Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

17 hours ago, AHAB said:

I am happy I found this thread about the 35mm 2,8 Summaron lenses. I have a Summaron from the first batch of M-Mount lenses (#16150001to 1616000 from 1958) which should be the so called M2 Version with 0,7 near focus distance and the Leica adapter with the little screw mentioned in some of the comments.

1. Question #1 - did I classify this lens correct as M2 version?
2. Question #2 - I do not understand the helical thread thing concerning my lens?
3. Question #3 - is my lens anything special

I am very sorry but I find it a bit confusing as it is not so easy to find informations about this lens - at least for me

Thanks for helping my finding out more details about my lens. 

   

1 - Yes, it's a M2 version  (also for M1 - to be precise - no RF coupling but 35mm frame in the viewfinder)

2 - Me too don't understand well the question... do you refer to post # 85 ?  Anyway, yours is not a "repurposed" M3... those do focus to 0,65 (I have one)

3 - I suppose (post some pics, if you like) that yours is a standard one, considering the batch it belongs to... nothing special but not a negligible value if it's in good conditions... and above all a very good lens to use on any modern camera which can accept it.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, luigi bertolotti said:

1 - Yes, it's a M2 version  (also for M1 - to be precise - no RF coupling but 35mm frame in the viewfinder)

2 - Me too don't understand well the question... do you refer to post # 85 ?  Anyway, yours is not a "repurposed" M3... those do focus to 0,65 (I have one)

3 - I suppose (post some pics, if you like) that yours is a standard one, considering the batch it belongs to... nothing special but not a negligible value if it's in good conditions... and above all a very good lens to use on any modern camera which can accept it.

 

Thank you for the answers

1 on my cameras I have 35 frame lines and rangefinder coupling 

2 yes I do not understand # 85 

3 I will send some pictures to you directly

Edited by AHAB
Link to post
Share on other sites

The "repurposed" M3 lenses are those where an unscrupulous dealer has unscrewed the lens from the spectacles and glued on a 35/135mm LTM to M ring. These will not focus correctly on an M2 (or other M), as the RF is designed to work with lenses in front of both RF windows from the spectacles. This is done as the M2 version fetches more money than a spectacles M3 version and the LTM version, focusing to 1m, fetches a little more than the M2 version. The LTM version will of course, focus correctly on an M with an LTM to M adapter ring but only down to 1m. I leave my 35/2.8 Summaron on my IIIg most of the time, as I also have both 35/2 Summicron and 35/1.4 Summilux ASPH lenses for my various M cameras plus 35 Elmarit and Summicron R lenses. 

Wilson

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, wlaidlaw said:

The "repurposed" M3 lenses are those where an unscrupulous dealer has unscrewed the lens from the spectacles and glued on a 35/135mm LTM to M ring. These will not focus correctly on an M2 (or other M), as the RF is designed to work with lenses in front of both RF windows from the spectacles. This is done as the M2 version fetches more money than a spectacles M3 version and the LTM version, focusing to 1m, fetches a little more than the M2 version. The LTM version will of course, focus correctly on an M with an LTM to M adapter ring but only down to 1m. I leave my 35/2.8 Summaron on my IIIg most of the time, as I also have both 35/2 Summicron and 35/1.4 Summilux ASPH lenses for my various M cameras plus 35 Elmarit and Summicron R lenses. 

Wilson

Thank you for your answer - so I am still a little confused but "on a higher level" 
My Version IMHO should be a so called M2 Version SIMOM as far as I understand - this lens should have RF coupling and should near focus to 0,7 on any M-mount camera body .

Is this correct?

 

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 by AHAB
Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's my Summaron 2,8 (1628xxx) reworked from a M3 version : goggles removed keeping the aluminium barrel, focus to 0,65, factory M adapter removed (see the hole for the screw) : good on a LTM body... with RF coupling not correct.

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!

(bought for 120 Euros... just to have a "bastard" item... ) 

Link to post
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, AHAB said:

Thank you for your answer - so I am still a little confused but "on a higher level" 
My Version IMHO should be a so called M2 Version SIMOM as far as I understand - this lens should have RF coupling and should near focus to 0,7 on any M-mount camera body .

Is this correct?

Yes. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

Scale focusing should be correct as the removal of the goggles does not affect this. Also optical focusing on the SL2 should be very simple. In low light conditions, I find focusing either my more critical lenses, 50/.95 and 75/1.25 much easier on my SL than on any of my M cameras. 

Wilson

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Everybody,

Welcome to the Forum AHAB & Slender.

Jul's question in his Post # 85 above is:

Are the heavier threaded focusing helicals used in the "goggled" M 3 versions of these lenses?

And: Are the finer threaded helicals used in the "M 2" versions of these lenses. Which do not have goggles. Altho some have adapters which are factory installed.

In his Post # 86 Jul noted that nobody had answered his question.

There has been no answer offered in this Thread up to now.

By the way, Luigi, do you have a photo of the threads on your lens that you were kind enough to provide a photo of?

Best Regards All,

Michael
 

 

Edited by Michael Geschlecht
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Michael Geschlecht said:

Hello Everybody,

Welcome to the Forum AHAB & Slender.

Jul's question in his Post # 85 above is:

Are the heavier threaded focusing helicals used in the "goggled" M 3 versions of these lenses?

And: Are the finer threaded helicals used in the "M 2" versions of these lenses. Which do not have goggles. Altho some have adapters which are factory installed.

In his Post # 86 Jul noted that nobody had answered his question.

There has been no answer offered in this Thread up to now.

By the way, Luigi, do you have a photo of the threads on your lens that you were kind enough to provide a photo of?

Best Regards All,

Michael
 

 

Uhm... I've checked my "bastard" Summaron ... which originally was surely an M3 version (0,65 m) : I doubt the focusing helicoid is brass : the lens, as is, is really VERY light 115-120 grams on a kitchen weight scale : to compare, my Summaron 3,5 E39 SM, on the same weight scale, indicates 160-165 grams.  The mount can make the difference , but maybe also the focus helicoid... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 2/25/2021 at 4:33 AM, Michael Geschlecht said:

Hello Everybody,

Welcome to the Forum AHAB & Slender.

Thanks for the welcome note and your help, I really appreciate! I used to be a "M only" photographer before hopping to the SL side of the Leica fence. I looooved, really, the rendering of the Summaron on my M9 and I was looking to get one for my SL2 as an alternative to "oh so perfect but suffering from diffraction from 2.8 onwards" SL lenses for street (when it's nice to have a lens at its best around f8), casual or intimate reportage shooting (when size in tight corners can make a difference).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is a picture of the helicoid on my 35/2.8 LTM (a real one!) Summaron. It focuses to 1m. Taken with 100mm/2.8 APO Macro-Elmarit-R on a CL digital. 

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!

Link to post
Share on other sites

And here 3 pictures of the helicoid on my Summaron 2,8 SM (not original - focus to ,65)  (for such a lens, doesn't worth to use something better than a phone... 🙄)

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!

Clearly completely different from Laidlaw's original ...  less threads.. I wonder if it's the original or a rework made when the lens was de-goggled... in any case, I have been always surprised by the light weight of this "spurious" lens... the 115-20 gr. I measured have no correspondence in any literature... when (several years ago) I found it at a flea market and handled it, my first feel was "SO light ? - A Summaron ?" 

Edited by luigi bertolotti
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Everybody,

My "goggled" 35mm F 2 Summicron, manufactured in 1963, bought new at a Leica dealer not far from the factory at Wetzlar where it was manufactured, has the same 8 threads visible in the cut out for the rangefinder cam that Wilson's screw mount 35mm F2.8 Summaron, that focuses to 1 meter, does.

This lens, which is marked "0.7" meters/"28" inches:

ACCURATELY measures, both thru the rangefinder & with a measuring tape: To 64 centimeters/25.2 inches. Neither of which is marked on the lens.

Best Regards,

Michael

 

Edited by Michael Geschlecht
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Luigi,

Could we please see a photo of the lens, focused at Infinity, at the cut out for the rangefinder cam, so that we can see & count the screw threads?

The "tiny" screw holding the screw/bayonet adapter in place seems to have 2 holes in the head in place of a single slot. Is that accurate?
Best Regards,

Michael
 

 

Edited by Michael Geschlecht
Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Michael Geschlecht said:

Hello Luigi,

Could we please see a photo of the lens, focused at Infinity, at the cut out for the rangefinder cam, so that we can see & count the screw threads?

The "tiny" screw holding the screw/bayonet adapter in place seems to have 2 holes in the head in place of a single slot. Is that accurate?
Best Regards,

Michael
 

 

What do you mean exactly, Michael ?  The screw threads (see my 2nd picture above) look to be four (I can count their starts along the barrel) ; the lens was at infinity in the above taking  (poor quality pic, I admit... 😒)

The hole for the screw/bayonet adapter has not the tiny screw into ; if I compare the hole with the one on my SA 21 f4  (1.674.855) which has its original SM/BM adapter, it looks just a bit larger... but quite similar ; I have the screw of the SA adapter : it has a single slot and it's more correct to name it a nut, has not a head, indeed.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 2/24/2021 at 11:17 AM, Slender said:

Would a google version "without googles" work on SL2, I assume. Would the disctance scale be on point?

Hello Slender,

It would focus correctly at Infinity. The distance scale would not show the actual distance the lens is focused on at distances less than Infinity.

But you could focus accurately thru the lens.

Using an "M" range/viewfinder to focus: At other distances the cam on the lens would be transmitting the distances from Infinity to 1 meter to the rangefinder patch while the focusing mount would be moving the focus of the image from Infinity to 0.65 meters. Which is what the numbers on the lens barrel would also indicate.

This is more completely explained in Posts #75, #78, & #81 of this Thread.

Best Regards,

Michael

Edited by Michael Geschlecht
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, luigi bertolotti said:

What do you mean exactly, Michael ?  The screw threads (see my 2nd picture above) look to be four (I can count their starts along the barrel) ; the lens was at infinity in the above taking  (poor quality pic, I admit... 😒)

The hole for the screw/bayonet adapter has not the tiny screw into ; if I compare the hole with the one on my SA 21 f4  (1.674.855) which has its original SM/BM adapter, it looks just a bit larger... but quite similar ; I have the screw of the SA adapter : it has a single slot and it's more correct to name it a nut, has not a head, indeed.

 

Hello Luigi,

Thank you for explaining. Now it is clear.

If the screw thread base is properly fitted then the lens should focus correctly at Infinity as things are. Even if the other distances are not correct.

I wonder, with all of these M3 versions being converted to M2 & Screw Mount, If you might be able to find a set of goggles, which weigh 80 grams, to re-convert the lens back to an M3 version? After which it would hopefully focus correctly.

Best Regards,

Michael

 

 

Edited by Michael Geschlecht
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...