are that the rear section had to be made as a flat ring to accommodate the collar to which the goggles can be attached. They then needed to release some to fulfill an order before the goggles were completed, so scribed the ring with the aperture numbers as we see, rarther than re-tool to make the original. By the way, mine is now on the auction site. Regards, John Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted February 18, 2010 Share #55 Posted February 18, 2010 YEA ! That's IT ! The elusive M2 version... nice to see one !!! I had one of those. Worth about £200 (Or was it the ungoggled M3 version?) Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted February 18, 2010 Share #56 Posted February 18, 2010 I had one of those. Worth about £200 (Or was it the ungoggled M3 version?) Easy to verify... mount on a M2, M4...M9 and see which frame appears. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmooney Posted March 6, 2010 Share #57 Posted March 6, 2010 I just picked up one of these lenses in LTM and was reading through this thread and am I to understand that all the versions of this lens are basically the same optically? Thanks, Jim Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
digitalfx Posted March 6, 2010 Share #58 Posted March 6, 2010 I have the later version that came with my M2...great little lens. I've used it on my M8 and it had proper frame lines. Its getting cleaned, as soon as it comes back im going to shoot some samples on the M9 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted March 6, 2010 Share #59 Posted March 6, 2010 In my experience, the f3.5 version is nowhere near as good as the f2.8 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted March 6, 2010 Share #60 Posted March 6, 2010 (edited) I just picked up one of these lenses in LTM and was reading through this thread and am I to understand that all the versions of this lens are basically the same optically? Thanks, Jim This is basically true for the 3,5s, even if during its 10 years life some refining of the coating (a "new" process at that times) could have been done: I have a 750.xxx (SM) and a 1.555.xxx (BM) and the front lens hue looks slightly different; the 2,8 has the same 6 elements design but new glasses - definitely better contrast. Edited March 6, 2010 by luigi bertolotti Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.