legendary Leica lenses -- old vs. new

[UliWer]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

This thread comes too early, so you will have to put up with the the good old M8-crop for my quick comparison (all lenses at f: 2!)

 

Summitar (1939) - uncoated:

 

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 20, 2009 by UliWer

[Advertisement]

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

[UliWer]

Second:

 

Summicron I - collapsible (1954), screw-mount:

 

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!

 

 

[UliWer]

Third:

 

Summicron II - rigid (1966) -M-Mount:

 

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!

 

 

 

 

What astonishes me, is that even the uncoated version of the Summitar is not far behind the first Summicron at the overall view, though it is weaker in the corner (which should become quite obvious on full format). The second version of the Summicron is a big leap forward.

[lars_bergquist]

I've used "perfect glass" coated Summitars (and one pretty close to perfect) and "perfect glass" collapsible Summicrons. To my eye the Collapsible Summicrons clearly outperformed the Summitars. The Collapsible Summicron itself was reformulated early in the run. I have an early thorium-glass collapsible and later collapsible Summicrons. Perhaps the comment refers to the early Thorium lens compared with a Summitar? I have a second Thorium lens coming in, I'll have to do a comparison with the later collapsible Summicrons.

Well, the Collapsible Summicron was marginally inferior to the Summitar >at f:2<. It was, as you say, much better at mid-apertures, and that was what made it superior and revolutionary. The Summitar stopped down was in fact not much better than the Summar, at least until the Summitar got coated. (Some Summar lenses are said to have been coated 'after the fact', having probably spent the war on a shelf in Wetzlar, but I have never seen one.)

 

The old man from the Age of Berek's Dog

[brianv]

I guess my question is in regard to which version of collapsible Summicron is reputed to be inferior at F2 to the Summitar. I currently have five Collapsible Summicrons, sold a sixth. I've shot with two coated Summitars. The later collapsible Summicrons performed better at F2 across the entire image. The notable astigmatism of the Summitar seemed to be eliminated in the Summicron.

Edited September 20, 2009 by brianv

[Fefes]

On 9/20/2009 at 8:10 AM, UliWer said:

Third:

Summicron II - rigid (1966) -M-Mount:

What astonishes me, is that even the uncoated version of the Summitar is not far behind the first Summicron at the overall view, though it is weaker in the corner (which should become quite obvious on full format). The second version of the Summicron is a big leap forward.

Both the Summitar and the Summicron rigid show strong CA in the high contrast window, to the left and right. There's a strong red line in the window frame vs glass that's is strident and very visible. The Collapsible doesn't show much of it on the left, and none on the right. It could happen due to small focus errors, but then it'd be hard to say which one is actually sharper. In these photos, I prefer the Rigid corners, the Summicron center, and I like the Summitar overall, which definitely shows less detail and is ghostly in the corners. I don't think any lens would make my photography much worst (nor better) than it already is. I think all three are lovely lenses.

In particular, I only have 2 Summicron Collapsibles, 1 Elmar 50/3.5 RS and 1 Elmar 50/2.8, and of these, I love the Elmar the most, but the Summicron's aren't in a lower scale. They are just fantastic lenses and a stop faster. The Summicron Collapsible, when in pristine condition, renders with high contrast wide open. Stopping down is mostly to add detail/resolution in the corners. By f2.4 I have all the contrast I'd ever want by wide open it's still not just good enough, but very very good indeed. A Leica user would describe it as moderate contrast, but in general, it remains very high.

I have maybe 40 other 50mm lenses, so while I am not a great photographer, I can say these are some of the most refined lenses. Every aspect of the optic balances or "dances" with every other thing the optic does. Given how many trade offs are made, I think of these lenses as absolute gems. Some "Elmar-like" optics, like any good Tessar, can produce great images. However, I have many of those, and they render very differently. I like them both, but the Elmar, with just 4 elements, is short of a miracle lens for the amount of glass it hosts.

Edited July 20, 2021 by Fefes

[a.noctilux]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Not old, but old lens formula coated for a special Replica ( a pity for some !)

As curiosity, not really practical to use, I can add the Anastigmat 3.5/50

(if Leica release it in M/LTM mount one day).

I managed to use it on digital M / LV for 'further easier test' ( unscrewed from the Zero Replica as I saw the very nice results already for some years)

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!

 

I do appreciate other 5cm/50mm Elmar/Summar/Summicron/Summarit-M or not M, though as they are 😇

[jankap]

"... a remarkable lens, superb close up results and wonderful colour rendering, considering that Zeiss produced this lens in 1933, which makes it 78 years of age, and still a great performer. Leica optics were well behind Zeiss at this date and Leitz's fastest lenses - the F2 Summar and F2.5 Hektor - couldn't compete with Bertele's F1.5 Sonnar in the performance stakes. Leitz couldn't compete with a fast 5cm lens of at least f1.5 until 30 years later with the 2nd version of the f1.4 Summilux in 1966. Their 1935 Xenon produced to give Leica users a competitive lens fell well short of the mark and couldn't touch the Sonnar." (Pan F - rangefinderforum.com)

Das von Jakob Bertele gerechnete Zeiss Sonnar 5cm 1:1.5 (1932) ist sicherlich eines der wichtigsten Kleinbild-Objektive überhaupt. Während rund fünfzehn Jahren galt das über mehrere Zwischenschritte aus dem klassischen Triplett abgeleitete Objektiv als das schärfste und gleichzeitig lichtstärkste Kleinbild-Objektiv. In der Regel an der von Küppenbender konstruierten Messsucher-Contax eingesetzt, wurde das Objektiv in kleinen Serien auch für die Leica produziert, die als handlichere und leisere der beiden deutschen Messsucher-Kameras galt.

was the lens in small series produced for the Leica camera too, that was known as the more handier and quieter camera.

http://artaphot.ch/zeiss/objektive/203-sonnar-5cm-1-1-5

 

 

Edited July 20, 2021 by jankap

[shirubadanieru]

1930~40s: Is there any lens more legendary then the Elmar 50mm 3.5? Still performs amazingly well today, and it’s the lens that started it all.

1950s: The Summicron 50mm rigid is to me, still the best 50mm Leica has ever made (not from a sharpness point of view obviously as if we just look at that all ASPH / APO lenses are better)

1960s: The Summilux 50mm VII is great, and the Summilux 35mm is so tiny that it should be mentioned, despite a very unique, not-for-everyone rendering wide open.

1970s~1990s: Summicron 35mm V4 is my favorite Leica 35mm after the Summicron V1 (and probably the only Leica lens I enjoy from this period)

ASPH age: I don’t like any of the ASPH lenses besides the Summilux 35mm f1.4 ASPH and the Summicron 28mm f2 ASPH. 

[a.noctilux]

@shirubadanieru

I have two comments (in reverse ...)

Asph. age, strange that I have same 'selection' asph. 1.4/35 and 2/28 but use happily sometimes my wife's Apo-Summicron-M 2/75.

1970s - 1990s may be from 1960's if you include the very nice/inimitable 35mm Summicron I (8 element) which I happen to use with my screw Leica also (if not right period),

so beautiful and unique rendering

[shirubadanieru]

5 hours ago, a.noctilux said:

@shirubadanieru

I have two comments (in reverse ...)

Asph. age, strange that I have same 'selection' asph. 1.4/35 and 2/28 but use happily sometimes my wife's Apo-Summicron-M 2/75.

1970s - 1990s may be from 1960's if you include the very nice/inimitable 35mm Summicron I (8 element) which I happen to use with my screw Leica also (if not right period),

so beautiful and unique rendering

Yeah the 8e is the best 35mm summicron for sure from my point of view! Much better than v4

[jaques]

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!

 

On 9/17/2009 at 3:00 PM, lars_bergquist said:

The v.1 35mm Summicron made a splash in 1958 because of its speed, but it was not exceptional: Canon introduced its 35mm f:1.8 in 1956. The eight-lens Summicron was pretty mushy wide open, and indeed all the way up to f:4.

pretty Mushy? wide open:

 

cropped:

 

Edited August 25, 2021 by jaques