Leica LTM Leitz 5cm Summitar V 5cm Elmar

Leica M39 screw mount bodies/lenses

Leitz 5cm Summitar V 5cm Elmar

  • Coated Summitar 5cm

    Votes: 147 59.0%

  • Coated Elmar 5cm

    Votes: 102 41.0%
  • Total voters
    249
I've had both and both were excellent performers.

If I had to choose one it would be the Summitar though - simply for f2 and the fact that when changing aperture (with a hood on) I never got thumb marks on the glass.

Can't really go wrong with either though.

John
 
helenhill said:
its this man's Work on flickr that FLOORS ME.... all 3 pages are w/ his SUMIITAR
OUTSTANDING ...drool

here is the Link...Enjoy !
www.flickr.com/photos/lesged/
Click to expand...

Helen et al,

I agree that these are stunning photos.

Not to take-away from the qualities of the Summitar ( or the photographer ), since these pictures all seem to have been taken over 50 years ago, I am curious as to what film was used, as this may be a significant contribution to these terrific photos...
 
So, seeing that the OP framed the poll in terms of use on a Leica III, I voted for the Elmar, which is a perfect match for my IIIc. I prefer using the Summitar on my M2 or Canon P.
 
This is the Elmar with some fuji film. I like how the Elmar renders colors but it did flare on me on a few shots in all this light. I need to shoot this lens a lot more than I do.
 
Both wonderful lenses. The Summitar edges the Elmar in sharpness (at least at wider apertures), while the Elmar is amazingly compact and light. Get the Summitar if you plan to shoot frequently below about F4 or so.
 
The elmar is worth it on a IIIc/f whatever simply due to the size. If you can live with the slowness, the annoying aperture 'ring', and the lack of common filters, it's a great compact lens. If i'm going somewhere during the day and it's going to be bright, I toss the IIIc in a pocket with the Elmar, significantly more compact than any other combination I have. I've only shot about half a roll with my elmar, here are a couple examples

5343201209_74ba479f00_z.jpg

5355715138_cefc6cb71d_z.jpg

5343791380_2c260daffa_z.jpg
 
I'm a comfirmed Summitar fan, it's a lens with two characters.. wide open and stopped down. It's never disappointed.
Often I use M-Elmar's (2.8 or 3.5) and occasionally an uncoated ltm. The 3.5 M-mount is a great lens, although the ltm is awkward but on the plus is no thicker than a body cap.
Both Summitar's and Elmars are still good value, buy one if you don't like it sell it and get the other, users are not hard to find.
Red scale Elmar is probably the peak of it's series.
A good one of one type is better than a bad one of the other.
 
Thats a very interesting point of view michael, an Elmar does not have to be coated.............it would be intrested to see results that compare coated and uncoated
 
I have three 50mm f3.5 Elmars. The 1933 lens is very prone to flare. Use a hood and do not shoot into the sun. The colors are also a bit more muted than my 1948 coated Elmar. The coated Elmar is a great all round lens but both my 1933 Elmar and the one on my 1929 Leica I can deliver lovely results. I have not tried them with black and white but I want to. On my M6, my favorite 50mm is a f2.8 Elmar. Small and Wonderful. Joe
 
srtiwari said:
I'm a bit confused. It seems to me that 'Summitar-Zen" has only the following pictures taken with his Summitar.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/lesged/tags/summitar/

He seems to have used other lenses in the rest of his pictures, as some notations suggest.
Click to expand...

Oh Dear... Quite right about your Confusion
Rather Sad
The flickr site has changed
And A Huge Majority of his work with the Summitar is missing
Most prewar / post war Italy
If i remember correctly
It was Stellar

Wonder why he got rid of it..???
His present work dies nothing for me ;(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom