Leica lens nightmare!

[pedro.m.reis]

Hi ppl.
For the newbie that owns "no" leica camera (only a Fed and a Zorki ) or lens but want to test some old leica camera (<= IIIg) and lens, is there a site that explain simply what are the main differences between the Summar, elmar, summicorn, summaron, etc etc lens ?

Thanks!

 

[Goodyear]

This page on CQ confesses to being very subjective, but makes n interesting read.

Also, search around on here.

 

[Sonnar Brian]

Stephen Gandy of cameraquest.com has this:

http://cameraquest.com/ltmlens.htm

also go to kbcamera.com

http://www.kbcamera.com/lenses.htm

 

[Goodyear]

D'oh! I linked the M-mount one. Still some reference to screw lenses in there...

 

[pedro.m.reis]

Thanks ppl. Very usefull info!

 

[xcapekey]

elmar - f4 distinction..any lens with elmar is an f4 (ie tri-elmar, 90mm col. elmar, etc.,)
elmarit - 2.8 lens
summar - precursor to summitar and summicron...f2, softish, nice glow when shot b/w f2-f4 when the scene has nice highlights...good portrait lens...easy to flare though
summitar - precursor to summicron, some summitars were prototype summicrons...sharper wide open than the summar, good performer for $...some flaring issues but not as bad as summar
summicron - ('cron is f2 distinction) varying degrees of sharpness depending on vintage, but generally considered overall best performer
summarit - 1.4, 50mm...haven't tried it myself, but people say it's soft in a good way wide open
xxxx-lux - is generally a 1.4 distinction (noted exception above as well as the NOCTilux which is a 1.2 - 1)...35mm, 50mm and 75mm summilux are all 1.4

 

[merciful]

elmar - f4 distinction..any lens with elmar is an f4 (ie tri-elmar, 90mm col. elmar, etc.,)

Except for the ones that are f2.8, of course.

 

[Goodyear]

Or f/3.5

 

[xcapekey]

i like the wide array of lenses available for leica....they each have their own feel to them...it's sort of like choosing a brush for painting....but don't get too hung up...a bad picture with a good lens is still a bad picture

i have to say, the lens that i can tell apart the easiest (from what i've tried) is the summar wide open...creamy...soft...nice bleeding highlights...most of the lenses after f8 get tougher to distinguish....also, my canon 35mm f1.8 has a similar effect wide open...not the best for technical work but nice for atmosphere...

i also like the look of the summitar wide open vs. my hexanon when i want dreamy...however, if i really want my subject o jump out in a contrasty way, i'll use the 50mm hexanon...the summitar and summar have a more liquid melt from point of focus to bokeh

 

[didjiman]

Here are some shots I just did with a Leica IIIa and a Summar. Slightly darkening with curve adjustment. I think the haze/fog/whatever-is-on-the-lens shows up the worse on the upper third on the vertical shots, right smack in the face area... I like it, but some people think it's too flat and gray...
http://www.dragonsgate.net/pub/richard/PICS/LeicaIIIa.11.29.05/

 

[Frank Granovski]

I don't know what kind of frame-lines you have but the CL/CLE lenses for the Leica and Minolta---40mm and 90mm---are darn good for the money.

 

[Goodyear]

Well, <= IIIg would presumably be no framelines. And no M mount either

 

[Frank Granovski]

Oh, they're screw-mounts.

 

[Sonnar Brian]

The IIIg has framelines, but separate RF. It is much more expensive than the other Leica screwmount cameras.

The Summarit 50mm is F1.5, but the name was recently used on the F2.4 of the Minilux.
A Beautiful IIIf with a Summitar should make anyone happy...

 

[Nikon Bob]

Don't forget the IIIc and Summitar combo.

Bob

 

[Goodyear]

The IIIg has framelines,

Cool. I just learned something new