3.5 Elmar or 2.0 Summar 50mm

[grandallj]

I have and shoot both a summar: http://www.flickr.com/search/?w=50698414@N02&q=summar

and a "red scale" elmar: http://www.flickr.com/search/?w=50698414@N02&q=elmar&m=text

and I think either lens would suit your mission. With the lenses I have, I would take the summar because I think it is adequately sharp when stopped down, but still produces stylish images when shot wide open (where it also has an advantage for being "faster"). I also think the summar handles more easily with the aperture set by a ring, rather than the tab setting on the elmar.

 

[Bingley]

I've never used a Summar, but my little 50/3.5 Elmar makes a great travel lens. Mine is a coated version from 1947 and is in very good shape. If you use iso 400 film, it works fine in low light conditions (RFF member Maddoc has some nice night photos with the Elmar on his flickr site, shooting Neopan 1600). And I think it's sharp enough...


Spoonful by bingley0522, on Flickr

 

[NickTrop]

Summar. By a mile the Summar. My sample was sharp enough. Certainly wasn't soft by f3.5. Edge sharpness is overrated and it one of those characteristics that used to be an optical function but has been easily fixed in software for over a decade - but don't oversharpen (or sharpen at all) and wreck the lovely nature of this glass. Loooow contrast at wider aps, but as others have mentioned, easily fixed. Summar = truly special/unique in its rendering as evident in the flower pic posted by Simon B. Get the best sample you can, use a hood, spring to have it serviced. In good condition it's a very special lens. In its time, the Summar was the top of the line Leica.

Great people lens. C'mon, look at the portrait posted by Raid. Can't Photoshop that.

 

[loyahk]

Color with Summar
B&W with Elmar

 

[Dralowid]

You can rely on an Elmar to produce the results you expect. The same cannot always be said for a Summar particularly into the light. The Summar is heavier and a wee bit bigger but its aperture ring is easier.

All said and done, you have a much better chance of finding a good Elmar than a good Summar.

michael

 

[retrochick]

I don't have an Elmar to make a comparison, however, here are some shots with my Summar. Pretty sharp if you ask me.

 

[loyahk]

no more than agree!
but i like both 😛

You can rely on an Elmar to produce the results you expect. The same cannot always be said for a Summar particularly into the light. The Summar is heavier and a wee bit bigger but its aperture ring is easier.

All said and done, you have a much better chance of finding a good Elmar than a good Summar.

michael

 

[Dez]

I would definitely prefer the Elmar, for travel or anything else. I have been told that the Summar is sharp, but the contrast is so very low, and the lens so prone to flare, that it's hard to tell. Probably it's a good soft focus portrait lens where its vices are seen as virtues. Like a lot of old Leitz lenses, the front element seems to be made of very soft glass, so it's difficult to find a Summar without lots of cleaning marks, which further reduce the already low contrast.

The Elmar also makes for a really pocketable combination, and looks appropriately cool/funky as well.

Cheers,
Dez

 

[healyzh]

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?

I have a Summar from 1934, and a second one that is a bit newer. I also have a Summitar from 1949. All are excellent lenses. The Summitar is sharper, but the Summar is a good fit for me. In fact I spent a lot of time and effort finding a really nice Summar (the 1934 I have), the newer one and the Summitar were both purchased on whims after I got my good Summar (the 2nd was purchased in part because it is beat up).

The following were all shot with the lenses on my M9, I think the flag photo is especially sharp. Some of the lack of sharpness in the first shot is due to how it was processed.

While I'm currently trying to learn to like the Summitar (in part because it is sharper), I most emphatically LOVE the Summar!!! My chief complaint is the lack of contrast, which is easy to overcome in digital post-processing (I've even done this with film shot in my M6 TTL).

Summar:

Friday Night Cruise-In by Zane's Photography, on Flickr


She lost her first tooth! by Zane's Photography, on Flickr


Gimme that ole Summar Swirl! by Zane's Photography, on Flickr


Summitar:

1949 Leica Summitar f/2 lens by Zane's Photography, on Flickr

 

[Thomas78]

I don't have any experience with a Summar right now, but I like my uncoated Elmar from 1934 very much:


Leica III bl_Elmar 50 3,5_01_Ilford PAN F_001 von thomas.78 auf Flickr