Any differences in Canadian and German IV 35 'Corns?

[johnastovall]

I've found two version IV 35mm 'Crons both rate out about the same.

One is Canada 1982 production and the other is Germany 1994 production. there's about a 500 dollar delta in the two lenses.

Which one should I look at getting? Is there a reason for a premium on the German over the Canadian other than it's newer?

 

[awilder]

There is no difference except possibly in the color of the coating (my sample showed the German version to have more amber/orange to the coating color than blue/purple). I've owned both and found then to peform equally as well and you'd be much better served by pocketing the $500 difference.

 

[venchka]

What awilder said.

The $500 is partly because the German lens is 12 years younger. And partly because Leica Gear Heads pay more for German made anything. On the other hand, the older Canadian lens may have been used less. So, put your $500 to better use elsewhere and buy the Midlands lens, hey!

 

[JNewell]

Also consider that build quality has not, in general, gotten better over the past 15-20 years. That may or may not be true in this particular case, but all things being equal, and in the absence of any reliable information to the contrary, at least on that issue I'd prefer the earlier example to the later. Better coatings would be the only reason I can think of to prefer the later example...but I doubt the differences are significant.

 

[mikeh]

!982? Wouldn't that be a VIII?
But it depends on the subject, the Canadian ones are better for beavers and hockey pics, while the German ones excel at automobiles and sausage shots.

 

[venchka]

It's also entirely possible that the parts for the newer lens were shipped to Germany for assembly after the Midlands facility closed.

 

[kevin m]

I don't know how well-made the Canadian versions are, but I can tell you that there's no reason to pay a premium for the German-made, version IV of that lens, because it isn't very well made, and certainly nothing like the quality of lens construction of the 'classic' period.

I had mine apart twice to use a spanner to tighten up the big ring that holds the lens group to the focusing barrel. It was supposed to have been glued in place, but the glue has a reputation for failing. If you hold a version IV and the front of the lens feels a bit 'wobbly' in your hand, especially when you mount the shade, that's what's going on.

 

[Tom A]

First off, the Summicron 35f2 was a Midland design. Dr Mandler worked from Canada and did design most of the M-lenses in the 50/60/70's. Manufacturing was centered in Canada and for many years the only lens made in Wetzlar was the 50f1.4 Summilux (which is why most promo shots of M's had a 50f1.4 on it - Leica Wetzlar on the ring!).
A lot of the earlier 35's with Wetzlar nomenclature was actually made in Canada, shipped as parts to Germany and assembled there with Leitz Wetzlar label on them. It was partly to avoid heavy import duties on finished lenses and also to supply the European market with "made in Germany" lenses.
As for performance, I have never seen a difference between them. Upgrades in coating etc was done on both sides of the Atlantic at the same time.
Buy the Canadian lens and spend the $500 on film instead!

 

[venchka]

Oops

Oops

...

Buy the Canadian lens and spend the $500 on film instead!

John doesn't do film.

A person could probably save another $300-$500 and have better construction, 99% equivalent image quality AND have a 35mm/2.0 lens that fit their M8 and their IIIG by buying the 35mm 2.0 UC-Hexanon lens. The black paint and build are worth the purchase price.

 

[venchka]

and brand new too if Matsuiyastore still has them.

 

[johnastovall]

It's going to be the Canadian. I'll apply the saving to another cut filter.

Almost got the Leitz lens kit for the M8 done.

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

I've found two version IV 35mm 'Crons both rate out about the same.

One is Canada 1982 production and the other is Germany 1994 production. there's about a 500 dollar delta in the two lenses.

Which one should I look at getting? Is there a reason for a premium on the German over the Canadian other than it's newer?

If I were to look at the sigma of the discrete entries on the Base 2 foundation of telecommunications protocol-sent hypermarkup text language, I'd probably do the handshake on the Germany A.D. (aka C.E.) 1994 sample, just because of the chance of the 12 year delta which empirically dictates a material depreciation fluctuation rather more marked in the time-linearly earlier subject that the later one mightn't exhibit. 😱

 

[Tom A]

Gabriel, I agree whole heartedly. I dont to what, but I agree!

 

[sleepyhead]

John doesn't do film.

A person could probably save another $300-$500 and have better construction, 99% equivalent image quality AND have a 35mm/2.0 lens that fit their M8 and their IIIG by buying the 35mm 2.0 UC-Hexanon lens. The black paint and build are worth the purchase price.

The UC-Hexanon doesn't focus down to 0.7 meters like the summicrons - for me that's a big factor against the UC.

 

[venchka]

Different strokes for different folks

Different strokes for different folks

The UC-Hexanon doesn't focus down to 0.7 meters like the summicrons - for me that's a big factor against the UC.

You pays your money and takes your choice. I applied the savings to another LTM lens and a complete 4x5 system including film developing hardware. To me that was more important than getting 0.2m closer to my subjects.

 

[Chris101]

I'd guess they grow better corn in Canada.