Differentiating Summitars?

[ra1nforest]

Hello friends,

I recently tried out a Summitar 50/2 and instantly fell in love with it seeing the darkroom prints taken with the lens. I've decided in getting a copy, but am unsure of the different version/s of this lens.

From what I've read, there are pre-war and post-war versions, translating itself to uncoated and coated versions. Correct me if I am wrong, but I was just wondering if there was a good way to differentiate between these lenses either through physical attributes, serial numbers etc? Any help and advice is much appreciated 🙂

Thank you very much.

 

[sanmich]

There are also two different types of iris / aperture.
One (later??) is quite round, while the other have what is called dog legs aperture blades and a hexagonal shape aperture (was it hexagonal?) with a different bokeh.

 

[Hacker]

The later (higher serial number) coated one that I have has hexagonal iris blades. The earlier one is rounded but uncoated.

 

[Shac]

Don't think it's as clear as this - I have a coated version from 1946 ( I believe all post war ones were coated) and it has the multi-bladed "round" iris

 

[WoolenMammoth]

dont mean to muddle things, but I was under the impression that the round iris followed the hex. I have one of each, the round iris certainly seems to be built a little better. I prefer the look of the hex though, the bok is definitely a tad different between the two. Probably not too much to get all bent and concerned about, but if you wanted to nit pick, there's enough of a difference to be cerebral about it if you wanted to. Whats probably more important is finding a clean one, Ive had a few over the past while and they all improved dramatically after a cla. I dont know if its my bad luck or if these are prone to haze but I would definitely look into that when you purchase so you can factor the cost of a cleaning if you need it.

 

[eia41]

For whatever it is worth, Hexagon or Hexagonal means "of six" or "with six corners" - from the Greek "hexi" (number 6) and "gonia" corner. Consider Pentagon, Polygon Trigonometry etc

 

[ravid905]

One of the easier ways I believe to tell the two apart, is the numbers on the aperture ring. If they are 2, 2.2, 3.2, etc. I think it would be the older model and possibly uncoated. The second version would have the more modern numbers 2, 2.8, 4, etc. Also, the second series will have a slight groove in the barrel which I think can be used for attaching a hood. The first link shows early uncoated: http://www.ritzcam.com/catalog/images/LS_5275.jpg and the second link a later coated: http://www.amaprophoto.com/532 Leitz L summitar 5f2 enke_1.jpg.
Also my Summitar, from 1939, has the circular blades but I have no idea when they were made round or hexagonal.

 

[ravid905]

Also I am not sure when exacly Leitz started coating there lenses, but I may have read somewhere that it was post war. This link will give you an idea of the year when a lens was made: http://www.forloren.dk/lbf/leica_lens_serial.htm

 

[Melvin]

Mine has the 2, 2.2, 3.2, etc numbers. It is coated and has a round aperture. 1946.

 

[John Shriver]

Summitars started being coated around 589xxx, which is war-time production.

Condition is all-important on Summitars. Super-soft coating, super-soft front glass (flint, lead crystal). Differences in condition would be more important than the different versions.

 

[sanmich]

Summitars started being coated around 589xxx, which is war-time production.

Condition is all-important on Summitars. Super-soft coating, super-soft front glass (flint, lead crystal). Differences in condition would be more important than the different versions.

For some reasons, the three or four Summitars I have handled in my life had clean front elements while the coll summicrons, all of them had more or less signs on their front elements.

 

[rtphotos]

whoa... some confusion going on in this thread. 😉

The round aperture was employed BEFORE the hexagonal dog-legged type.

From sampling done in a previous thread, we determined that the switch occurred between serial numbers 792XXX and 7978XX (ca.1950).

Please go to the original thread for the discussion:
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=54605

Please note John Shrivers post (#18) regarding the start of coating (during WWII).

Thanks!

rt 😎

 

[John Lawrence]

And just to muddy the waters still further - bear in mind that many users sent back early uncoated lenses to be coated later on!

 

[mcgrattan]

My Summitar has the older aperture designation [2.2, 3.2 etc], has round aperture blades and a 561xxx serial number [1940?]. It also appears to be coated.

So I assume that's an after-sale factory coating of the lens as with that serial number I assume it wasn't coated originally.

 

[muser53]

I spoke with Sherry Krauter the other day and she recommended that the flat bladed lenses if you shoot a lot of back lit scenes. It is her opinion that they render the out of focus areas in a slightly more pleasing way than do the domed bladed lenses. Other than that (if I understood her properly) there is not much difference in the signiture of the difference versions. She then added her own Summitar is a domed version! She did say that the 50 Summitar is one of her favorite lens.

Paul

 

[muser53]

I spoke with Sherry Krauter the other day and she recommended considering the flat bladed lenses if you shoot a lot of back lit scenes. It is her opinion that they render the out of focus areas in a slightly more pleasing way than do the domed bladed lenses. Other than that (if I understood her properly) there is not much difference in the signature of the difference versions. She then added her own Summitar is a domed version! She did say that the 50 Summitar is one of her favorite lens.

Paul