35mm dilema - what would choose, Summaron or Summicron?

[teddy]

Hello RFF's,

Just wanted to introduce myself first and greetings to all, my name is Jose from Adelaide Australia. I enjoy reading from this forum very much. I don't think I have introduced my self properly. 😉

I know there are probably many threads on this nonsensical topic. However sense doesn't come easy on the mind when it has to deal with things of the heart. In this I mean that I have a Leica Summaron 35/2.8 and a Summicron 35/2 (8 elements).

The problem: I love em both! But I can only keep one!

I'm interested to know your opinions on what YOU would keep and why. Perhaps I can drive some logic to my head by reading some FRESH opinions.

What I love about the 35/2 is the DoF effects. And that by keeping it I would have a "complete set" of lenses for my M3.

What I do like about the Summaron is that it seems to be higher contrast wide open in the centre. And it renders nice for black and white - I mean, it has a unique signature.

So, can I have some opinions? Much appreciated.

Jose

 

[maddoc]

If both of your lenses are the M3 versions then I would keep the one that suits you needs more, Summicron if you need the extra stop and Summaron if you like the rendering of that lens.

 

[teddy]

Thanks for your quick response maddoc. Yes, I like the extra stop, very useful indoors. Although, a little less contrast wide open for the Summicron but this I think is easily corrected via software. Both are M3's.

 

[Kate-the-Great]

If it were me, I'd miss the extra stop if I went with the Summitar. I am not familiar with the character of each lens though, and I do know that can make all the difference to some photographers (myself included!)

 

[Ronald M]

My Summicron was way better than the Summaron which did not sharpen up until 5.6. The `Cron has nice imaging properties wide open.

I would have the 35 Cron, 50 rigid, 90 2.8 elmarit, 135 4.0.

Look at your f2.0 and see if it has fog inside, pen light from both sides against dark background.

 

[teddy]

Thanks Ronald, my Summicron has no fog, haze or anything wrong with it. It's almost pristine. I'm very interested in knowing how many think that the Cron 35 (v.1) is "nice" at f2. I've read bags about how some don't like the "glow" or lower contrast of the lens wide open. This is why I have doubts of selling the Summaron because wide open it is sharp and contrasty. Not the corners, but they do add a charm. Another plus on the Cron 35 V.1 is that when I take photos of trees, the foliage has fantastic clarity compared to the Summaron. This leans me more towards the f2.
My lenses are the Cron 35/50/90 and 135/4 Elmarit including the Summaron 2.8 and a Collapsible Summicron.

 

[teddy]

Here's a shot with foliage:
Leica M3, Leitz Summicron 35/2 RF, Tri-X, D-76

 

[Villanova]

Thanks for your quick response maddoc. Yes, I like the extra stop, very useful indoors. Although, a little less contrast wide open for the Summicron but this I think is easily corrected via software. Both are M3's.

It sounds like you prefer the Summicron. The consensus seems to be it's sharper than the Summaron and any contrast preferences can be solved in Photoshop.

 

[Jerevan]

Contrast can be added in printing or in some digital program and the extra stop can be useful as well as the DoF effect.

A "complete set" can also be a plus point.

 

[k__43]

The OOF rendition of the summaron 2.8 is great! I wouldn't choose a summicron over it just for a few cm less DOF. I would tho for night or indoor shooting.

 

[splitimageview]

There are more than a few threads about this, and also a pdf floating around called "35/2.8 Summaron - Legendary lens?"

"The author obtained MTF readings on the Summaron 35 f/2.8, Summicron 35 V1 (8-element), and Summicron 35 V4 (pre-ASPH, so called 'bokeh king"'). The Summaron 2.8 had greater curvature of field compared to the Summicrons, but equal resolution on axis to the Summicrons, and superior resolution at the far edges compared to the 8-element Summicron. Contrast is greater with the Summaron at f/2.8 than either of the two Summicron versions tested. The bottom line is that the only lens which will beat a Summaron 35mm f/2.8 at f/2.8 is the Summicron 35mm ASPH. "

This matches my experience.

http://photo.net/leica-rangefinders-forum/00ZGWz

 

[Dektol Dan]

Keep the Summaron

Keep the Summaron

I have a number of 35's. I consider the Summaron the best.
I hold it more in reserve now because mine is very good but also more dear to me because of its age.

Check this image from corner to corner. 2.8 isn't slow on a Monochrome, the Summaron was made for it.

 

[teddy]

Pristine clarity on this image. sigh - I prefer the Summicron, but I like the Summaron clarity also. I'm tormented...

 

[mfogiel]

These are among the best 35mm lenses for B&W photography, obviously if razor sharpness is not your main concern. If for some reason you need only to keep one, I'd definitely go with the faster Summicron, because no matter what you say, a stop more is very useful in practice. Also, the Summicron 8 elements has been one of the "better" and more expensive to manufacture lenses of Leica in that period, and the second hand prices show that. I second the above suggestion for a line up with a Rigid or DR 50/2, the first Elmarit or Summicron 90 and first ELmar 135/4 - all great B&W lenses with low contrast yet excellent resolution.

 

[benji77]

I'd vote to keep the Summaron (coz I have one and it rocks).

 

[HuubL]

I have both and currently have no need to sell one, but I use the Summaron all the time and would sell the Summicron because of what it would return in currency. A v1 Cron (without goggles) is worth 3-4 Summarons. A v4 at least 2! Imagewise, they're both wonderful.

 

[teddy]

These are among the best 35mm lenses for B&W photography, obviously if razor sharpness is not your main concern. If for some reason you need only to keep one, I'd definitely go with the faster Summicron, because no matter what you say, a stop more is very useful in practice. Also, the Summicron 8 elements has been one of the "better" and more expensive to manufacture lenses of Leica in that period, and the second hand prices show that. I second the above suggestion for a line up with a Rigid or DR 50/2, the first Elmarit or Summicron 90 and first ELmar 135/4 - all great B&W lenses with low contrast yet excellent resolution.

Well, I think I do agree very much on what you say regarding the Summicron 35. I also think having the f2 family together - 35/50/90/135 for the M3 is a good thing. I mean, I have them all here!

mfogiel's images are very well developed and are an example of clarity among RFF's - show us a picture or two taken with the 35 Summicron (v1) if you have it!

 

[David Hughes]

Hi,

Simple solution for problems like this when both sides are evenly balanced.

Put both on ebay as BIN items and the minute one sells, pull the other one. That way the decision will be taken for you.

And suggesting this to you might make you decide one way or the other because you'd hate to see one go more than the other.

Regards, David