$10,000 Summitar!

[Rob-F]

Get out your checkbooks. Some early Collapsible Summicrons were marked as Summitar, the immediate precursor to the Summicron. It looks like Setadel, in Canada, ran across one, and is hoping for nearly ten grand! Well, I don't know. Wouldn't you rather have a Noctilux for that kind of money?

http://www.ebay.com/itm/LEICA-50mm-...TM-Screw-Mount-LENS-RARE-w-Cps-/281778321135?

 

[photomoof]

The lenses have an asterisk after the name Summitar.

Reported that James Lager Vol 2 does have an illustration of these lenses, but mine is packed away, maybe someone can look it up?

 

[Blind_spark]

A rare bird, indeed - if collectiblend is any reference, his price isn't too far out of line (though there is a large gap in their estimates, and one had to wonder if this one falls into it as it's described). It's a collector's item really - the Noctilux is probably already bought at that point.

I think I read somewhere that they were quietly distributed, perhaps to select photographers, for testing before the Summicron went into full production. There was also a version in a Compur shutter...yikes!

 

[mfogiel]

This has nothing to do with photographing, but rather with a collecting bubble mentality based on rarity alone.
"Charles Mackay, in his definitive history of early financial bubbles, Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841), published a list of objects (and their prices) which were exchanged for "one single root of the rare species ( of tulip ) called the Viceroy":

Two lasts of wheat (448 florins)
Four lasts of rye (558 florins)
Four fat oxen (480 florins)
Eight fat swine (240 florins)
Twelve fat sheep (120 florins)
Two Hogsheads of wine (70 florins)
Four tuns of beer (32 florins)
Two tuns of butter (192 florins)
One thousands lbs. of cheese (120 florins)
A complete bed (100 florins)
A suit of clothes (80 florins)
A silver drinking-cup (60 florins)"

I would rather take the wine and cheese...

 

[Vobluda]

I understand it correctly that you are not interested in the lens? 😀

This has nothing to do with photographing, but rather with a collecting bubble mentality based on rarity alone.
"Charles Mackay, in his definitive history of early financial bubbles, Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841), published a list of objects (and their prices) which were exchanged for "one single root of the rare species ( of tulip ) called the Viceroy":

Two lasts of wheat (448 florins)
Four lasts of rye (558 florins)
Four fat oxen (480 florins)
Eight fat swine (240 florins)
Twelve fat sheep (120 florins)
Two Hogsheads of wine (70 florins)
Four tuns of beer (32 florins)
Two tuns of butter (192 florins)
One thousands lbs. of cheese (120 florins)
A complete bed (100 florins)
A suit of clothes (80 florins)
A silver drinking-cup (60 florins)"

I would rather take the wine and cheese...

 

[David Hughes]

Hi,

Ten silver florins weigh 3.65 oz if I remember correctly. That's assuming it was the standard European florin in silver. So what would their value as scrap silver be? Hmmm...

Regards, David

 

[photomoof]

Hi,

Ten silver florins weigh 3.65 oz if I remember correctly. That's assuming it was the standard European florin in silver. So what would their value as scrap silver be? Hmmm...

Regards, David

Silver and Gold, not unlike bitcoins are mined, at a cost. The origin of "making money" literally, you dug it up, refined it, minted it, and hoped for a profit.

Silver and Gold for instance measured in the price of quicksilver used to refine it. "Making money" was perhaps once more literal, but there are always those who long for that system. There is of course a point where labor makes it impossible to make money from gold, and especially from silver.

He probably does not want the lens, although clearly it is a rather steady form of currency, which has held up better than gold.

(By the way a lot of money to be made from tulips, they were just ahead of their time, ask any of the major retailers with garden centers)

 

[mfogiel]

Indeed, I don't need the lens. Why ?
- Because I already have a Summitar and a Collapsible Cron, so a Summit-cron would be a double...

 

[Timmyjoe]

I think the pricing is somewhat whacko. I guess maybe someone would pay that kind of price for it, not sure why. Saw an early M3 with collapsible Summicron on eBay yesterday, nothing special, early serial number, and the guy was asking $7500 for it. Ridiculous.

 

[rbelyell]

ive seen a lot of noctilux photos and while a few were quite good, my general conclusion is that the vast majority, myself included, do not know how to properly use it, or perhaps better put, use it in a way that is unappealing except to those who appreciate out of focus portraits.

just recently i reviewed an m9 photo thread on a forum and many of the shots were with a noctilux that imo yielded results i would have deleted. in the middle of these was a summarit post of a wonderfully executed photo. the juxtaposition and extreme result difference was striking.

 

[photomoof]

Indeed, I don't need the lens. Why ?
- Because I already have a Summitar and a Collapsible Cron, so a Summit-cron would be a double...

That is not a lens one "needs."

Surely you have some expensive things you don't really need? Anyway, most of us do. 🙂

 

[Corran]

Some collectible camera gear is expensive due to rarity but is functionally identical to commonly available items. So the market is smaller - a photographer who wants a Summicron to shoot with isn't going to buy that.

Conversely, other items are rare and/or expensive but have no real equivalent. These may be of interest to a photographer for the uniqueness of the item or integration into their workflow and vision.

This SummitarCron vs. Noctilux thing shows that pretty well. I've got a really rare and historically interesting lens that is worth a bunch of money that I need to send to Westlicht or similar auction house. It's similarly of no interest to a "regular" photographer since functionally identical items are available for cheap.

Interesting bit of history though, good to know. That Summitar is an item that a lay person wouldn't realize was worth anything, while a Google/eBay search of "Noctilux" would show exactly what that lens is selling for. Therefore it may be more common for an eagle-eyed person to find a rare SummitarCron for little money than a Noctilux (then sell the rare item and get a Noct!).

 

[Rob-F]

Lager mentions it on p. 35 of my copy of "Leica Illustrated Guide II" (1978). He says the prototype Summicron, marked "Summitar *" "made available in 1950 for testing."

 

[zuiko85]

Collecting is just another hobby. As far as cameras go it could be expensive or not. For instance, if one wanted to have a collection of 110 film cameras (and started 20 years ago) then for a modest sum you could build an extensive collection. Some would be more expensive, a Canon ED20 comes to mind, but many would would have been in the $1~$5 range. At least for the short term, even the film is available again from Lomography.

 

[splaaash]

Their summar is No.812296 mine is 875xxx but dosn t have the filter thread or f22 but that cant be hard to add???? Can it

 

[mdarnton]

If I were obscenely rich, I'd put out the $10K just to take some pictures with this lens and see what kind of four element, four group lens Leica could make that they would think could possibly replace the Summitar! It must be a very interesting design, donchathink?

 

[LeicaTom]

I had one of those in the 1980's sold it then for like $2,500 so, the increase I would think it's a $6,000 lens all day, but that kind of lens is sold or traded within a very very small group of Leicaphiles, who spend $10k+ a week on anything marked Leitz........

Tom