Help! LTM Summaron or 35mm CV Skopar?

Z

Zathras

Member
Local time
7:15 AM
Joined
Oct 27, 2005
Messages
39
Location
Under A Rock
View My Gallery
Hello everyone,

I'm considering getting a 35mm lens for my LTM rig and I'm having trouble deciding between a 3.5mm f3.5 Summaron and a CV 35mm f2.5 Skopar. I was considering a J-12 in the past, but I decided against it because I didn't want to buy into another filter size as well. I was set to get the CV, when I decided to get a 13.5cm Hektor and also ended up with a SOOGZ adapter, which allows me to use E39 filters with the Hektor, as well as a Summaron. My lens lineup now consists of a 5cm Summitar, 9cm Elmar, and the aforementioned Hektor. Now I can't decide whether to stick with Leitz glass or go with the newer lens. I really like the look I get with my old single coated lenses, used with shades of course, and I want to keep that consistency, but I also like the look that people in this forum have been getting with the Skopar. Unfortunately I don't know anybody in my area who uses either CV gear or old screwmount Leica gear, so I have nothing I can actually work with in person to arrive at any kind of conclusion. I wish that I could just afford to buy both and see for myself, but that is not realistic, so I'm looking for advice here.

Mike Sullivan
 
I have the IIIF and use the CV Color Skopar 35/2.5. I doubt you'll find a better lens, plus it's faster than the Summaron.
 
If not for filter size I would suggest the Canon 35/2.8.

But I won't suggest that, though it will offer the same old fashioned image that you state you like, while still being pretty sharp.

But it doesn't have a 39mm filter thread.
 
If the older look is what you're after, the Summaron is the way to go. The CV Skopar has more contrast and is more like a modern lens. Summarons usually are found with a bit of internal haze and need to be serviced. The Summarons are about fifty years old and can be a bit pricey.
 
The CV is sharp and contrasty right out to the corners wide open and virtually flare free the exact opposite of the Summaron; however any prints from the Skopar will stick out from the Summitar and Elmar like the proverbial sore thumb.

I've come to think it's a great lens


Image+Aug060179+copy.jpg

big copy
 
After my 3.5 Sumaron was cleaned up inside by DAG, it gives the same image as my 35 2.0 Summicron without the open stops.

Older Leitz glass is very fine, but the inside needs to be crystal clear. Check with a small penlight. Looking thru it at a light in the shop ceiling or a window will not work. Any haze at all ruins the Leica look.

When people complain about low contrast, their lenses need internal cleaning. There are small differences compared to new, but not not so much as you would notice without side by side prints.
 
I have an old Summaron 3.5 - probably from around 1950 - on my IIIa from 1937. My Summaron is OK for B&W but not great for color. It's not as sharp or contrasty as the Summicron-M on my M6, but so what?
 
Ditto photodog. you will get a different looking picture

Just make sure you get a clean one or have it cleaned before you say it is no good. If clean, it will make pics like the Summitar.
 
If you can find a summaron at the right price with clean glass (unlikely) it is a great lens. I had a beauty and sold it as part of a deal to finance a 35mm 'cron. I miss it greatly for my ltm bodies, and would replace it in a flash.

I have no experience of the CV 35mm, but do like the 25mm f4 that I have.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom