Phantomas
Well-known
OK, I know there is no straightforward answer to this question, but I need to make up my mind so thought I'd get some suggestions here. The story: I have two 35mm M mount lenses - 2.8/35 Summaron and 2/35 Biogon. Both are in excellent condition (Biogon better as it's new). I haven't had either long enough to form opinion on which one is better or which one I like more, but by default I prefer Biogon. Now I need to decide whether to sell the Summaron or not. The urgency is that a good friend just got into rangefinders and bought an M4-2. Without a lens. He has an Industar from me on loan to get him started, but wants a 35mm and/or 50mm of his own. My original plan was to use both 35s long enough to see if I really like Summaron enough to keep it, but there's no time for that now. So, two questions:
1. Can I assume that Biogon is simply better than Summaron and sell the later with no regrets? Or does Summaron have some legendary qualities/signature that make it absolutely worth keeping? Like I said, I do not have enough photos to judge the results. I like Biogon coz it's well built, very smooth, f/2 vs 2.8. I like Summaron coz (silly reason) it comes with a hood and I really like using hoods for protection (the way I carry the camera).
2. If I do sell the Summaron, what would be a good price to charge a friend? I bought it as a part of a set, so it didn't have a fixed price. The lens is very clean, comes with original Leica hood, all caps, original plastic case.
Thanks for your opinions.
1. Can I assume that Biogon is simply better than Summaron and sell the later with no regrets? Or does Summaron have some legendary qualities/signature that make it absolutely worth keeping? Like I said, I do not have enough photos to judge the results. I like Biogon coz it's well built, very smooth, f/2 vs 2.8. I like Summaron coz (silly reason) it comes with a hood and I really like using hoods for protection (the way I carry the camera).
2. If I do sell the Summaron, what would be a good price to charge a friend? I bought it as a part of a set, so it didn't have a fixed price. The lens is very clean, comes with original Leica hood, all caps, original plastic case.
Thanks for your opinions.
SimonSawSunlight
Simon Fabel
I would still keep both. I have and love the combination of a modern 35 (nokton f1.2, color-skopar) and the classic look my 35mm f3.5 summaron produces.
get your friend another f3.5 Summaron for ~150$, or maybe a Komura? or a Color-Skopar. maybe stroll the local camera shops with him?
get your friend another f3.5 Summaron for ~150$, or maybe a Komura? or a Color-Skopar. maybe stroll the local camera shops with him?
Krosya
Konicaze
You say - it's a good friend, so let him borrow your Summaron and see if he likes it. At the same time - see if you miss it. It sounds like you prefer Biogon anyway. And if he doesnt like it - there are many other 35 mm lenses out there.
Phantomas
Well-known
Oh that's for sure, my lens collection is open for him to borrow and that's what's going to happen, but of course he'll need a lens or two of his own.
Looking at the photos on Flickr I quite like the oldschool look the Summaron produces. Might end up like Simon suggested - keep both lenses and help him find another one, plenty around. I just hate accumulating gear and was checking if there are some strong arguments against keeping two of these particular lenses (plus another 35 in F mount).
Looking at the photos on Flickr I quite like the oldschool look the Summaron produces. Might end up like Simon suggested - keep both lenses and help him find another one, plenty around. I just hate accumulating gear and was checking if there are some strong arguments against keeping two of these particular lenses (plus another 35 in F mount).
Krosya
Konicaze
I think that these two lenses are different enough for it to be worth keeping both. You probably know that many of us here, me included, are crazy enough to have multiple lenses in the same FL just because they differ in size or signature. I have 4 different 35's and find excuse to keep them all. 
At least for now. And dont get me started on 50's hehe.I have even more of those.
At least for now. And dont get me started on 50's hehe.I have even more of those.
You have to keep both until you know if you like either or both as keepers.
Take Samsonite down to the shop to get his own lens. Make sure he gets something different so you have 3 35mm lenses to try.
Take Samsonite down to the shop to get his own lens. Make sure he gets something different so you have 3 35mm lenses to try.
Sparrow
Veteran
I've never used a Biogon and I'm sure it has a better spec that the Summeron, but I would be loathe to give up the Summaron, what for me is the quintessential RF lens, just right, like Goldilocks porridge
Last edited:
mfogiel
Veteran
I hve the Biogon, the Summaron and The 35/1.2 Nokton. Each serves different purpose, but if I had to keep just one, it would be the Biogon, because it is the most versatile and technically perfect. However in real life, I shoot most of the time with the Summaron during the day and Nokton at night. I only shoot B&W, and the Summaron is legendary enough for B&W for me...
Summaron
Biogon
Nokton
Summaron
Biogon
Nokton
Phantomas
Well-known
Hehe, sounds like a winning idea. Let's see if I can convince him to get a Summilux....
What does "Samsonite" mean? I only know luggage and a mineral.
Phantomas
Well-known
mfogiel - ironically I was just looking at those photos of yours on Flickr (when i was searching for Summaron examples)
friendly luggage reference. stop carrying him around and let him get his own lens.
John Lawrence
Well-known
Whilst I would plump for the Summaron 2.8, I think that, as others have said, you really need to use both extensively before making a decision.
One other thing that may be worth bearing in mind is the way prices have risen for the Summaron over the past few years. Not long ago, a good used Summaron 2.8 could be had for around £250.00 sterling. A quick flip through some dealers sites here in the UK, show they are now selling for around double that!
John
One other thing that may be worth bearing in mind is the way prices have risen for the Summaron over the past few years. Not long ago, a good used Summaron 2.8 could be had for around £250.00 sterling. A quick flip through some dealers sites here in the UK, show they are now selling for around double that!
John
kermaier
Well-known
Doesn't CZ make a hood for the Biogon? And if you don't like the vented, bayonet hood, you could get one of the CV 43mm screw-in hoods with push-on cap that came with the 35/2.5 Skopar Pancake I -- then you could leave it on the lens all the time, and never have to fiddle around with those crappy CZ pinch-caps again.
Anyway, I have a Summaron 35/2.8, as well as a UC-Hex 35/2 (plus a few other 35s, but let's not go there), and I can't bring myself to part with either.
::Ari
Phantomas
Well-known
I didn't realise they were so "expensive", I expected the lens to be somewhere under 200, but admitedly haven't done research on that. Wow, that means I got a REALLY good deal on that M4 set
Doesn't CZ make a hood for the Biogon? And if you don't like the vented, bayonet hood, you could get one of the CV 43mm screw-in hoods with push-on cap that came with the 35/2.5 Skopar Pancake I -- then you could leave it on the lens all the time, and never have to fiddle around with those crappy CZ pinch-caps again.
Anyway, I have a Summaron 35/2.8, as well as a UC-Hex 35/2 (plus a few other 35s, but let's not go there), and I can't bring myself to part with either.
::Ari
You're right, there's indeed a hood for CZ. I didn't yet get to buying one (it's probably expensive, no?) but just placed a wanted ad here on RFF. Another good thing about Summaron is the size - it's very small, even with the hood on.
MCTuomey
Veteran
not much to add other than the only reason to keep the summaron would be that you like its old-school rendering. but wait, you haven't figured that out yet. so, you need to keep it until you do ...
fwiw, i have the 35/2 biogon. the only lens i'd sell it for would be the c-biogon. yes, i like zeiss lenses to an unnatural degree. pay no mind to my opinion.
i use a CV screw-in hood for my 35/2. works great. those expensive big ole zeiss bayonet hoods aren't so handy. look impressive though.
fwiw, i have the 35/2 biogon. the only lens i'd sell it for would be the c-biogon. yes, i like zeiss lenses to an unnatural degree. pay no mind to my opinion.
i use a CV screw-in hood for my 35/2. works great. those expensive big ole zeiss bayonet hoods aren't so handy. look impressive though.
Last edited:
ferider
Veteran
Do a little test, Phantomas. If you have a good Summaron copy, it might have higher center resolution and nicer bokeh than the Biogon. Also color rendering should be quite different. If you care for this stuff. Obviously the Biogon is more flare resistant, faster, etc.
Then again, a clean M2 Summaron can go for US 700 or more. That's a lot of money for a lens that you mostly leave at home.
Roland.
Then again, a clean M2 Summaron can go for US 700 or more. That's a lot of money for a lens that you mostly leave at home.
Roland.
Phantomas
Well-known
I'm a huge CZ sucker myself, so I've already been cursed. Thanks for the hood advise. Is it vented? Will look into it.
That's my point - hate having gear not being used much. I guess i'll keep it for a while and see how much use each of these lenses gets. And again - I'm surprised by the price! Actually I bought the whole set of M4 + Summaron + 50 Summicron + MR meter + a bunch of original hoods and accessories for less than that. Didn't realise it then, but now... score!
MCTuomey
Veteran
No, not vented. Stephen G has round ones new for $30. I use the older, smaller ones he used to offer as replacements for CV original 43mm hoods. Maybe he has some of those left.
You can get the heavy star vented ones from eBay, cheap. But they're screw-in and add to the overall length, so I don't use them myself.
Oh Two
Established
The Last to Go
The Last to Go
I have a Biogon, very nice, rather contrasty, and has a kind of bluish cast to it (I shoot only color these days), and it's BIG (if you can't get it behind an old timey case I don't like it). I also have an Ultron, (not in the race) and a 2.8 Summaron I've had since new.
The Summaron has the 'look', it's small, and plenty fast for me. I find it flare resistant enough (I was taught basic principles like 'don't shoot into the sun' from the beginning), and I love its contrast (perfect for Photoshop), and color (perfect mate for modern color negative films).
A new Biogon is easily had, a minty Summaron isn't.
Now the choice based on that alone is an easy one.
The Last to Go
I have a Biogon, very nice, rather contrasty, and has a kind of bluish cast to it (I shoot only color these days), and it's BIG (if you can't get it behind an old timey case I don't like it). I also have an Ultron, (not in the race) and a 2.8 Summaron I've had since new.
The Summaron has the 'look', it's small, and plenty fast for me. I find it flare resistant enough (I was taught basic principles like 'don't shoot into the sun' from the beginning), and I love its contrast (perfect for Photoshop), and color (perfect mate for modern color negative films).
A new Biogon is easily had, a minty Summaron isn't.
Now the choice based on that alone is an easy one.
beyond
Jason Beyond
A Biogon for me too.