1951 Summitar - M240 - first photos

[brusby]

'Just got this nice lens from a forum member.
It had quite a bit of haze which needed cleaning. Here are some shots from first outing at the local park. No lens hood to check for flare.

In the order taken.


L1002194 by Brusby, on Flickr


L1002195 by Brusby, on Flickr

L1002201 by Brusby, on Flickr

L1002203 by Brusby, on Flickr

 

[brusby]

Few more from the same outing.

L1002210 by Brusby, on Flickr

A little flare shooting into the sun. It's birds in the sky (left), not dust spots. Lens seems to be pretty sharp.

L1002218 by Brusby, on Flickr



L1002233 by Brusby, on Flickr


L1002243 by Brusby, on Flickr

 

[brusby]

Finally, last bit of haze cleaned and back for one more shot.

M2404068 1 by Brusby, on Flickr

 

[raid]

These are beautiful B&W images. Thanks for posting them here. I recently used a Summitar on my M10 for color images.

 

[brusby]

Thanks Raid. Here's one color image from the same session. I'm really pleasantly surprised with this lens.

L1002248 by Brusby, on Flickr

 

[David Murphy]

Very nice shots. That looks like a great place to take kids and family.

The Summitar is an insanely good lens especially for it's relatively modest price (by Leica standards). It's hard to believe this is a lens from 1951!

 

[Paulbe]

Wow! Excellent pix! Looks like a great lens you have there...
Paul

 

[brusby]

Very nice shots. That looks like a great place to take kids and family.

The Summitar is an insanely good lens especially for it's relatively modest price (by Leica standards). It's hard to believe this is a lens from 1951!

Much appreciated, David! It's City Park here in New Orleans. I see lots of families there these days enjoying the sun and open spaces.

And I agree about Summitar prices. IMO they'd be a bargain at several times what most are selling for these days.

Wow! Excellent pix! Looks like a great lens you have there...
Paul

Thanks Paul. I couldn't be happier. It seems to be giving a very nice blend of both old and new image quality -- the long tonal range of classic Leica glass coupled with the sharpness and pop of more modern releases.

 

[raid]

Thanks Raid. Here's one color image from the same session. I'm really pleasantly surprised with this lens.

L1002248 by Brusby, on Flickr

A clean Summitar came close to a collapsible Summicron in optical qualities, I think.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Looks sharp and good on colour. These lenses are very impressive on bw film, it is really good they are keeping it on digital.

 

[Horatio]

I’m really tempted to get one for my M3, with an adapter.

 

[raid]

The Summitar came in two versions over the years depending on the number of aperture blades.

 

[brusby]

I'm very curious if anyone can tell which version this is based solely on these images. I've posted about 10, done at various apertures.

If you do guess, please say upon precisely what in the images you're basing your opinion.

 

[wpb]

6 bladed. L1002218. Has the hallmarks of a six bladed aperture in the highlights on the swan boats.

 

[Shac]

6 bladed. L1002218. Has the hallmarks of a six bladed aperture in the highlights on the swan boats.

I'd agree - so presumably it's post-war and coated.
Mine is post war but produced just before they changed the aperture - coated plus >>6 blades.

Your looks like it has absolutely no problem. Great IQ.

 

[brusby]

Which highlights are you referring to? These?

 

[raid]

online says: "The diaphragm used 10 blades in 1939, and oddly went back to 6 blades in 1950. The 6-bladed diaphragm is a mechanic's nightmare, deliberately designed to mushroom forward inside the lens. There are no click stops; these weren't introduced until 1953's SUMMICRON. It stops down to f/16."

 

[brusby]

I'd love to see examples of improved image quality from 10 blade Summitars. Feel free to post below.

 

[brusby]

I took mine completely apart to clean it. The aperture blades are a little more difficult to put back in place than flat ones, but calling it a nightmare is an overstatement. It's exactly the same mechanism but with curved blades.

There are reports of positive advantages to the domed aperture assembly, such as less focus shift and less vignetting. I don't know whether this is true or not. But, I did some brief testing and focus shift seems to be almost imperceptible on this example.

I also don't know yet about the vignetting. But, vignetting never bothers me anyway. In fact, I usually like a bit of it and try to use it to my advantage.

So, pick 'yer poison.

In a practical sense I'd much rather have less focus shift. The reflection shapes don't bother me in the slightest. Although I'm sure there are plenty people who have the opposite opinion.

online says: "The diaphragm used 10 blades in 1939, and oddly went back to 6 blades in 1950. The 6-bladed diaphragm is a mechanic's nightmare, deliberately designed to mushroom forward inside the lens. There are no click stops; these weren't introduced until 1953's SUMMICRON. It stops down to f/16."

 

[raid]

My Summitar was made in 1950, and it has 6 aperture blades. I am sure that Leica did not by design degrade their own Summitar when they changed the aperture design.

I own a Jupiter-8 with 18 aperture blades. It is NOT twice as good as the J-8 with fewer blades.


Summitar on m 4/3 camera: