Leica LTM Downsizing dilemmas : Summicron - Summitar - Elmar

[ravenxarmy]

I need some money to buy a 2.8F Rolleiflex so I'm considering letting go off some lenses.
But I can't decide which...
I have three 5cm lenses for my 1949 IIIc

1948 Summitar (it's one I use the most, 80% of the time, I like that it's nearly the same age as the camera so I rarely take it off)
1955 Red dial Elmar (because everybody needs an Elmar)
1955 Summicron with a nice even serial number 1255000 (probably the best out of the 3, and in the best condition at as well, but somehow the least used by me, not sure why...)

Does one need three 5cm lenses?
Or am I crazy thinking that I should I forget the Rollei and keep all three of these?

 

[Coldkennels]

I'd keep all three.

I mean, I'm not exactly the best example - I have 5 different 50mm lenses in LTM alone (Leonon, Serenar, Elmar, Summar, Summicron). Hell, that number jumps up by god-knows-how-many if you count all the Soviet ones (Industars 10, 22, 26, 61 and Jupiters 3 and 8, most of which I have multiples of) that never come off the FEDs and Zorkis I have lying around, too. And let's not even get started on the Contax/Kiev ones...

Thing is, 50mm lenses all have different fingerprints and use cases. Of the five LTM 50s I own, the Leonon is used the least (oversized, awkward to carry, needs relubing really), but even that does weird and interesting things that make me want to keep it around (super glowy and soft wide open, impressively sharp stopped down).

Out of the three you've got, I'd argue they're all just about different enough to justify keeping: the Elmar is the most compact and traditional/normal in rendering, the Summitar has the most character, and the Summicron is probably the best balance of the two and the all-rounder option.

If you had to get rid of one, I'd get rid of the Summitar. But I definitely wouldn't get rid of either of the other two - and I suspect you'd only regret it down the line.

 

[oldwino]

I need some money to buy a 2.8F Rolleiflex so I'm considering letting go off some lenses.
But I can't decide which...
I have three 5cm lenses for my 1949 IIIc

1948 Summitar (it's one I use the most, 80% of the time, I like that it's nearly the same age as the camera so I rarely take it off)
1955 Red dial Elmar (because everybody needs an Elmar)
1955 Summicron with a nice even serial number 1255000 (probably the best out of the 3, and in the best condition at as well, but somehow the least used by me, not sure why...)

Does one need three 5cm lenses?
Or am I crazy thinking that I should I forget the Rollei and keep all three of these?

tough choice, but if I had to get rid of one, it would be the Summicron. I personally find the early Summicron range to be rather pedestrian (ie boring) a lot of the time. I feel it is a jack-of-all-trades, and therefor does nothing with any particularly interesting style.
The Summitar has character, and the Elmar has precision.

 

[KoNickon]

You'll probably get the most money for the Summicron, and you say you don't use it much. And -- you know you need a 2.8F 🙂.

 

[wlewisiii]

Honest thought - keep all three lenses and use your 3.5 E3 more instead of getting a 2.8. For that matter, I prefer Rolleicords to Rolleiflexes because they're simpler and less likely to break down and even if they do, they'll be cheaper/easier to get repaired.

Edit: Someone else in the thread has the 3.5 - sorry.

 

[Rayt]

You already have a 3.5E3? Is it a Planar? As for the 50mm I would keep the one you use. If you don’t use the lenses then you are a collector. Ask for a higher price and if it doesn’t sell then fate has decided for you.

 

[ravenxarmy]

You'll probably get the most money for the Summicron, and you say you don't use it much. And -- you know you need a 2.8F 🙂.

Funny story about the 2.8F
I sent Jimmy Koh my 2.8E (the early one) for a CLA and a little fix and as he was done with it I thought it would be a great idea if he kept it and sent me a mint 2.8F he happened to have knocking about. With working meter and all. This upgrade did cost me slightly more than the CLA though. Jimmy is a legend.

 

[ravenxarmy]

You already have a 3.5E3? Is it a Planar?

I don't have a 3.5 at the moment.
I just did a small switcharoo an E for an F
Both are Planars.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

I went through most Leitz 50 LTM and all 50 Crons, up to typ 4.
Collapsible Cron is one of the best 50ies I used on bw film, better than newer and modern as well, IMO.

 

[ravenxarmy]

I haven't used newer crons. In what way is the gen. 1 better than later ones?

 

[cboy]

I'm not a collector so if don't use I'll likely sell. But selling these days don't always go over the sentimental value so it's better to swap and trade rather than to sell

 

[ravenxarmy]

Now I feel like taking the cron out for a walk. I think I will just eat the 2.8F spending and keep the lenses...

 

[Bingley]

Like you, I love the Summitar, and it's a "correct" lens for a 1949 IIIc. Since you use the Summitar for 80% of your photos with the IIIc, I say you should keep it. Keep the Elmar, too, if your sample is in good condition. Sell the Summicron: You'll get a lot more for it than for either of the other two lenses, and you don't lose very much if any in quality by sticking w/ the Summitar. Of course, I am biased: I have a 1949 Summitar and a 1939 Summitar, and a 1949 IIIc. And a red scale Elmar.

 

[jankap]

What do you want to achieve with a further lens in the same range of f/3.5 to f/2.0?
In the blog of Jim Kasson there is test for decentering. I tested the Elmar RS and the Canon f/0.95, both at F/4.0. The Elmar is of 1950 and the Canon is 10 years younger.
First the Elmar

Here the Canon

There is not so very much difference at the same fstop. So does it make sense to add a lens in the same range?