1946 coated Summitar

[Atom]

I swapped around some lenses recently and ended up with a 1946 coated Summitar with original filter and hood. Tested it briefly this evening and I am very impressed with this lens wide open. I can't wait to work with it some more and discover its full potential. I have read on this forum about the "classic" look of this Leica lens. I plan on doing some portrait testing, and comparisons, with the 50 Elmar M in the near future. The version I have is quite cean with very little visbly wrong for such an old lens. The sharpness in this image was not quite what I expected, I was expecting something much softer wide open.

 

[Atom]

That looks real good up close and wide open.

How did you date the lens?
I have one I believe to be from the same year as yours. Mine has the old f stop numbers.

Richard - Ehem Pixtu: I was told by the previous owner the year of manufacture. I do remember finding info (I believe on here) that the earlier models, pre war, were uncoated and had the older f-stop numbers. After the war they were coated and had the newer f-stop numbers. At least that's what I seem to remember, its getting to the wee hours of the morning here so I could be a bit off. Do a search, or perhaps someone else out there knows. Anyone?

This was taken, by the by, near it's close focus, probably just over a meter.

 

[payasam]

I had one from the same year. Coated, "new" aperture scale. Sometimes I wish I hadn't sold it.

 

[John Lawrence]

The Summitar is one of my favourite lenses, combining good sharpness with a "classic" look. I've also managed to find examples without cleaning marks, which is something I've never managed to do with the Summicron in LTM.

 

[helen.HH]

Absolutely FAB shot....

I wasn't so Lucky in a Summitar I had (returned)
It was way TOO soft ...I'll have to start looking again

Cheers-H

 

[like2fiddle]

I, too, love my Summitar. Mine is a ltm, from 1950. The following link dates Leica lenses by serial number. Have fun with the Summitar, and even though it makes great images without the barn door hood, using the hood can make a big difference in outdoor images.


http://www.forloren.dk/lbf/leica_lens_serial.htm

 

[marke]

Looks like you got a good one, Atom. I also have a 1946 coated Summitar. The lens is very clean, but I don't have the filter or hood. I've had i mounted on my LTM IIIf RD, but haven't used the camera or lens much. Now you've got me interested in running a roll of film through it again. I want to experiment with it more wide open, for portrait as you have done here.

Here's a few I took last year.

 

[John Lawrence]

I, too, love my Summitar. Mine is a ltm, from 1950. The following link dates Leica lenses by serial number. Have fun with the Summitar, and even though it makes great images without the barn door hood, using the hood can make a big difference in outdoor images.


http://www.forloren.dk/lbf/leica_lens_serial.htm

The hood does indeed make a big difference. However, I never really got on with the barn-door one and instead use the 12585 vented hood which just clips on to my Summitar.

 

[Atom]

I would be a lot more interested in the 12585 hood than the barn door. I find it to be very eye catching, a little too noticeable. The barn doors I have are in wonderful shape as well. Anyone interested in a swap?

Thanks Helen, for the compliments.

 

[Atom]

Just found this great thread that is a collection of information on hood alternatives to the Summitar. http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=57675

 

[raid]

I need to check my old Leica lenses out this evening. Thanks.

 

[John Lawrence]

It's worth bearing in mind that many uncoated Summitars were sent back to Leitz for coating at a later date. One of my Summitars has what looks like a bluish coating on it, and the other a green one.

 

[like2fiddle]

FWIW, my 1950 version has bluish coating and is marked in cm, not mm. I, too, read somewhere that many early post-war Summitars were sent back to the factory for coating

 

[raid]

My 1950 Summitar seems to be uncoated. I do not see any coloring.

 

[Ronald M]

I has a collaps `Cron which I disliked. Since I have run across two Summitars, one of which is near mint and came on a 111C also near mint looking, not operatioinally. It was a cupboard camera. The other is scratch free and in nice condition. Both coated.

Both are a bit soft open, 5.6 yields an expremely sharp neg.

 

[Atom]

I was rather unaware of the Summitar before I got mine. It seems people have more nice things to say about it than the collapsible cron. Mainly the comlaint I've heard is that it's rather difficult to find a good copy of the cron. Is there any reason one would be able to find better Summitars out there? Also I've read (I don't recall where) that the cron had a far superior formula to the summitar, any thoughts or evidence of this?