Leica 35mm Summilux Steel Rim

[enasniearth]

I bought my m5 with 35 summilux 262 in 1980
It was my only lens
I shot with it about 15 years
mostly shot ektachrome
F2.8 -f11 the slides are very sharp
Equal to the summicron
F2 & f1.4 were low light work
Where I wasn’t as critical
Just glad to get the shot
As I stated before the contrast dropped some opening to 1.4 but still sharp

I think about getting another type 2

The original steel rims are $12000 & up
Reproduction is $3800
Although the glass types are probably not exactly the same
The type 2 is a lens I shot with ( my only lens) for years

 

[brusby]

For comparison -- later 35lux version 2 (not steel rim), wide open on M9
L9998680 by Brusby, on Flickr


Same -- but more difficult shot for a lens that has a lot of glow and tendency to flare in strong backlight.
L9998549 by Brusby, on Flickr

I think at f2 (to help insure both subject's eyes are in focus), M9
L9998653 by Brusby, on Flickr

 

[Disappointed_Horse]

Nothing rescues a thread descending into a pointless argument about the merits of a lens better than example photos of pretty girls.

 

[Brick33308]

Shooting the lens wide open or f2 only makes sense either in dark conditions or when going for the glow, or both. And the glow isn’t going to happen where you’re shooting portraits in a well room, so no benefit shooting those portraits wide-open.

For sure it’s a funky little lens, not for everybody. But it’s become my favorite lens simply because of it characteristics wide open. For me everything used to be sharpness and great depth of field when I used my spray and spray Sonys. Now my taste have changed, and in certain circumstances I like the softness and especially the glow that this lens provides. That’s not to say I don’t still value sharpness, just depends on the situation.

 

[brusby]

Shooting the lens wide open or f2 only makes sense either in dark conditions or when going for the glow, or both. And the glow isn’t going to happen where you’re shooting portraits in a well room, so no benefit shooting those portraits wide-open.

I couldn't disagree with you more. And the evidence is right there in the images posted.

 

[Ororaro]

Here’s my 97.5% brosky, on a 100% brand new fresh out of box M4 Papy.

 

[Brick33308]

I couldn't disagree with you more. And the evidence is right there in the images posted.

How so?

 

[Brick33308]

For comparison -- later 35lux version 2 (not steel rim), wide open on M9
L9998680 by Brusby, on Flickr


Same -- but more difficult shot for a lens that has a lot of glow and tendency to flare in strong backlight.
L9998549 by Brusby, on Flickr

I think at f2 (to help insure both subject's eyes are in focus), M9
L9998653 by Brusby, on Flickr

I like both these images especially the second one

 

[brusby]

How so?

You said "the glow isn’t going to happen where you’re shooting portraits in a well room, so no benefit shooting those portraits wide-open."

It is precisely for the "glow" and just a bit of softness when shooting this lens at wide apertures that I picked it for the portraits I posted above. I find that regardless of light level those lens characteristics are present and tend to smooth skin textures and give a bit of a fairy dust feel to things. Often effects like these are best applied in a subtle way and not in a manner that is immediately obvious to the viewer. So, the "glow" doesn't need always to be at 100% and I would argue is most effectively used in moderation.

If I had used a more modern 35mm Summicron or Lux ASPH, the images would have been quite a bit more etched and clinical looking.

So, it seems we perceive things differently. But that's totally cool and what makes for some nice individuality in approaches to making images.

 

[Brick33308]

I get your point and stand corrected. Yes I see that glow in your images even when well lit conditions.

Unlike a certain other person who hates the wide open glow (even though he can’t explain why he owns 2 of these lenses) you and I agree on liking this lens’ wide open character which is why we bought it.

 

[Ororaro]

Oh, I also own three summicron 35mm V1. The reason: because I like’em.

I’m like that.

 

[Ororaro]

I also own three Summilux pre-asph V2.
That makes 5 summilux glow in my collection.

The only justification I will give is: because I wanted to.

And yes; I shuffle and use ALL MY LENSES.

My three books (one upcoming), besides showing off very good photography, also shows off my entire array of Leica collection. This really stroke me as I’ve never really realized how much I use everything I own, and to what extent. Lux 35AA, V1, V2, canadian, germab, titanium, lotsa glow, super glow, cron V1-2-4… all the fifties (yes, all: ALL)…
I spent 2020-2022 printing over 30k darkroom prints, just to give a rough idea.

So yeah, I just shoot. I don’t give much religious importance about why I should or shouldn’t use a summar. By the way, I have this lovely summar with extremely scratched and abraded front element. Makes the sunniest Miami day look like a London rainy day. Quite interesting, and makes me sick at the same time. There’s something I genuinely dislilke about the feminine glow. Just like my LF 7.25 inch Wollensak Verito, I’m never quite sure if it’s a Great lens or a ridiculously cheap coke bottle lens.

 

[enasniearth]

there are a lot of shooters that only have the money to buy 1 35mm lens
let alone 3 type1 8 element summicrons or 2 steel rim summiluxes
im sure these were purchased with a bit less in cash then now
many of the lenses from my past ( sold to move to something else )
are too much in cost for me now .
I went back to 1974 & Nikon rangefinder for film & I don't regret
they do the job
the Leica first type monochrome ccd I bought I'm unsure of & I have't found a permanent 35 for it yet
digital b&w with it has a real film like quality - but I don't fully embrace digital
I look at the type 2 summilux & 3.5cm f1.8 Nikkor in Leica screw
in my honest opinion you pick something - get shooting with it as an extension of self -
then focus on that
always believing that there is an optic with mythical qualities that fits your photography
I think gets in the way of enjoying your photography
if you have that lens -- shoot with it constantly - & learn to love its quality & flaws
if not - pick something out & spend the rest on film -
pick 1 camera 1 lens and learn it well

 

[Rayt]

I bought my first Leica 35mm lens which was the Asph Summicron I think in 1999. From then to now I have owned and used all variations from the V1 Summicron, steel rim, 35AA Summilux, many Elmars and Summarons to the v1 FLE Summilux. I wish I could keep them all but like most people had to sell one or two to buy one. Out of all of them I will say this one embodied all the best qualities: 35mm Summilux Asph non-FLE. I have one in silver chrome. I still have a pre-A because it’s a specialty lens for when I want the look. However the 35mm Summilux Asph is big, heavy and blocks 25% of the viewfinder so I don’t use it all the time. The 35mm I used the most happens to be the cheapest one nobody ever talks about. It’s a perfect shooter: 35mm Summicron V3. A friend begged me to sell it to him and I relented. Maybe I’ll get another but with digital it doesn’t matter. 35mm Summicron v3 in b/w film:

 

[enasniearth]

Very beautiful photographs
I had purchased a type 2 summicron Germany
Which is the same 6 element as the type 3 for the monochrom
Contrast was a bit higher than I hoped
Very sharp - even wide open
With film you just adjust exposure development to match a film type
My friend in Maine says you can do the same digitally , but apparently I’m not that smart

 

[Disappointed_Horse]

I'm going to ask a sacrilegious question, but has anyone done a direct comparison of the steel rim re-issue lens with the Voigtländer Nokton 35mm f/1.4?

 

[Rayt]

Very beautiful photographs
I had purchased a type 2 summicron Germany
Which is the same 6 element as the type 3 for the monochrom
Contrast was a bit higher than I hoped
Very sharp - even wide open
With film you just adjust exposure development to match a film type
My friend in Maine says you can do the same digitally , but apparently I’m not that smart

The v2 and v3 have the same design. It’s higher contrast than the v1 because of the popularity of color print film. The 50mm Summicron v3 “high leg” of the same vintage was also designed for color print film. The v1 is a precious lens. I sold mine when people were willing to pay crazy money for it. I feel guilty if I owned too many lenses I don’t use. Anyway the handling of the v3 is by far the best because the finger tab is higher on the lens. Maybe I have big hands.

 

[Rayt]

I'm going to ask a sacrilegious question, but has anyone done a direct comparison of the steel rim re-issue lens with the Voigtländer Nokton 35mm f/1.4?

FM forums have detailed comparisons posted.

 

[Disappointed_Horse]

FM forums have detailed comparisons posted.

Thanks, I'll check it out.

 

[maddoc]

The v2 and v3 have the same design.

No, they don't. Very similar but not the same.