M8 + Summitar 5cm?

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Does the Summitar collapse more deeply than an Elmar? I would be surprised, as the focal length is the same and the thickness of the focussing ring is similar. The Elmar has mms to spare. I guess the thicker barrel hits the side of the throat, not the shutter or shutter guide.

[Advertisement]

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

[wlaidlaw]

Does the Summitar collapse more deeply than an Elmar? I would be surprised, as the focal length is the same and the thickness of the focussing ring is similar. The Elmar has mms to spare. I guess the thicker barrel hits the side of the throat, not the shutter or shutter guide.

 

Jaap,

 

I don't know and I would have to go and play "Hunt the Adapter" if I was going to measure it, as I am not using LTM lenses on anything other than Visoflex/Novoflex at the moment. However if you look at the pic below, where I have pulled up the contrast, you can see the marks clearly on my M4 from when I tried to collapse my LTM Summitar (on a Leica 50/75 adapter).

 

Wilson

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!

[jaapv]

Thanks for showing, Wilson. It certainly proves care should be taken.

[WestMichigan]

Here is a picture taken today with the 50/2 Summitar on an M8. This is a 1953 collapsible hex diaphragm coated lens in VG condition. No artistic merit just to show what it is like. This is taken wide open (f2). It was focused on the far tree. You can see that at f2, it really is quite soft and pretty low contrast. Sorry it is not a more interesting picture but busy today, so this is just a quick pic from my terrace.

 

Wilson

 

Hi Wilson,

nothing personal, but I've decided to hate you :-)! An M8, A Summitar, and a view like that from your terrace. Sigh. If you ever feel that you take any of them for granted, go to nearest wall - accelerate cranium forcefully into it - repeat as needed until realizing life is good, life is great. :-)

Peace Friend,

Richard in Michigan

[wlaidlaw]

Hi Wilson,

nothing personal, but I've decided to hate you :-)! An M8, A Summitar, and a view like that from your terrace. Sigh. If you ever feel that you take any of them for granted, go to nearest wall - accelerate cranium forcefully into it - repeat as needed until realizing life is good, life is great. :-)

Peace Friend,

Richard in Michigan

 

Richard,

 

Every day when I get up, I go and marvel at the view, dropping down 1,000 feet to the valley of the Bresque below and looking towards Mont Victoire above Aix-en-Provence. Amazingly when I bought the house 6 years ago, it had been on the market for 2 years with not a single sensible offer. It must just not be to local French taste and most foreigners coming in are looking for a "Provençal Style" farmhouse, which I don't like with their tiny windows, dingy insides and tiny rooms. It was built in the 1970's by a pupil of Le Corbusier, Mikel Patout, as his own retirement house but sadly he died before moving in.

 

Here are a couple more shots taken of the interior and patio with an interesting combination - a Zenitar 16mm fisheye on an M9, with an Elephoto M42 to Leica M adapter.

 

Wilson

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!

[zipper]

I agree, the 50/2 Summitar which I was using today with a Voigtlander LTM to LM adapter is not not not an everyday lens for the M8. At some point you will forget and collapse it and then - goodbye M8 shutter = EUR 2000+ repair. If you want a cheaper lens with an old fashioned look, I would go for a series 1 rigid Summicron or an earlier 50/2.8 Elmar-M, which you can safely collapse. These would not cost a lot more than a Summitar. I use the Summitar from time to time, just because I have it (my father bought it new with his IIF in 1953, which is the camera it still normally sits on).

 

Wilson

 

Wilson, did just that 2 days ago trying a friend loan Summitar w. Milich adaptor, realised as I did it - luckily no damage, cause: late evening, brain fade... 'experience is something you get just after you need it'. ps., stunning house and view - looks like a Monet motif, the Eames chair fits too.

[wlaidlaw]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

the Eames chair fits too.

 

Sadly nothing like as comfortable as they look - hence the cushion on mine.

 

Wilson

[scsambrook]

Just bimbling around the forum and wondering why folks have this urge to collapse these old lenses, especially on digital bodies . . . Maybe to carry the camera under a jacket? Can't think of any other reason, but maybe my ageing brain isn't as perceptive as it (allegedly) used to be.

 

I envy Mr Laidlaw the magnificent view and the lovely sunshine weather that seems to go with it. Be nice to see how his old Summitar reproduces it focused on infinity, and maybe stopped down. I had one on a IIIf back in the 1960s and it turned out some very sharp Kodachromes. Strange how fashions change, we'd never have thought of shooting sunshine landscapes at f2 back then. Wide apertures were for dull days and 'available light' only !

[wlaidlaw]

Three reasons to play with old lenses on modern digitals

1) They are often very cheap and some have a quality/price ratio that often exceeds by some margin, modern lenses

2) You can get interesting effects. Many older lenses have kinder/gentler bokeh than modern asymmetricals. The in focus plateau has softer roll off at the edge into out of focus. Particularly noticeable if you compare older 50mm designs with the current 50 ASPH Summilux, which has a very sharp edged in focus plateau.

3) It's fun

 

Too hazy/dusty today to take photo of view with Summitar but due rain later in week, which should clear the air and will take a couple with 50 Summitar and 50 Opton Sonnar.

 

Wilson

[scsambrook]

Three reasons to play with old lenses on modern digitals

1) They are often very cheap and some have a quality/price ratio that often exceeds by some margin, modern lenses

2) You can get interesting effects. Many older lenses have kinder/gentler bokeh than modern asymmetricals. The in focus plateau has softer roll off at the edge into out of focus. Particularly noticeable if you compare older 50mm designs with the current 50 ASPH Summilux, which has a very sharp edged in focus plateau.

3) It's fun

 

Too hazy/dusty today to take photo of view with Summitar but due rain later in week, which should clear the air and will take a couple with 50 Summitar and 50 Opton Sonnar.

 

Wilson

 

Thanks for that offer - look forward to seeing your results. And I do understand why people (myself included) enjoy using older lenses on digital cameras - what I continue to wonder is why folks have the seemingly irresistable urge to collapse those Summitars and Summicrons when there's really no reason to do so. Better shut up before I start to sound obsessive about it - !

[wlaidlaw]

Thanks for that offer - look forward to seeing your results. And I do understand why people (myself included) enjoy using older lenses on digital cameras - what I continue to wonder is why folks have the seemingly irresistable urge to collapse those Summitars and Summicrons when there's really no reason to do so. Better shut up before I start to sound obsessive about it - !

When I still had a 50 Elmar (what an idiot to sell it to another member for very little money), I used to collapse it on my M8, on the basis that it was a factory built coded one, so it must have been designed to collapse on an M8. It then made a camera which would fit in my pocket. For the reasons which I posted above with the picture of the end results on my M4, I am not going to be brave enough to collapse my Summitar on either my M8 or 9. In fact I never leave the Summitar mounted on any of my M's, as I just know at some point, I will have a senior moment and collapse it.

 

Wilson

[wlaidlaw]

Ok so here are the comparison shots of the 50/2 Summitar and the 50/1.5 Zeiss Sonnar. Both shots taken on an M9 f2 at 1/4000 using a huge Manfrotto 074B large format tripod with timer, so no shake. The pics in order are Summitar, Summitar Crop, Sonnar and Sonnar Crop. Not as much difference as I expected in resolution, given the very high reputation of the Sonnar and the big price differential when new (Sonnar nearly twice as much as Summitar). What is noticeable is the reduced vignetting of the Sonnar. Both these lenses are in pretty good condition with no detectable fungus, separation and minimal cleaning marks. Pics taken in RAW/DNG and converted using standard recipe for M9 to JPEG, with no other alterations at all. If anyone would be in the slightest bit interested, I can take the same shot with two other comparisons, a modern Zeiss 50/2 ZM Planar and the MATE at 50mm and obviously only f4.

 

Wilson

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!

[scsambrook]

Thanks for doing that - it would be interesting to see how the modern ones compare ! Nice view you have there.

[WestMichigan]

Query: Have all those who've responded to this thread stating they DO shoot with Old Glass on their M8/9 also posted samples to the M8 and Old Glass thread?

 

I am still waiting ever so patiently for my opportunity to have an M8 and be able to post my own images, so I haven't posted anything to that thread myself - beyond commentary anyway!

 

Peace

Richard in Michigan