Leica LTM Elmar 2.8 compared to collapsible Summicron?

Leica M39 screw mount bodies/lenses
S

shawn

Veteran
Local time
3:35 AM
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
3,478
Just looking for opinions on how the LTM Elmar 2.8 and the original LTM collapsible Summicron (not radioactive) compare?

Tried searches but haven't seen much comparing these two lenses. I have the Elmar (on a IIIG) and was curious how it compares to the Summicron.

Thanks,

Shawn
 
LTM compares most favorably with Rigid & DR Summicrons. Color and contrast better.

I read recently the first Sumi was made for slides which have a lot of contrast. Mine was somewhat flat.
 
The summicron has better corner sharpness and better resolution. The elmar more contrast from f5.6 they are nearly equal in sharpness. At f8 to f11 you're hard pressed to see a real difference in sharpness.
 
I've owned a number of collapsible 50 Summicrons over the years, and loved them all. More than sharpness, it's a lens that delivers beautiful IQ and smooth bokeh. You have to be careful buying one, as front element coatings can sometimes be damaged (though whether or not that makes any difference in your photos is debatable), and some have internal haze. You get one stop of extra light w/ the Summicron too. Really, you can't go wrong with one of these if it's clean. They also have an olde style way of imaging if that's important to you, but the Elmar probably does that too.
 
I kept my Cron and got rid of my Elmar. Nothing wrong with the Elmar per se. The only thing wrong with it to me was that the front aperture portion of the lens rotated as you focused. Made aperture adjustment a little finicky for me. I do agree that it’s hard to find a good Collapsible Cron though. I have one that was CLA’d a bit ago by Youxin Ye and could screenshot his comments on it. I’ve since acquired a near mint version. It is my favorite 50mm for the Leica
 
My own experiences make me suggest that the Collapsible Summicron has more character for B&W and the Elmar has better color fidelity than the Cron.
 
I haven't owned or shot a collapsible Summicron, but I do own, shoot, and enjoy a LTM 2.8 Elmar 5cm.
Here's a shot a mid apertures (5.6?)

31148465396_8aceb148bc_c.jpg


You can see more images shot with it here: https://www.flickr.com/groups/3066844@N23/pool/
 
The problem I have is I own both. I blame g.a.s.

By the by I can’t tell the difference with the negatives of either one. I only use black and white film anymore, mostly slow stuff.
 
Thanks everyone. A little more character can be fun as would the extra stop and non-rotating aperture.

Thanks,

Shawn
 
shawn said:
Thanks everyone. A little more character can be fun as would the extra stop and non-rotating aperture.

Thanks,

Shawn
Click to expand...

Those are good points, but I think it’s also good to consider one of the main points of a collapsible lens: compactness. The Elmar is more compact than the Summicron.
 
I have the M mount 1st version of the Elmar 2.8, I think it is the same lens but for the mount. It is a sharp lens, fair enough, but the ergonomics of the thing are sad. It is a fairly heavy lens, and when collapsed it won't stay collapsed, keeps sliding out, and there is no way to stop it. Really the only way to use it is to lock it open when it is on the camera, and leave it like that. Mine is a pristine copy, and it must have done this since new, and the first owner just put it away.
 
davidnewtonguitars said:
I have the M mount 1st version of the Elmar 2.8, I think it is the same lens but for the mount. It is a sharp lens, fair enough, but the ergonomics of the thing are sad. It is a fairly heavy lens, and when collapsed it won't stay collapsed, keeps sliding out, and there is no way to stop it. Really the only way to use it is to lock it open when it is on the camera, and leave it like that. Mine is a pristine copy, and it must have done this since new, and the first owner just put it away.
Click to expand...

Sounds like your Elmar needs maintenance. Mine has a little friction when collapsing and extending, and stays put when collapsed.
In terms of ergonomics it is a delight to use when compared to the f3.5 screw mount version. The rotating front of the lens can be a pain in the neck when using a polarizer (yes, I use a polarizer with my rangefinders occasionally), but it doesn’t bother me otherwise.
 
Ccoppola82 said:
I kept my Cron and got rid of my Elmar. Nothing wrong with the Elmar per se. The only thing wrong with it to me was that the front aperture portion of the lens rotated as you focused. Made aperture adjustment a little finicky for me.
Click to expand...

The rotating front won't be a problem if we use this sequence:

1. Shutter
2. Aperture
3. Focus
4. Expose.

Notice the initial letters are S-A-F-E. It's the SAFE method because the aperture is set before focusing, thus avoiding disturbing the focus setting. It's a good thing for a student to learn no matter what camera or lens they use. It helps to remember all the settings.
 
davidnewtonguitars said:
I have the M mount 1st version of the Elmar 2.8, I think it is the same lens but for the mount. It is a sharp lens, fair enough, but the ergonomics of the thing are sad. It is a fairly heavy lens, and when collapsed it won't stay collapsed, keeps sliding out, and there is no way to stop it. Really the only way to use it is to lock it open when it is on the camera, and leave it like that. Mine is a pristine copy, and it must have done this since new, and the first owner just put it away.
Click to expand...

I have a ltm Konishiroku Hexar that is loose like that. Don’t know if it is adjustable. My Elmar stays shut when it is closed.

Shawn
 
Sounds like the felt or whatever they use for light seals around the lens barrel is worn a bit too flat.

Regards, David
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom