which summicron?

E

equalizer

Member
Local time
7:10 AM
Joined
Jun 3, 2006
Messages
17
Hello

#1
I want to find a used 50mm lens to use on an M6... What is the difference between the summicron 50/2 and the collapsible one? Which one is better or is it the same?

#2
Something else... is it ok to buy a used summicron, the early version? Will it be safe or will it be better to prefer the latest version?

#3
Does anyone have a picture of an M6 with a 50mm summicron collapsible?

thanks for your help
 
Hello: See Cameraquest guide to used Leica lenses for your questions. All 50mm Summicrons are good IMHO but later versions become better wide open and have improved contrast and flare resistance, again IMHO.

A CLA is best factored into the price of an older Summicron if it has not received one.

yours
Frank
 
And a CLA can cost up to $125 depending on condition. Personally I prefer the older Summicrons like the rigid and the DR to the current one. I've had two of the current ones and didn't like either - too sharp. I replaced the 2nd one with a current Elmar-M and I'm very happy with that.

End of last year I bought a rigid Summicron and I like it - optically excellent with less contrast than later models. Built like a brick. :)
 
Hi,
I have a coll. cron and I´m very very pleased with it.
looks nice on the M6 i think (even better with black heavystar hood)

Just yesterday I scanned a roll of Sensia 400 shot with the cron to get a feeling again for it..I was so blown away by the lenses character I have to share the pic :)

my shooting buddy and friend (Nikon maniac, can anyone donate a s2 body so I can hook him onto RF´s? pretty please?)

a 100% crop is attached and I absolutely love the sharpness and 3d effect in the print (Minolta DSIV scans)

Edit: sorry the colors of the crop are off..it´s too late and I´m slightly too drunk for PS use, cheers
 

Attachments

  • M6 cron klein.jpg
    M6 cron klein.jpg
    124.8 KB · Views: 0
  • Summicron S400 Augarten Kklein.jpg
    Summicron S400 Augarten Kklein.jpg
    85.2 KB · Views: 0
  • Summicron S400 Augarten Kklein det.jpg
    Summicron S400 Augarten Kklein det.jpg
    84.1 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:
If you like crisp, sharp, relentless lenses, try one of the modern ones. I had one for a little while (black, 5th version with focusing tab, detachable aluminium hood, 1990s production, I think), and I adored it. Brutally frank, contrasty lens.

Only sold it because a Summilux fell out of the sky, and I couldn't afford to keep two fifties at that time. I'd still have it otherwise.

543506b0.jpg


c6d2525f.jpg


5997cd6c.jpg
 
I stolded it. Another gent wrote it in this sub-forum, a while ago.

I've owned two modern Summicrae, that tabbed fifty and my present 40mm, and I have to say he really nailed it. They're ruthless little crunchbuckets.
 
Good that you credit a source Biggles. :) I generally describe them as "painfully" sharp and of course many people really like that sharpness. My personal opinion is that there is a coldness to it and I don't need a dermatology lesson when I look at a picture.
 
peter_n said:
...I don't need a dermatology lesson when I look at a picture.
Click to expand...

HAH! I photographed my 78 year-old mother across a table with the 40, on Neopan 1600, this past summer... Yeah. Wrong optic for little old ladies, definitely. Lines in her face, hell! Cracks in her teeth!

The tabbed, fifth version fifty would have been even a bit harsher, I think.
 
I don't need a dermatology lesson when I look at a picture.
Click to expand...
True, the real first thing that I like in a picture is the subject/compo.
But then the handling of the lens is real important, and the character is certainly too. For those reason if sharpness is not an issue, neither contrast, I would go for a collapsible cron but take a M mount and you must watch for some issues: marks on front coating and internal haze. Cheers.
 
Biggles said:
HAH! I photographed my 78 year-old mother across a table with the 40, on Neopan 1600, this past summer... Yeah. Wrong optic for little old ladies, definitely. Lines in her face, hell! Cracks in her teeth!

The tabbed, fifth version fifty would have been even a bit harsher, I think.
Click to expand...

I once read somewhere "never point a camera loaded with XP2 at a woman over 30" (sorry, can't remember the source). I think the same could be said of recent Summicrons. I've now used both versions of the latest design (tabbed and built in hood) and they're great when you want sheer resolving power and sharpness. I use an old f2.8 Elmar when I want a slightly kinder rendition.
 
There's always one of us that comes along with an alternate suggestion. I just sold my tabbed summicron and own the summilux asph 50 and a new zeiss planar. The tabbed summicron developed wear in the focusing helix and would stick at 3ft sonsitently. The summicron had a good bit of flare in comparison to the summilux asph. While it was a sharp lens i was less than happy with the flare and mechanical issues. I Love the summilux but have the new zeiss planar and feel it's well ahead of the summicron in quality of build and flare controll. Resolution and contrast are excellent aswell. Overall I feel it is a better lens than the summicron and can be purchased new for about the same price as an average condition tabbed summicron. I found my new at Calumets clearance center sale on evilbay and was new in the box with USA warranty and was black. The price was $461. I sold my old summicron and told the buyer about the focus issue and sold it for over $500.
 
I have a collapsible, I use it on a screw mount body but it's a flare monster so I don't bother with it on my M bodies. I had the rigid silver 50's 50 when I had my M3, again, great lens but loved to flare, hood or no hood. All along I had the 1969 version which I loved, I even bought the latest optical version and in practical photography didn't find any difference worth keeping it. Then I got a pre-ASPH Summilux. I still have my 1969 Cron but have not used it since I got the Lux. The 43mm filter with the hood that only goes over a special filter mount is a PITA, but it ran me half what the later 46mm one would've so I live with it.
 
Summicron current / Planar

Summicron current / Planar

Hi all,
I have a question for X-Ray: in almost every thread about the Summicron, you supprt the choice of the Planar ZM. As I know the quality of your work, I take very seriously your suggestion.
Now, I'm considering selling my Rigid Summicron for a modern lens, and your suggestion of the new Planar haunt me. The Rigid Summi is a very good lens, but (it might surprised people) I don't see much difference with my Summitar, especially stopped down: the Summi is just more contrasty; the other difference is the peculiar bokeh that each lens has wide open.
Anyway, I sell the Summi, keep the Summitar and want a modern lens.
How is the Planar better than the current Summicron? Could you post your own pictures taken with the Planar?
I would most appreciate!
Best,
Marc
 
The basic diff between the latest and the older summicrae is that the newer are sharper at the edges of the frame.
 
Marc-A. said:
Hi all,
I have a question for X-Ray: in almost every thread about the Summicron, you supprt the choice of the Planar ZM. As I know the quality of your work, I take very seriously your suggestion.
Now, I'm considering selling my Rigid Summicron for a modern lens, and your suggestion of the new Planar haunt me. The Rigid Summi is a very good lens, but (it might surprised people) I don't see much difference with my Summitar, especially stopped down: the Summi is just more contrasty; the other difference is the peculiar bokeh that each lens has wide open.
Anyway, I sell the Summi, keep the Summitar and want a modern lens.
How is the Planar better than the current Summicron? Could you post your own pictures taken with the Planar?
I would most appreciate!
Best,
Marc
Click to expand...

I have all 3 of those lenses - Summitar, Rigid Cron and a ZM Planar. While I agree with X-ray about the flare issue, I really can't say which is better otherwise. Well, I personally prefer handling of Planar, as I hate focusing tabs/locks of any kind and Rigid as well as Summitar have them. Planar has a little bump, or elsewhere called - "nipple" and you can say - I like nipple. ;)
Planar ZM feels better in handling for me, as well as has shorter focus throw, - something else I like.
However........... all things considered, when it comes to image quality, there is something special about Rigid. I used to have a newer Cron, yet sold it and kept Rigid. It adds some qualities to the photo that no other lens does for me. I like Summitar very much too. It can deliver some great images. Than there is also a Minolta Rokkor 40/2 - very "fluid" lens.

So, just to confuse you even more - all these lenses are great yet each has it's own special quality and application. After all - there is a reason so many of us here have many 50mm lenses.
Good luck with your descision. ;)
 
Thanks for your answer Krosya :)
I guess with Leica we have (in French) "l'embarras du choix" (= we're spoilt for choice)! :rolleyes:
 
Hi Dan,
I know your Leica pages almost by heart; I've read them so many times ...
But I didn't found any comparison between the Planar ZM and the current Summicron. I can see the obvious difference between the Rigid Summicron and the V4 one. But how would you compare the Planar ZM and the Summicron V4?

X-Ray always claims that the new Planar is better than the new Summicron; as I highly value his opinion, I would like to understand why such a claim. (I would appreciate to see his own pictures taken with the Planar ZM).

Selling the Rigid Summicron, I know what I loose; but buying a modern lens (Summi V4 or Planar ZM) I don't know what I gain.

Best,
marc
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom