Summicron 35mm f/2 v4: overpriced and overrated? Prove otherwise with Photos please.

[peter_n]

Yes they're all good, we're nitpicking here. I use a v.1 and an ASPH and they're both terrific in their different ways, and the only 35 Summicrons I've owned.

 

[k.a]

i think that the summicron iv is an absolutly amazing lens, small, ligth, great handle and superb image quality

all with summicron iv and M8

edit: one more shot

taken a few weeks ago in istanbul

 

[rbrooks]

It got its bokeh king title because of the rendering at F4 apparently.

I've found f4 to give a nice bokeh. Better than f2.
With the pre-asph Summicrons (35mm, 50mm) the bokeh is at f4. With the pre-asph Summiluxes (35mm, 50mm) the bokeh is wide open or f4.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Sold mine 20 years ago. I had both a Summicron and a Summilux (which I still have). At f/5.6 they were effectively indistinguishable and at f/1.4 there was no contest.

Either is more than good enough: more will depend on whether you are a good photographer than on full aperture MTF and other ultimate theoretical distinctions.

Cheers,

R.

 

[nobbylon]

I have a Canadian version which I bought earlier this year after selling my asph. I find the pics match my 50 summicrons more closely. The Ultron 35 1.7 I've often raved about to all intents gives exactly the same images as the v4. The only reason I can see to buy a v4 is because a/ you like the small size or b/ you just want it to be a leica lens.
The v4 does make an M a pocketable camera.

 

[starless]

I guess if you can aesthetically decide between the signature of different lenses then you should get the one you like. But I doubt anyone can really tell.

Here are for example 2 images. What version 35mm Summicrons were used for these??

 

[nobbylon]

taken on another members M8, all wide open, Ultron, v4 and pre asph lux

 

[SonC]

I had lots of 35's in M-mount, and the 35 Summicron wasn't the "best" in any category except ergonomics. It's just the perfect size with a perfect tab and perfect handling.

I quite agree. I sold mine to buy the 35 Asph, and though the new lens is crisper, I do miss the handling of the v4. It might be partly the size, but probably because it was my "glued-on-the camera" lens and just felt right.

 

[nobbylon]

see this comparison I did a while back
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=87679

 

[Mr G]

 

[ampguy]

wow

wow

The summilux gives incredibly more shadow detail. The first two lenses are ok, but very similar to my JC Penny lens (which were very good in their day).

taken on another members M8, all wide open, Ultron, v4 and pre asph lux

 

[kevin m]

The summilux gives incredibly more shadow detail....

Evidently one of the benefits of all that stray light bouncing around inside the lens. 🙄

 

[Emile de Leon]

f2 Summi 4 is great at f2 - f4..just because of the way it renders..I loved it with superfast B&W film at f2 at nite. And in the daytime closed down a stop or 2..I dont love it way stopped down though..
But I sold mine years ago...
If I ever get back into B&W film again with small format..I would rebuy.
I'm using the 35mm Asph 1.4 now and it is great for color..at any aperture..
The ver 4 was just ok for color..but I didnt think great..a little cold..
But the Asph is just too contrasty for nightime shots..in B&W..

 

[DubilUC]

f2 Summi 4 is great at f2 - f4..just because of the way it renders..I loved it with superfast B&W film at f2 at nite. And in the daytime closed down a stop or 2..I dont love it way stopped down though..
But I sold mine years ago...
If I ever get back into B&W film again with small format..I would rebuy.
I'm using the 35mm Asph 1.4 now and it is great for color..at any aperture..
The ver 4 was just ok for color..but I didnt think great..a little cold..
But the Asph is just too contrasty for nightime shots..in B&W..

Yes, you've definitely touched on something here i find myself. And that is how great this lens is in black and white. Since I've been shooting exclusively black and white lately, it is the first and only lens I want to shoot.

I definitely find a tendency in modern lenses to excel in colour, but find them somewhat bland in their black and white presentation. Its not the case with every modern lens, and its obviously not something that cant be overcome with choice of stock/development/post production. Its just a difference in the way the tones are distributed after all. To my eye, this lens draws with a higher contrast through the midrange (giving an 'S' shaped tonal distribution which tends to crush the lower midrange), biasing it towards black and white. Many modern lenses tend towards a more raised midrange and very black blacks which looks great in colour, but lacks tonal differentiation through the midrange in black and white, imparting them a muddy 'greyness' - especially on digital.

For colour with high contrast slide film i find this lens a bit too much, but LOVE the way it mates with digital. The film-like tonal presentation works so well with the linear sensor and the classic double-guassian design draws a touch of sweet analogue love to the crisp digital images. I'm surprised to see so few people shooting classic summis on digis - its a really great synergy imo..

 

[kipkeston]

The lens is a classic. Some love its qualities some don't. If you're worried about sharpness, shoot MF or above. Oh and it's definitely worth $1k.

 

[KenRothman]

I have a ver 4 that is my only Leica-brand lens at the moment. I guess I got a great deal on it, which was around US$800 last November. It's not pristine, but I have no complaints.

Took this shot with it, which is one of my favorites. (M6 classic)

 

[kipkeston]

I guess if you can aesthetically decide between the signature of different lenses then you should get the one you like. But I doubt anyone can really tell.

Here are for example 2 images. What version 35mm Summicrons were used for these??

ah, I'd say cron asph up top and v4 bottom, apertures maybe 5.6 up top and 2.8 bottom. I like them both.