Leica LTM Leitz 5cm Summitar V 5cm Elmar

[lxmike]

Which do people prefer, Leitz 5cm Summitar coated or the 5cm Elmar for use on their Leica III

 

[wlewisiii]

I love my Summitar. I am very happy with it as the only lens I own for my IIIf.

William

 

[lxmike]

very nice William, I particularly like the last shot of the deli

 

[helen.HH]

another Vote for the Summitar

 

[helen.HH]

 

[Roger Hicks]

Elmar. Smaller.

Cheers,

R.

 

[lxmike]

very nice Helen, very nice indeed

 

[lxmike]

I must admit Roger the IIIf with Elmar is a very fine ' slip it in your coat pocket' street shooter

 

[Sonnar Brian]

Okay, My Leica III has the coated Elmar on it.

William's IIIf has my old Summitar on it, coated and with the nice aperture mechanism.

My IIIf's have Collapsible Summicrons on them.

 

[helen.HH]

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/

 

[tomtofa]

another Vote for the Summitar

Helen, this is fantastic (and good, too).

Tom

 

[wlewisiii]

That url should have a / instead of a ' between photos & lesged.

And yeah, Les has some insanely great work from his time in Italy.

 

[helen.HH]

Cheers ^ Thank YOU LXmike

Mighty Kind TOM...Much Appreciative
I was just LUCKY one night on a walk home
to turn a Corner and there was Con Ed working on that Gas Line
I did a Few with the Summitar and another few w/ the 21SA

Wiewisiii: I corrected the Link ...Thanx !

 

[kdemas]

I agree Helen, beautiful. I have enjoyed the Summitar when I have used it never used a classic Elmar (I use the Modern version).

Helen, this is fantastic (and good, too).

Tom

 

[raid]

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/

Les is a friend. He usually is found at nelsonfoto.com/SMF

 

[Nikon Bob]

I would take either one. I have a pre war uncoated Elmar and a post war coated Summitar and find both sharp enough. The uncoated lens naturally suffers more from flare. The Elmar is darn near 2 stops slower. Both are collapsible and make the camera just as pocketable. If you need the speed then go Summitar otherwise I don't think it matters too much. Kind of a hard choice from where I sit.

Bob

 

[Bingley]

Helen, thanks for that link: wonderful photos!

To the OP: This is a tough question to answer, since a lot can depend on the particular samples of each lens. I've got a coated Summitar and a coated Elmar 50/3.5, and I had an Elmar 50/2.8. They were/are all wonderful lenses. But if I had to keep only one, it would be the little Elmar 50/3.5. It's combination of sharpness and lower contrast works beautifully for b&w landscapes, and my sample isn't too shabby for color either. I think the Elmar is also more flare resistant than the Summitar (you really do need a hood w/ the Summitar). But the Summitar is a beautiful lens, particularly stopped down and w/ b&w.

 

[Bingley]

Thumb's up for the Summitar:

Elmar 50/3.5:

 

[john neal]

Steve, that's a stunning landscape with an Elmar - my hat is off!

 

[maddoc]

It used to be the Summitar for me but the (coated) Elmar became slowly my favorite. It is smaller and I think a little bit better at f/4.0 compared to the Summitar at f/4.0 As others have mentioned, a IIIf w/ Elmar 5cm 1:3.5 is very pocketable and fun to use !