50mm preasph lux? which one is I and II ?

maddoc said:
proenca: The lens in your first photo (E46) looks exactly as mine vs3 Summilux and it has the integrated hood. When it is collapsed, you can't see the hood.
Click to expand...
Yep, that's the one I have, (the pre-asph E46). It further confuses people when they see it, for I had the focusing tab added to it by DAG. I love the tab on this lens (and the 1979 version Summicron).
 
Well, here is a not that sharp (mobile-phone camera ...) photo of my 'lux 50mm vs3.

peter_n: thanks for the info about the titan version.

-Gabor
 

Attachments

  • NEC_0125 copy.jpg
    NEC_0125 copy.jpg
    277.5 KB · Views: 0
BTW, not sure about what you mean by "lemons" with the Summilux. Only thing to watch out for is fogging, and in some cases fungus. A lot of these lenses are really old (the v2), and many people thought they were taking good care of them by storing them and not taking them out at all to get some fresh air. Also watch out for gear that's been used for a long time in extreme-humidity places; it does a number on any gear, but specially lenses.
 
I have an E43 made in 1972 and cheap from eBay. Sent it to DAG for a CLA that cost $100 but the lens came back looking (and working) like it must have done when it was new. The lens hood is a CV hood used on the 35/2.5 P1 that Gandy was selling off when that lens went out of production - a very convenient 43mm! It really is a wonderful lens. 🙂
 
thank you all for your replies. it seems my credit card going to take a hit, 50 summilux it is , v3.

Gabriel : sorry, i was too long in SLR photography 🙂 just changed over rangefinders over a year go, not even. lemons is an expression that it goes "in a batch of oranges, there are always some lemons". lemons , at least to the SLR crowed, means a bad lens - bad focusing, misaligned, sometimes fixable , sometimes hopeless. I was just wondering since the v2 is quite old, if could be a batch or two of "lemons", since i guess QC was not so tight as it should be now.

fungus and foginess for sure, problem is im buying over the internet, and in a shop, so I will have to take their word on it. thank you for your tips, your photos made me buy it ( as other ppl as well ) but seeing that you had gorgeous photos with it in a M6 and then in a M8 made me assured. seems like a brilliant lens, cant wait to try it ( still have to buy the body though, second M7 seems to be 🙂 )

cheers to all and thank you again for a very informative thread 🙂
 
I received my 'lux 50mm vs 3 yesterday (Thanks again Kyle !!) and shot one roll of film already, can't wait to see the results ! Did a short test with my R-D1s also and ... wow !!

Gabriels photos made me also finally decide on this lens .... (and the thread about the soul of the Summilux here in RFF)

-Gabor
 
so i think we should get some compensation from Gabriel, at least he was responsible for two people buying the 'lux .) GabEviel you should be renamed 🙂
 
Wow, that's four people that have told me they've bought this lens because of me.

Does Leica have a commission program? 😀

Glad to help. Look at Todd Hanz's Summilux pics; they're deal-makers.
 
Harry Lime said:
...stuff deleted...
50mm F1.4 Summilux 1959-1961 - Type 1 SN#1,645,300-1,844,000
This version was only made for two years and was replaced by Type 2, which featured a new optical computation and increased performance (especially at 1.4).

...stuff deleted...
Click to expand...

This is all very strange. I see the date of 1959 is the generally accepted production starting date of the summilux-m. However mine has a serial number of 1644xxx. Checked the mount closely and it is definitely an m-mount rather than a screw-mount with adapter.

I would be curious to know the history of my lens. I have (hopefully) attached a (poor) picture of it.

Cheers,

Mark -%)
 

Attachments

  • summilux.jpg
    summilux.jpg
    24 KB · Views: 0
one question though.. is 850-900 pounds ( 1300 eu or 1500 usd ) a fair price for a E46 summilux in very good condition ? i have no idea how to rate ( price wise ) these lens
 
peter_n said:
According to the Hove Leica book 7th ed. p. 137 the Summilux began manufacture in 1959 with serial nr. 1640601.
Click to expand...

Thank you for the reference for the starting serial number of Summilux lenses.

Cheers,

Mark -%)
 
Summilux 1st version

Summilux 1st version

Yes, 50 Summilux production was introduced in 1959 and started at 1640601. Based on the previous fast 50 Summarit with newer type glass that was developed in the mid 50s. Interestingly the lens layout is very similar to the newest Noctilux.

In 1961 when the newer designed - and improved image quality - Summilux was introduced at serial no. 1844001, Leitz made no official announcement of the new lens, its only since 'collectors' found this information that its been well known to photographers and the older [now] 1st version design became the less desirable of the 50 Summilux versions.

The first 500 or so 1st version Summilux lenses did have a couple mount differences. The focus ring machined grip ridges of these were on the 'mountains' with smooth 'valleys', the opposite arrangement of all Summilux 43 lens made after, and the engraved focus scale was extended with a few more meter/feet values added. Lens hoods of the early lenses till the introduction of the black anodized version in 1968 were solid well made with beautiful black crinkle paint finish and chrome rim, but the newer 'vented' style and these are interchangeable with any of the 43 versions.

Although the 1st version has become the Summilux folks don't usually actively look for, it has a special image quality. Yes, its low/medium contrast at its wider apertures, but has a very smooth look that can be said is 'beautiful', a great lens with people and for 'atmosphere' when you don't want to be 'knocked off your feet' with a modern look. It has very low distortion, and a flat field. Like most older lens designs stopping down will sharpen the image and increase contrast, so you can think of this lens as giving you 'options' of image look. Nice with B&W films and a 'softer' rendition with color. There are still some great photographers still making great images with this 1st version lens. And as was mentioned to me recently and I agree, its a lens to have when you don't want your images to look like everyone else.
 

Attachments

  • P8210004.JPG
    P8210004.JPG
    130.6 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:
dreamsandart said:
Although the 1st version has become the Summilux folks don't usually actively look for, it has a special image quality. Yes, its low/medium contrast at its wider apertures, but has a very smooth look that can be said is 'beautiful', a great lens with people and for 'atmosphere' when you don't want to be 'knocked off your feet' with a modern look.
Click to expand...
I couldn't agree more. Right before I bought my E46 Summilux, I had bought a first version Summilux; the images were "soft", but the rendition was beautiful, specially in B&W, but I was very pleased with the slide film shots I took with it.

Why didn't I keep it? I spotted a faint but clear beginning of fungus growth right at the edge of the front element, on top. My heart sunk. So for a few hundred dollars more, they let me exchange it for what is now my pre-asph Summilux. 🙂
 
proenca said:
one question though.. is 850-900 pounds ( 1300 eu or 1500 usd ) a fair price for a E46 summilux in very good condition ? i have no idea how to rate ( price wise ) these lens
Click to expand...
I payed 1270 USD for my vs 3 Summilux (silver, integrated hood, original box, pouch, original caps, and paper work) all in excellent condition. The silver is usually a little bit more expensive ... so I would say 1500 USD is the very upper limit for me ... (In the shop - Sapporo, Japan - were I sold my Nikon stuff, they have a black Summilux 50 mm vs 3 - only lens with two caps - for 108.000 Yen ~ 950 USD)

-Gabor
 
Yep, the history of the Lux can be a little confusing.

I'm starting to think that the serial number ranges, given in various books and on the internets, aren't all that accurate. Also Leica is notorious for being a little on the sloppy side when it comes to keeping track of serial numbers, so who knows what sources many of the authors are relying on.

The whole thing gets even more confusing once you throw in the special editions (black paint, LTM mount etc).

But what it boils down to are the different optical computations, of which there are three.

I agree with what someone said earlier regarding the performance of Type 2 and 3.

It may be the same formula, but the mounts are entirely different, as are the colors of the coatings. I would also bet money that the newer version (with the collapsible hood) is built to higher tolerances and perhaps may have been tweaked in other ways, perhaps different glass. For one thing Leica has switched to lead free glass in recent years and glass types are sometimes discontinued. Considering that the lens was in production for several decades these are real possibilities.

In any case the safest bet is probably to get the las pre-ASPH version that focuses to .7 meters and has the built in hood. As I mentioned earlier, I have this lens and think it's terrific. Below f8 it's not as sharp as the current Summicron (mostly the corners), but as everyone knows, sharpness isn't everything.

HL
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom