Identifying a 35mm Summicron type/model

I don't need two of the same type, but one is with goggles and one is not. My M3 lenses are still in mintish condition in chrome, and they are irreplacable in such a condition.
 
Even in ugly condition, the m2 type is still worth much more than the minty m3 type 8 element. I would consider Roland's suggestion if I were you.
 
If I keep both lenses, it would not really be a problem.
So you would replace the optics from one lens into the other, as Roland suggested.

This is assuming that the M2 version has inferior/dirty glass optics.
The glass looks very clean, but Eddy had to make some moving around for somelens elements, but now the lens looks very good.

Food for thought.

I am next trying to get a replacement front ring from Sherry Krauter.
If anyone here knows of anyone who may have a replacement fron ring, let me know please.
 
Last edited:
$800-$1000 for mint(-) condition goggled version is a reasonable price maybe.
A collector may pay more for a very clean lens.

The M2 Cron is about $500 more for the same condition.

Maybe Dan's list has been updated for this lens.
 
Dan wrote on his antiquecamera website:

M2 chrome $ 1,800-2,300* ==> what I bought in user condition
M3 chrome $ 850-1,000 ==> what I have in mint condition
M2 black $ 2,500-2,700*
M3 black $ 2,250-2,500*
 
FWIW, Raid, my chrome Canadian v.1 Summicron (non-goggled) focuses to .7m and appears to be the same as yours, same tab/lock. Serial number of mine puts it in 1965 production.
 
The clues will continue to come together, Raid, to identify its vintage. As to the details of its hard life, that will likely be more difficult, perhaps more interesting. Can you track back through your seller to the previous owner, etc?

Mine has a pretty simple history, because I bought it new in July 1967. The question then is, what was it doing before that, since manufacture in 1965? Those were days of waning interest in RF cameras. It probably sat unsold for some time at the camera shop before I came along and accepted the salesman's suggestion that it would be the right companion for the used M2 I bought at the same time!
 
Again, for what it's worth, that style of tab and infinity lock is also present on my 1959 Wetzlar-made f/2.8 Summaron with goggles. So I think that detail is not going to be helpful in narrowing your lens date further.

How about poking through the CameraQuest site for more info? There may be a known date at which minimum focus changed from 1m to .7m, to put an early limit on your lens....
 
retnull said:
If it's any help, my v1 Summicron (serial 1743xxx) has a minimum focus distance of 0.65 meters.
Click to expand...
My Summaron does too, but I put that down to its being a goggled version, which I understand do focus a bit closer. Does your Summicron have goggles? Raid, what's the close focus on your goggled lens?
 
Doug said:
My Summaron does too, but I put that down to its being a goggled version, which I understand do focus a bit closer. Does your Summicron have goggles? Raid, what's the close focus on your goggled lens?
Click to expand...

Doug,
The goggled version focuses down to 0.65m.
 
I just called Eddy to get clarifcation on the lens repair. He told me that the glass was excellent but that mechanically the lens needed adjustments.
 
I just read this thread with great interest.

Can bag a Summicron 35mm F2 lens promoted as a version 1 (8 element, non-goggled version) in good/Exc++ condition. The seller declares it to be serial # 1744xxx
(The pictures of the item do not show serial number)

Puts' Leicapocket_pod1 identifies nos. 1740001 to 1746500 to be Summicron M 90mm (1960)

There is a notation on that chart -
"...* Lens nos. 1745260, 1745738, 1746019 & 1746308 are 2/35 Summicron (ELC.M3-chrom+M2-black)
.** Lens no. 1856205 is Summicron 3.5 cm 1:2 (ELC.M-black)
^ Lens no. 1571311 is Summicron 3.5 cm 1:2 (ELW.M-chrom)..."

NONE of these include "my" lens. The pictures show a chrome, tabbed version, which appears native M (rather tha LTM with adapter).

So, my questions are -

1. Could it be a "fake", meaning goggles removed to change from M3 to m2 version ?
2. How reliable is the Puts' list, or consistent the Leica numbers ?
3. Any other explanations ?
4. would you buy such a lens ?
 
Hi Subhash - I have a chrome tabbed Canadian M2 version 1 numbered 2103xxx that should put manufacture at 1965. I bought it new in 1967.

I've been going by this website: http://www.forloren.dk/lbf/leica_lens_serial.htm

Which broadly does not disagree with Puts in placing numbers 1717001 to 1827000 as made in 1960.

So both this list and Puts would have your lens as from 1960, which is plausible since the lens was introduced in 1958... though I don't know the numbering or time-line for feature details. But if Puts's numbers are exclusively 90mm, that leaves a question.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom