Difference between Summicrons

[ravid905]

Are there any significant differences between a collapsible and rigid Summicron of the same vintage? Also, how does a Summitar compare against the two? I prefer decent contrast over supreme sharpness if that matters.

 

[wlewisiii]

There is a nice article here: http://www.trenholm.org/hmmerk/SHBG12.pdf

For what it's worth, the Collapsable is a great lens to my eyes. There are a fair number of my recent gallery postings made with it.

William

 

[venchka]

I can only speak for one Summicron. The first and only one I've owned and used. I love it. Dual Range, second version, circa 1961.

Good luck! You will like whichever one you choose.

 

[dreamsandart]

Any Summicron will be a good lens. The first version collapsible and 1st rigid have their following for good reasons.

If you are interested in a 50 Summicron with a bit more contrast and generally better corrected try the next version in black alloy mount, sometimes called the '69' version (by me at least) or catalog #11817. I traded a DR 50 for it 30+ years ago and have always been pleased and often amazed [still] with the results. Very well built, its a nice balance of sharpness and higher contrast (Leitz lens design philosophy at the time was to increase contrast for a 'sharper' perceived image), close focus correction and handles well. If you like 'vintage' glass it still has the look with smooth bokeh but not as much 'glow' ( read 'flare' ) as the earlier versions.

 

[Flyfisher Tom]

I'm interested in this too 🙂 Anyone have an opinion on the summitar collapsible 50/2? How does it compare with the rigid or any later crons?

 

[Avotius]

I'm interested in this too 🙂 Anyone have an opinion on the summitar collapsible 50/2? How does it compare with the rigid or any later crons?

I think the summitar is pretty low contrast, my friend used to have one and to compensate he just shot all his 100 speed film at 400 and it looked great! Other then that though the shots looked pretty dull in a grey kind of way.

 

[Marc-A.]

My rigid Summitar is great for portraits, flary, low-contrast and flattering with a kind of hidden sharpness. It needs f8 to get really sharp and decently contrasty.

Rigid Summitar? You have something precious 🙄
The low contrast is kinda a problem ... I like very much my Summitar for the bokeh and the softness (especially for portrait), but sometimes I'm a bit upset when the results are "dull" as said Avotius.
Anyway the Summitar is an excellent lens, and the use of its square hood imrpoves contrast and reduces flare. I stress on the fact that its bokeh is one of the most beautiful ever.

I think the summitar is pretty low contrast, my friend used to have one and to compensate he just shot all his 100 speed film at 400 and it looked great! /QUOTE]

Which 100 speed film does he use? I haven't got really good results with the Fuji Acros, but I use to shoot the Acros at 100. Does it make a significant difference to shoot it at 400?

Best,

Marc

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

Oh, si belle! And with a Kiev + J-12, no less, an excellent combination. Bien fait.

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

Anyway the Summitar is an excellent lens, and the use of its square hood imrpoves contrast and reduces flare. I stress on the fact that its bokeh is one of the most beautiful ever.

You mean the Summarit, right? There's a lot of difference between the Summitar and the Summarit, and what you're describing sounds like the Summarit to me. I love both of them, but the Summarit is now always mounted on the M3.

 

[Marc-A.]

You mean the Summarit, right? There's a lot of difference between the Summitar and the Summarit, and what you're describing sounds like the Summarit to me. I love both of them, but the Summarit is now always mounted on the M3.

Funny that you think I'm describing the Summarit; I guess my description is so vague it can apply to other lens, or it proves that judging a lens is a matter of taste rather than of objective performance. Anyway I was talking of the Summitar the contrast of which can really be improved by the use of its hood. Maybe you disagree about the bokeh of the Summitar?

BTW, thanks for your comment on the photos 🙂

Marc

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

Funny that you think I'm describing the Summarit; I guess my description is so vague it can apply to other lens, or it proves that judging a lens is a matter of taste rather than of objective performance. Anyway I was talking of the Summitar the contrast of which can really be improved by the use of its hood. Maybe you disagree about the bokeh of the Summitar?

BTW, thanks for your comment on the photos 🙂

I've never used my Summitar with a hood on (well, once, I think). I think I got your comments on somebody else's mixed up: I thought you were saying that the contrast of the Summitar is pretty low, which I disagree. If the Summitar is clean and coated, there is some pretty decent contrast; low contrast can be due to many factors, but a "fairly low contrast" in that lens regardless of flare or no flare, is a symptom of a problem that has nothing to do with the actual optic design.

The bokeh? Very unique. Softness on the corners, depending on focusing distance. Very nice lens, imo. But not for everyone.

A plus.

 

[Ronald M]

The first `cron is sharp, but lowish in contrast to 4.0.

DR/rigid has much more better contrast. These two are the same formula. First 50 2.8 is about like these two

Version 3 is sharper overall at 2.0 and a bit more contrasty.

Version 4 is almost extreme- current 50 2.8 is much like it

A coated Summitar is similar to the first `cron.

I could post pics, but the small differences in sharpness can`t be seen on a screen.

They are all pretty decent glass, but there is visable change from one generation to the next mostly at larger stops.

 

[Ronald M]

One more point is that you should examine the lens with a small penlight from both ends while looking thru the opposite.

Any haze at all will lower contrast and change the character of the image to a flatish lowish contrast one. Sharpness is not effected until the haze gets worse. Inexperienced people or dealers with a lens to sell may tell you it does not hurt, but that is untrue.

The smaller the light, the easier it is to see the internal fog. A small keychain light is fine as is a small Maglight. A store window or overhead light will not pick up subtle cases of fog. I always carry a light when shopping. Smart dealers always check before they buy.

 

[ravid905]

Thanks again all, I know I can always rely on everyone for quick answers. What I am gathering by the responses is the consensus is on the rigid, but with a really clean example of any, you can't go wrong. Since I started shootong with a camera I found in a crawl space in my grandparents place years ago, I've come to prefer the results from older lenses. It's like looking back in history books, the images have something about them, I don't know what, that I just don't seem to be getting from my modern lenses. Not to mention the older ones are a hell of a lot cheaper.

 

[David Murphy]

I'm interested in this too 🙂 Anyone have an opinion on the summitar collapsible 50/2? How does it compare with the rigid or any later crons?

I have a coated Summitar and while I can't compare it to a Summicron, but I can tell you that to me it seems nearly, if not completely, as good as branded modern 50mm SLR lens (Nikon, Pentax, whatever). The first time I got photos back from it I as astonished at how good the quality was -- made be a believer in Leica optics.

 

[Marc-A.]

A coated Summitar is similar to the first `cron.

Really? It's not sharper and doesn't have more contrast than the Summitar? 😕
Marc

 

[Avotius]

Which 100 speed film does he use? I haven't got really good results with the Fuji Acros, but I use to shoot the Acros at 100. Does it make a significant difference to shoot it at 400?

Best,

Marc[/QUOTE]


he used to use era but I convinced him to try shooting delta 100 at 400 and develope it at 800 which is what he uses now.

 

[sockeyed]

I can't really compare between different Summicrons, but I can show you samples from my 1957 rigid Summicron:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sockeyed/tags/1957summicronrigid/

The coatings on the early Summicrons are very soft and are easily scuffed. When I bought mine, it was in bad condition, but I removed the front element and mailed it to ARAX in the Ukraine and they recoated it with a modern multicoat. Now it's flawless.

 

[Flyfisher Tom]

Nice shots Sockeyed 🙂

I really like the 1st and 3rd photo. I am impressed with how the rigid handled the potential flare situation to the right.

 

[sockeyed]

Thanks, Tom. I think that the recoating helped a lot in controlling flare; it was pretty bad prior to having the work done.