Summaron V. Zeiss
Summaron V. Zeiss
I bought my Summaron in 1966 new, I've babied it and it still functions as new. It was removed from the body it was on less than half a dozen times and always sported a UV filter(s). I bought my Zeiss a couple of years ago.
If you are doing available light out doors, and street photography the Summaron is superior to the Zeiss. It is also wonderful for portrait work. It takes years off the ladies. It is far more ergonomic than the Zeiss. It tends to flare more, but the Zeiss can make for halation flare too. The Summaron is noticeably wider than the Zeiss, and yet has little distortion.
The Summaron has that National Geographic 1960's look, has contrast that lends itself to manipulation in Photoshop. There is a point where less contrast means greater ability to draw subtle tonal gradations. Take your pick, micro contrast is more useful where, in highlights or shadows? Ergo, you can take away or emphasize only what is recorded.
The Zeiss is wonderful too. It has that Biogon look, and is by far my favorite Zeiss lens. It's a bit clumsy to use, and I find myself using it more and more, but only because I value my Summaron so much I want to save it for more special occasions, and it would be very difficult to replace it. 50 years later and at a price of some $1200+ for used Summaron I would always recommend the Zeiss over the Summaron because it is the only pragmatic decision. I firmly believe that unless your lay out thousands, glass is no better today, just different in look, and my preferences for my favorite imagery still lie with the hits of the past (which thank God I still own).
The Zeiss is PLENTY good for the price and performance. You can't go wrong with it.
