3.5 Elmar or 2.0 Summar 50mm

[denizg7]

Hi guys,


I am having the hardest time picking out my main travelling lens.

I really like the Summar's old glowy look and the Elmar is the tiniest 50mm when it comes to collapsing it.

I was hearing from people that If I use a lens for a leica before '54 with an adapter the image output would be way too soft. Is this true?

As much as I love the Summar's signature look, I would like it to get sharp at around f8 to f16.

Thanks

Any suggestion is welcome, if anyone has an output who owns both the lenses would be great.

66 percent of the time I will shoot b&w

 

[Beemermark]

In 40 years I never used a Summar that was sharp. I know people will disagree but that's my experience with a number of them.

If you want the aberrations of a Summar AND a (relatively) sharp lens, find a 1.5 Summarit (?). Has that look you like wide open but gets pretty good at f4 and on.

 

[denizg7]

the summarit is nice. But the 1.5 version is not as portable as I would want it to be. This will be my travelling lens for a ultra compact setup, and I would want it to have that old world glow to it but also for it to become relatively sharp at higher f stops

 

[philipus]

I have read good things about the red scale Elmar as a sharp lens. I confess that I've never used one myself though.

I know you asked about the Summar and Elmar but perhaps you'd consider a Summitar? I use a coated 1950s model which I find brilliant. Plenty sharp and lovely bokeh. Plus it's f2 and that's fast enough usually. The aperture ring is also more user-friendly than the Elmar.

As for adapter influence, I have never experienced that and I have several old LTM lenses.

philip

 

[denizg7]

yeah thanks. Completely forgot about the Summitar. Well I am just going to compare photographs on flickr and make up my mind i guess.

thanks

 

[charjohncarter]

In 40 years I never used a Summar that was sharp. I know people will disagree but that's my experience with a number of them.

If you want the aberrations of a Summar AND a (relatively) sharp lens, find a 1.5 Summarit (?). Has that look you like wide open but gets pretty good at f4 and on.

I agree, but there is something about it, and I like it. Even though I haven't used one for almost 50 years.

 

[raid]

I use both lenses you are referring to, but I have only obce taken the Elmar as a seondary travel lens. It is good lens for sunny times. Come to think of it, why dont you take both lenses with you? The Summar is very good for portraits in open shade, with a lens hood always on the lens.

 

[denizg7]

Hey Raid,

Is the Elmar you have uncoated? Should I try to look for an uncoated lens or a single coated lens?

I will mostly shoot black and white and I am actually a fan of little bit of flare with old lenses.

 

[raid]

My Elmar is most likely either single coated or uncoated. It is sharp at 8.0 and upwards.
It is very small and light, as you know. I would take with me the Summar for interiors shots inside buildings and for portraits. The Summar needs to be protected from direct sunlight, or you will get lots of flare in the images. A trick is to shoot in open shade.

Keep it simple.

 

[TheHub]

Any suggestion is welcome, if anyone has an output who owns both the lenses would be great.

That's kind of tough. I own and love both lenses, but personally I'd go with the Elmar.

It's slightly smaller, collapses thinner and is coated.

 

[raid]

I shoot mostly in color. This is an image taken with a Summar:

 

[raid]

Here is a B&W image taken by the Elmar:

 

[raid]

The Elmar with color film.

 

[Toccata]

I think the coated summitar (late '40's) essentially splits the difference between the elmar and the summar. Not perfectly, of course. Less glow than the summar (unless you get an uncoated lens) and less sharp than an elmar in excellent condition.

 

[Mudman]

I have never had a problem with sharpness with my summar. You just need to make sure they've been serviced to remove haze. I like and use both lenses. They're different in rendering certainly.

 

[goamules]

I've been shooting a Summar clone, Fed 50/2.0. It flares badly, even indoors if there is a skylight or window nearby. When I shade it with my hand, the contrast increases markedly, so a hood would be imperative. I would not mess with a Summar for an important trip lens. Take the Elmar.

 

[David Hughes]

Hi,

I've had all of them; uncoated Elmars and Summars, coated Summitars and a Summar. They are all nice, pleasant lenses.

But, here's my point, nowadays they will all be second-hand lenses. So there's no guarantee of what you are getting. I've had excellent and very bad examples of all of them (except the uncoated Elmars). So you pays your money and crosses your fingers.

Regards, David

 

[denizg7]

Hmm I can see how elmar renders more sharply than the summar.

I hope I did not make the wrong choice but the Summar definitely has a glow to it unlike any other leica lens I had.

What I want to use the Summar is for a project where when I travel to Cities around the world, there are always parts that are untouched , places that are dubbed "olde city" or just poor unchanged districts and capture it as if it was taken a while back.

thank you everyone for your input and it certainly helped me

 

[Ronald M]

Watch out for internal fog which you check for with a keychain light or penlight,both sides.

Noncoated lenses will have lower contrast and more pastel as opposed to saturated colors.

3.5 Elmar will sharpen up at 5.6, at least my red scale does. Summar gets almost sharp. It needs a lens shade.

A clean Summitar is a better investment. It will be sharp at 5.6, soft wide open.

A shade is recommended for all these older lenses.

 

[Simon Bruxelles]

In its day the 5cm Summar 5cm was top of the range of Letiz lenses and almost exactly twice as expensive as the 5cm Elmar. It was exceptionally sharp with a fast aperture. It still is, but only if it is in good condition and that means a recent service. I have three and as long as you use a lens hood are as good as the Elmar. The difference is the image from a Summar is relatively low contrast, not so good on paper but an easy fix on screen. I particularly like colour images from the Summer which have a delicate pastel look. The only reason for not taking a clean Summar is that it weighs quite a bit more than the Elmar.


Photos-3 by debrux2010, on Flickr