35mm Summicron 6-element early or late one?

[edwliang]

hi everyone, i am looking at 6-element of Leica Summicron, but i dont know if v2 or v3. I know there is a tiny tab of aperture ring with v2, is it bad for handling?

beside handling and built quality, is the performance much different?
cheers

 

[fotomeow]

When I had the v3, I dont recall the tab being an issue. Perhaps it depends how big your fingers are.
The v3, in my experience is just a bit more contrasty than the v2. This may also give the appearance of being slightly more sharp, but is more due to contrast, IMO>

v3 is an excellent lens. Be aware of the hype of v2.

 

[ferider]

hi everyone, i am looking at 6-element of Leica Summicron, but i dont know if v2 or v3. I know there is a tiny tab of aperture ring with v2, is it bad for handling?

beside handling and built quality, is the performance much different?
cheers

In theory, the v3 should have slightly better corners and less vignetting (per Lager, the optical formulas are different). But it will depend much on the sample that you get. So, if all else is equal (cosmetics, price, etc.), get a v3.

 

[Ronald M]

version 1 was collapsible

2 was rigid/ DR, almost always satin chrome and has small tab /infinity lock.

3 was usually if not always black, no infinity lock & no tab

4 was black and early ones had no shade , later current have a slide out shade.

Post a photo

None are bad handling. #2 has two slots in aperture ring for accessories

Just remembered there were two versions of #2, front element is distinctly different. A version was heavy chrome. B version was satin chrome.

As the line progressed , the center area of sharp definition at F 2.0 gets bigger until it cover the full frame on the APO. Finger tab returned on APO.

Around 4 or 5.6 all are fully sharp, but contrast gains are evident.

None are bad handling unless you demand finger tab.

 

[edwliang]

version 1 was collapsible

2 was rigid/ DR, almost always satin chrome and has small tab /infinity lock.

3 was usually if not always black, no infinity lock & no tab

4 was black and early ones had no shade , later current have a slide out shade.

Post a photo

None are bad handling. #2 has two slots in aperture ring for accessories

Just remembered there were two versions of #2, front element is distinctly different. A version was heavy chrome. B version was satin chrome.

As the line progressed , the center area of sharp definition at F 2.0 gets bigger until it cover the full frame on the APO. Finger tab returned on APO.

Around 4 or 5.6 all are fully sharp, but contrast gains are evident.

None are bad handling unless you demand finger tab.

hi ronald, actually, we are talking about 35mm, sorry.

 

[edwliang]

When I had the v3, I dont recall the tab being an issue. Perhaps it depends how big your fingers are.
The v3, in my experience is just a bit more contrasty than the v2. This may also give the appearance of being slightly more sharp, but is more due to contrast, IMO>

v3 is an excellent lens. Be aware of the hype of v2.

gary, how contrasty is v3 if you can compare it to v4 please?

 

[iaeaix]

gary, how contrasty is v3 if you can compare it to v4 please?

Tried v3 briefly for sometime, it is very similar to V4 in terms of contrasty


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[edwliang]

Tried v3 briefly for sometime, it is very similar to V4 in terms of contrasty


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

thank you gary. one more question, v4 seems to be softer wide open?

 

[Rob-F]

v3 is an excellent lens. Be aware of the hype of v2.

What hype is that? What has been said? I wasn't aware of any "legends" around version 2.

 

[Rob-F]

I looked it up in Erwin Puts "Leica Lens Compendium". Puts says the v. 2 is a little sharper in the field at wider apertures (but not as good as the 8 element v. 1). Version 3, he says, has better flare performance than v.2, but less sharp in the field.

I like that little "semaphore flag" tab! It's cute!

 

[maddoc]

Just be aware that some 35/2.0 Summicron lenses (late vs2, early vs3?) don`t have a filter thread and require series vii (or similar sized) filters and the hood 12504 for the purpose of using filters.

 

[edwliang]

Just be aware that some 35/2.0 Summicron lenses (late vs2, early vs3?) don`t have a filter thread and require series vii (or similar sized) filters and the hood 12504 for the purpose of using filters.

thank you. i think v2 of summicron 35 is all of which dont have a filter thread.

 

[edwliang]

What hype is that? What has been said? I wasn't aware of any "legends" around version 2.

the hype is that v2 has better built-quality. and maybe better optic. and v2 has a very short production period that it became a collector lens. Maybe i am wrong.

 

[Rob-F]

the hype is that v2 has better built-quality. and maybe better optic. and v2 has a very short production period that it became a collector lens. Maybe i am wrong.

Well, Put's statement that v2 is sharper in the field, would seem to support the "hype." But then again, if the v3 has better flare performance, as he says it does, then it becomes a question of preference. Should we value sharpness? Then v2 has better optics. Do we need lower flare? Then v3 is better.

 

[raid]

I am content with my 8-element Summicron 35/2.

 

[jnclde]

Question: Has anyone had the v3 and/or v4 and a 40mm Summicron-c/M-Rokkor derivative and compared the results? I currently own the v3 50mm Summicron and the 40mm M-Rokkor v1 and adore the way the 50mm v3 renders. I want to create a kit where my two main lenses match optically in color and rendering. I was curious if it would be worth letting go of my 40mm to get the 35mm of the same era. But many sources online state that the 40mm is optically comparable to the 35mm v3.

 

[raid]

The Summicron-C is an underpriced lens, but its overall performance is great. Its main "shortcoming" is its 40mm focal length that many photographers find less pleasing than using a 35mm lens.

 

[Ronald M]

hi ronald, actually, we are talking about 35mm, sorry.

Sorry Got that this morning. All that writing for nothing. Feel stupid.

 

[maddoc]

From my experience, the 40mm M-Rokkor (CLE version) is on par with the 50/2.0 Summicron vs 4 (the one with the focusing tab but no integrated hood), while the 35mm 2.0 vs3 renders more similar to any of the older 50mm Summicron lenses.

Question: Has anyone had the v3 and/or v4 and a 40mm Summicron-c/M-Rokkor derivative and compared the results? I currently own the v3 50mm Summicron and the 40mm M-Rokkor v1 and adore the way the 50mm v3 renders. I want to create a kit where my two main lenses match optically in color and rendering. I was curious if it would be worth letting go of my 40mm to get the 35mm of the same era. But many sources online state that the 40mm is optically comparable to the 35mm v3.

 

[Steve M.]

I think the best version would be whichever one you already have on your camera :]

I'm not a wide shooter, but yes, the 40 Rokkor is every bit the equal of anything around that focal length. I had one for a short spell and it was great. If I shot a 35 and didn't need a fast lens, my preference would be an old Elmar 35 3.5 because it has such a classic Leica way of rendering. I almost kept the one that was attached to a camera I bought, but if you're used to shooting 50's and 90's and move to a 35, it looks real different in the viewfinder. I was always hunting around for something to focus on, but w/ that focal length it seems you just sorta aim the camera and get all this stuff in the shot that is normally cropped out w/ the longer glass. It's just a different way of seeing. Things looked awfully far away too, for obvious reasons.