Yes! Another "Which one to buy?" Thread!

P

photogdave

Shops local
Local time
8:51 PM
Joined
Sep 25, 2005
Messages
2,142
Location
Film-filled Vancouver
View My Gallery
Some time ago I posted a thread about whether I should sell my M6 and get into a CL or CLE. After lots of helpful replies from the forum I decided just to take it easy and stick with the M6 for now and if a good deal on a CL comes along, revisit the idea. (CL for no better reason than I simply LIKE it better!)
Guess what? A good deal has come along. Good condition CL with 40 Summicron and 90 Elmar both in quite good shape. No 100 per cent sure about the camera's meter but I can live with it. The dilemma? I also have the opportunity to pick up a 35 Summicron V4 for nearly the same price as the CL kit.
The Summicron is definitely the lens I want the most in the whole wide world. Not necessarily for it's "king of bokeh" status, but because I like it's size, feel and it focuses closer than my CV Ultron. This is a very early V4 and is well used. There is some play in the barrel and there is a small patch of fungus on the inside of the front element. This is why the lens is even in my price range. The going rate for these lenses in really good shape is WAY to high for me.
So...What to do? I have always been under the impression that fungus is absolutely irreversible. Is this true? Should I forget about the lens and go for the CL package? I'd like to hear your thoughts! 🙂
 
Isn't the version 4 Summicron the one that Magus hates for some reason? I don't own one and don't know much about them but have noticed that he has commented several times that he thinks it's a dog. Magus is Magus though! 😛

I personally would go for the CL ... the 40mm Summicron is a brilliant lens and maybe you could sell off the rest of the kit ... keep your M6 and the 40mm summicron. I have a CL and while it's a good camera it's no M6 ... and the 40mm lens would be pretty close with the 35mm framelines!

Just one idea ... 😀
 
Thanks Keith. Although I enjoy reading Magus' comments on certain threads I can't believe anything he says related to lens quality as he doesn't seem to have a link to a gallery or any kind of web site, so I'm not sure if he really takes photos! (No insult intended here Magus. Let's see some of your work please!)
Anyway, I have no qualms about selling the M6 since I prefer to use my M4. Keep the 40 and sell the rest. Hmmm....
 
How did a lens question turn into a 3rd party bringing up something that Magus said of a certain lens. Why would we care what he said, especially coming from a 3rd party?
 
Last edited:
ywenz said:
How did a lens question turn into a 3rd party bringing up something that Magus said of a certain lens. Why would we care what he said, coming from a 3rd party?
Click to expand...
I would be interested in his opinion if I saw some evidence he has used the lens. Anyway, that has just me and Keith BSing. Let's get back on topic! What would you do?
 
ywenz said:
How did a lens question turn into a 3rd party bringing up something that Magus said of a certain lens. Why would we care what he said, coming from a 3rd party?
Click to expand...
Good point - there have been way too many discussions along such lines lately.

Back on topic: if it were me I'd avoid the fungus like the plague. I know that its possible to kill it off using UV but I'd be disinclined to take the risk of it, um, overrunning the lens or, worse, spreading further afield. And I doubt a lens that has been afflicted would keep much resale value.

...Mike
 
I didn't realise you had an M4 ... lucky dog! 😀

I just think the 40mm Summicron would be a good keeper ... after all two steps backwards and a 40 becomes a 35 anyway . The CL and 90 shouldn't be hard to sell and if you're lucky you may come away with a 40mm Summicron that owes you very little. I too lust after a 35mm Summicron but I think I would rather go the whole hog and have the ASPH ... I know they cost twice the price second hand but after all ... you only live once! 😛

I like that pic of Magus's too speaking of third partys ... ... which we're not supposed to be doing according to that other third party who shall remain unnamed! 😛 😀
 
Last edited:
Summi!

Summi!

Hi Dave,

get yout fingers off the fungus-lens! You won't be happy even if it's a few years ahead.

I had Summicron-C and it's a really good lens. I ended up selling this lens cause my Rollei Sonnar 2,8/40 ist less prone to flare and - quite strange - theres almost no difference in measured exposure time between both lenses when changing lenses in the same situation, on tripod e.g. Thats interessting cause normally there is one stop difference! I am wondering whether this comes from the one fewer lens or from the newer glass and coating technology inthe Sonnar, but it was reproducible anytime.

I hardly noticed any differences between those lenses on the testing slides i made, e.g. OOF or color rendering.

I read a review somewhere, where the autor compared 'my' Sonnar against a Summicron 35, and it was better! Especially the resolution in the corner.

So, the Summi-C is a classy "old style lens" with it's own signature which is very pleasing to many viewers! So go for it!

Ahh yes, about the angle, i never missed a 35. I have a 35 LTM-Adapter on my Rollei Sonnar cause my M6 doesn't have 40 framelines and never had any probs with this difference.
 
Dave

Check this thread

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=26850

I own a v4 35 Summicron and while I appreciate the small size and light weight I can't imagine it wouldn't be bettered in many areas by current lenses, some of which would be a lot cheaper. It's a nice lens, but softish at f2.

Were I in your position I'd buy the CL/40/90, forget the 35 with fungus, and see how you get on with the 40. You might find it gives you everything you desire. You could always sell it on [and the CL/90] if you weren't convinced.

Paul
 
pvenables said:
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=26850
I own a v4 35 Summicron and while I appreciate the small size and light weight I can't imagine it wouldn't be bettered in many areas by current lenses, some of which would be a lot cheaper. It's a nice lens, but softish at f2.

Were I in your position I'd buy the CL/40/90, forget the 35 with fungus, and see how you get on with the 40. You might find it gives you everything you desire. You could always sell it on [and the CL/90] if you weren't convinced.

Paul
Click to expand...

Yes, the Summicron is not a bad lens! The Rollei Sonnar ist only better at full aperture, stopped down theres almost no difference!
 
Run, do not walk, away from a lens with fungus.

The v4 Summicron has a reputation for being, ahh, less than physically robust. If the one you are looking at shows physical wear, as opposed to cosmetic wear, I'd pass.
 
Well, the old 35 Summicron doesn't seem too popular around here after all! I guess deep down I was hoping someone would say "if it's just a LITTLE fungus, don't worry. It won't get any worse and it won't affect the image quality." It just seems these lenses are SO overpriced on the used market and getting one at half the going rate would be so sweet. (I could finally post to the Leica Bargains thread at the user group site!)
I appreciate all the advice here and the consensus seems to be to go for the CL package. It sounds like many of you may actually prefer the 40 to the 35 too. You've got me leaning in that direction...
Thanks again!
 
There is no such thing as "a little" fungus - it will spread. Run...

CLs are not without their soft spots but the goods ones can be very good. The 40/2 is a very, very fine lens, and there's no hair on the 90/4, either (other than its slow max aperture).
 
Stay away from the killer fungus. A little will soon be alot.

I owned the v1, v4 and asph currently and also the Biogon. Also had the v1 summilux. The v1 summicron and summilux are not particularly sharp wide open and have considerable fall off with the summicron at f2 to 2.8. Mechanics are very good in the v1's. The v4 is a dramatic improvement in image quality but mechanically poor compared to the early ones. My v4 had a bunch of play and got worse with use. All 3 of these lenses are drastically over prices and over rated. The asph is a very sharp lens but tends to be a little harsh compared to the earlier lenses. This isn't all bad if this is what you want. My personal favorite is the Biogon with the modern sharpness and smooth tonality of the clasics. It's also a very attractive lens finished well and built very well and the price is excellent.

My pick is the the Biogon but if your heart is set on a Summicron then I think the v4 is the one for the classic look or the asph for the modern hard look.

Don't overlook the v2 and v3 summicrons. both are good but not as good as the later. In each version they improved but between the 2 and 4 the differences are not that dramatic. In most shooting you'll never know the difference.
 
Thanks Ray. Have you ever shot with the 40mm Summicron?
The Biogon seems nice but still out of my price range for the time being. One thing I don't like about the Zeiss lenses is the 1/3 stop increment aperture adjustments. I usually shoot street with my rfs and change exposure by feel without looking at the settings. I could see these extra click stops getting me lost. Any experience with this?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom