Leitz Canada Summicron 90mm f/2 - Why 'cheap'?

It's cheap because it's very big and heavy, even has its own tripod mount, it's very heavy and bulky. Simple as that.

The last pre-asph version is a lot smaller.

Lilserenity said:
Hiya,

The next lens that I want to get soon for my M2 (pending on a couple of windfalls I'm due) is a fast 90mm lens for gigs. Certainly f/2.8 is the bare minimum with f/2 and faster preferred, as then I will be able to shoot ISO 400 at most gigs and so forth

I have been looking at the market and noticed that some fairly good 'new looking' lenses (i.e. they're not the older 1950/60s chrome Leica lenses that seem to fall into my budget!) either in black or silver which are the 90mm Summicrons notably fro Canada.

I believe the latter bit could be why they generally seem cheaper. The prices I have seen these go for has been from £300-450 or so fairly consistently over time whether it's on eBay or various shops.

From what little I know, I understand it's not the sharpest 90mm wide open but still pretty damn good, what I have seen on the 'net seems to be pretty good to me (although no substitute for taking my own shots and printing them to judge the result) so I'm quite keen to establish why relatively considering Leica prices these seem actually quite good value! (A contentious way of putting it but some Leica stuff seems astronomical!)


Basically I was wondering if this is a good lens (I've not found masses on it but I don't know the exact search terms to use to pull out the details on this lens, there seems to be more than one generation!) -- build quality and so forth. And finally why is it cheap, or at least the examples I have seen (and they've all been in pretty good condition, no optical blemishes and slight signs of use, Exc+ to Exc++ condition)
​

I would also want to use the lens outside of low light in which case f/2.8 and f/4 would become pretty standard, so it doesn't have to be the sharpest ever 90mm M mount lens wide open,

Vicky

(Just to add, these were definitely M mount Summicrons, not R mount)
Click to expand...
 
Wow this really is a phenomenal response, I can't thank you all enough.

First things first to clear up: I wouldn't mind if the lens was made in Kazakhstan if it had a good repuatation :) Canada/Germany makes no difference to me, I just wanted to see if it was something as irrational as that distinction seems to be could be a factor in that 'cheaper' equation. The fact I still continue to use my EF 50mm f/1.8 II which is widely derided by some shows I am not bothered really by perception and myth -- I go on results and that piece of plasticky lens does turn them out time and time again.

I guess this just goes to prove again -- don't listen too much to Internet myths and so forth. I could quite understand the Elmarit being sharper but then at f/2.8 it would be (greater DOF as pointed out) and my main reason for large aperture is low light capture, not to create nice Bokeh or anything else, it just affords me another stop or so and that can be the difference between using a moderate speed film and a high speed one. I like Neopan 1600 but sometimes I want to use a slightly less grainy emulsion like Delta 400 or a more traditional contrasty emulsion like HP5+ or Tri X. The majority of the time for portraits I will be shooting anywhere from f/2.8 to f/4 as I find f/2 and below too shallow for my liking in daylight - it really is about low light performance having the extra stop.

All these answers explain and answer my question, I guess the examples I have seen even down to around £300 recently are due to first: not mint condition but still quite good. Secondly they do appear to be large lenses for M mount and have the peculiar filter mount that has been mentioned. None of this bothers me because:

a.) The 90mm f/2 will not be attached to the camera all the time and will be carried in a bag if I do take it with me. After carrying lenses like the 70-200m L series glass and others, I'm not too worried about that.

b.) My main lens will as inferred be the 35mm Color Skopar.

Does anyone have any dimensions out of interest (length mostly) for this Canadian Summi 90mm -- the large one with tripod collar/mount? At a guess from what I recall it seems to be in the order of 4 1/2" - 5" long?

I'm definitely going to pick one of these up, and hope to before I go up to Birmingham in a fortnight to see Jack Kerouac's "On the Road" scroll for the first time and to take part in a creative writing day - coffee, photography and writing -- wonderful :)

Thank you ever so much for the insights. My EOS 3 is looking at me a little fallorn since the M2 arrived... There there... :)
 
Get the pre asph 90 2.0 with sliding shade . It is way better than the Canadian lens. There is a small difference with the ASPH, but very small.

Get a Canadian only if you want to use the head on a viso or it is much cheaper.
 
the canadian also has the sliding shade. It's very confusing to call it like that.
The filter mount is a normal 48mm not series-whatever. Probably the series-whatever was the very first version's filter mount.
It measures 11 cm from the mount till the end of the front cap, when shortest(i.e. focused to infinity and hood pushed back).That is, 4 2/8 inch. :D
 
Last edited:
Here's my 90mm F2 V2 Summicron

Here's my 90mm F2 V2 Summicron

Shown with Leitz chrome Red E48 (48mm) Wetzlar filter. 11cm long, with filter attached and hood folded, this is the one with the two-part lenshood, looks like a foldup drinking cup. Great lens, bought mine for $200US and had it cleaned up.

Also very cool because it is one of the lenses originally offered by Leitz to go on the M2. Designed for Press Photography, according to my 1962 Leitz catalog.
 
Last edited:
I had whichever version was current in 1984 - it was very sharp. Now I have an Elmar-C - it carries lighter! 90mm is not a lens I use very often.
 
Vicky, have fun looking at Kerouacs "long scroll". We saw it in Santa Fe a couple of years ago. This was obviously "pre-spell check" as there are lots of annotations and notes on it.
As for the 90f2 - if you are going to be an "occasional" user of that focal length, go for the early version with the tripod mount on it. Avoid the chrome version as it is HEAVT ( and usually carry a "collectors" price tag). The anodized black version is optically the same and it is portable.
The pre asph version is good too and a bit smaller - but no tripod bushing - and I like the bushing as you can really balance the lens on a monopod. If you use the camera bushing it is unbalanced because of the offset on the baseplate.
 
I have the chrome version of "Big Bertha", and I find the lens manageable weight wise. Optically, this is an excellent lens. I have the 90/2.8 Elmarit, but I find the 90/2 more "exotic" and a beautiful lens.

If the main purpose is photography, I would go with the Nikkor 105mm/2.5 or the Canon 100mm/2.0. Each of these two lenses costs less than a Summicon.
 
Last edited:
Thanks Tom and again to everyone else. Maybe in a few years when I can splash the cash, I'll be able to afford a smaller version of the f/2 Summi, not a major consideration mind you.

I found example on Red Dot Camera's website of the lens I was on about:

http://www.reddotcameras.co.uk/product_info.php?cPath=34_36&products_id=921

Notably it's the anodised black variant to match the Color Skopar I have.

Vicky
 
"Secondly they do appear to be large lenses for M mount and have the peculiar filter mount that has been mentioned."

The Canadian 90mm Summicron with intergral lens hood takes a screw in E48 standard filter as laready stated and I guess weight is in the eye of the beholder but my chrome version is not too heavy..-Dick
 
Last edited:
Vicky, that looks very much like my own lens :)
I payed about 100 pounds more for it, that included a CLA.

Seems like a good deal.
 
I had the same lens twentyfive years ago. That's a good deal, I paid nearly $600 in 1980, then the lens needed a warranty repair from Leitz Canada (don't ask) so it was gone nearly a -year-.

My chrome one is not any different, that I can detect so far. It's a "Big Bertha" but not as heavy as my Canon 85mm F1.5, so that is relative.
 
I just wanted to say thank you to everyone for their help on this again.

I almost pulled the trigger on this one yesterday and nearly bought it (I needed some cheering up this week, I'm horridly sick erghh :() but I thought I would just hold on a little because it's not immediately needed. But I shall be looking at acquiring such a 90mm by the end of the year.

However, a big reason for holding off was borne out of boredom and frustration of seeing daytime telly for the 3rd day on the trot :) I was looking at Robert White's website, very good dealer and found out about Lee's RF75 system. That was fatal ;)

I must admit the filters I use are probably of dubious enough quality but they do chuck out decent enough results and seeing as I mostly do black and white, I have generally managed to get away with using Cokin ND Grads on my Mamiya C330F -- I know they're not perfect but they've done pretty well.

Anyway, long and short of it, I have decided seeing as I'm walking the North Downs Way (Farnham to Dover, SE England, a stroll of 132 miles... :)) later this year at the end of April/start of May and that was a major reason to get a proper rangefinder, I'd be better off acquiring this RF75 system, with a couple of very decent Lee ND filters.

For more information on it you can check it out here: http://www.robertwhite.co.uk/products.asp?PT_ID=502

It does look superb. I'm even thinking about taking a stab at buying it and having not seen it reviewed in Black & White Photography Magazine, try my hand at some freelance submissions. (It was nearly 10 years ago I wrote my first paid article, and about the same amount of time since I last wrote anything 'professionally'!)
 
I had a black one with retractable hood. Dated in the 80's. Heavy... yes, but not when compared to the Canon 85mm f/1.2

Great lens for portraits... yes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom