Leica LTM Collapsible Summicron

Leica M39 screw mount bodies/lenses

Collapsible Summicron

  • Total voters
    108
  • Poll closed .
When studying the above images carefully, the collapsible is just a tiny bit sharper than the rigid.
These two lenses came out the test as the best of quite a bit of other Leitz 50mm lenses.

Erik.
 
Last edited:
I've done similar comparisons between the Type I Rigid and Collapsible Summicrons- both in comparable condition, close to perfect glass. The Rigid did slightly better than the best Collapsible. I'll do another test on the M8 or EP2 soon.
 
Last edited:
I can't comment on the sharpness between the two but I will say that the sample image from the Rigid shows more contrast than the Collapsible.
 
Brian Sweeney said:
I've done similar comparisons between the Type I Rigid and Collapsible Summicrons.
Click to expand...

I must say that my rigid once was opened to clean it from fog. The collapsible is untouched. Maybe that is the reason of the less-than-expected quality of the rigid.
Unfortunately most of the rigids are fogged and most of the collapsibles are scratched.

Erik.
 
ItsReallyDarren said:
I can't comment on the sharpness between the two but I will say that the sample image from the Rigid shows more contrast than the Collapsible.
Click to expand...

Softer lenses show often more details than high contrast ones. I must however say that the contrast of the two examples above is almost the same. The difference with other lenses is much bigger. A VC 50mm f/2.5 is much contrastier, but less sharp.

Erik.
 
Finally got my Summicron late last week, and I'm currently testing it out. Hopefully I'll have some results soon!

From the serial number lists I've been able to find, this one seems quite early (I think?).

Summicron1.jpg
 
Vince Lupo said:
From the serial number lists I've been able to find, this one seems quite early
Click to expand...

Very early indeed! Officially the first Summicron collapsible lenses start at 10XXXXX in 1953. Yours is from 1951, very strange indeed! A very interesting lens. In those years the famous Summitar* lenses were made. These were actually Summicron prototypes. Maybe yours is a Summitar* that was given a more modern look in later years.
The engraving and form of the identification ring of your lens is different from those of later years. On my example the words Summicron f=5cm etc. is upside down compared to Ernst Leitz GmbH Wetzlar. My example also lacks the slots to unscrew the ring.

Erik.
 
Last edited:
Yes it is a 'yellow' Summicron. Who knows - maybe it's still from 1953, but perhaps the serial numbers weren't always used in the years we might think....dunno.

On a totally different tack regarding collapsible Summicrons, years ago (specifically 1993) when I was an undergrad student at Ryerson Polytechnic University in Toronto, I did a three way lens test involving a 1935 Summar, and 1950 Summarit, and a 1956 Summicron (#1348382). The Summarit yielded the highest resolving power at 89.1 l/m at f/16, the Summicron and Summar were both 79.4 l/m at f/5.6. All the lenses seems to exhibit 'coma' at maximum aperture, with the Summarit being the most pronounced. Interestingly, the Summar provided better results wide open than the Summarit! As well, the Summarit actually got sharper from f/5.6 to f/16. Overall, I concluded that the Summicron was the 'winner' of this extensive test (that is, as extensive as I could do it without the ability to do Optical Transfer Function or Edge Spread Width!), and it was the most consistent of the lenses across the board.
 
Last edited:
The serial number on the lens shown is below what I've seen pictured on the Summitar* prototype Summicrons. I've seen this lens and another pictured on Flickr in this SN range. My earliest Summicron is in the 995 range, my other two Thorium Summicrons are in the 104 range.

Many times Serial Number batches are taken out of sequence. Could have happened here.

Erwin Puts shows an picture of the Summitar*, Sn in the 93x range.

http://www.imx.nl/photo/leica/lenses/lenses/page92.html

And an early 920x Summicron on Flickr:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/focuslight/313579468/

Note lack of "GMBH".
 
Last edited:
This is for sure a radioactive lens. I also just picked one up currently being serviced. It puts out about 36 times more radiation than you are being exposed to from the sun's rays. Nevertheless it's quite a harmless amount. I work for a Fire Dept, and we have radiation detecting devices on our apparatuses.

I agree about the Summitar having more resolution than a late model collapsible summicron, however I've heard of other unscientific tests from users of the two summicron lenses that claim the radioactive one has better resolution. Leitz may have changed the glass dues to the negativity surrounding radiation in the early 50's.

Here is a link to a fellow who did some research on the Radioactive Summicron. You can translate using google translate. http://www.sky.sannet.ne.jp/seven-ss/camera/summicron50.htm

It would be fun to compare the two collapsible type lenses on an M8/M9 and see the results. Below is mine currently being serviced by Masa in Tokyo.

Thanks!
 

Attachments

  • IMG_2289.JPG
    IMG_2289.JPG
    30 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:
I used the RIT (Rochester Institute of Technology) Alphanumeric Test Targets and Kodak Tech Pan film for the 'technical' shots. For those of you not familiar with this method, you set 5 of the same test targets evenly spaced on a wall, then you set your camera on a tripod and make sure that the film plane is exactly parallel to the target plane. Then, you angle your camera so the targets go from one corner to another (then you can get the middle, outer middle, and outer edge measurements - both left and right). Once you've processed the film, you use a 'traveling microscope' to measure the number of lines per millimeter. In addition to those 'scientific' shots, I did shots out in the world using both Fuji Reala and Kodachrome 64 film. Here again, the 'real world' results seemed to mirror the test target shots. The Summar was actually the most surprising of the three lenses in terms of its image quality, though the Summicron was obviously the better lens.

The cool thing about this test (at least for me as a 3rd year undergrad student at the time) is that I presented a copy to Conrad Stenton, Chief Scientist at Hughes Leitz Optical Technologies in Midland, Ontario. Maybe it's still there!
 
Last edited:
Vince Lupo said:
The Summar was actually the most surprising of the three lenses in terms of its image quality, though the Summicron was obviously the better lens.
Click to expand...

The Summar is indeed a fine lens and more so when it is coated. I've been looking for a coated one for years and recently I found one. Regrettably I do not have the time to use it a lot. I do however agree that the collapsible Summicron is better still.

Erik.
 
Brian,

This thread sent me to my camera bag to check out my own LTM collapsible Summicron, s/n 1191xxx.

Where does that put in terms of year of manufacture, relative quality among 'Crons ?

LF.
 
Luddite Frank said:
Brian,

This thread sent me to my camera bag to check out my own LTM collapsible Summicron, s/n 1191xxx.

Where does that put in terms of year of manufacture, relative quality among 'Crons ?

LF.
Click to expand...

That is in between samples that I've personally used. Would be interesting to see some shots with it. I'm looking at a 5x7 in my office made with my 115x Summicron, and it is quite good.

What color is the coating of the 119x lens?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom