lxmike
M2 fan.
I often see it stated that you should avoid the 5cm LTM Sumar, as often fogging, surface scratches and cleaning marks, and flare make them a lens thats not worth shooting with. Is this over stated, surely they cannot be that bad. Does anyone still shoot with one of these, can reasonable images be taken if you stop down to arround 5.6, or should on steer clear.
Mr_Flibble
In Tabulas Argenteas Refero
Yes
Sure thing
Really depends on what you are looking for in a lens, the summar is a warm to neutral lens, and has a pleasing softness for portraits. But gets reasonably sharp at f/5.6
I have two, both have cleaning marks.
1 sec @ f/2
lxmike
M2 fan.
Yes
Sure thing
Really depends on what you are looking for in a lens, the summar is a warm to neutral lens, and has a pleasing softness for portraits. But gets reasonably sharp at f/5.6
I have two, both have cleaning marks.
1 sec @ f/2
thanks for sharing, very nice images by the way
cheers Mike
matt_mcg2
Established
I have one which I use as my main (RF) 50mm lens. Mine is coated, and has some spots/marks on the inside on one element, and some very fine scratches, but the glass is generally in good condition. I find it to be very sharp stopped down, and particularly sharp in the centre of the frame. The 'bokeh' wide open is wild, though, and might not be to everyone's taste.
So this is at about f8:
Orange filter. Looks sharp to me. If you zoom to 100% on this, the fine detail is as good as any lens I own. More or less.
So this is at about f8:
Orange filter. Looks sharp to me. If you zoom to 100% on this, the fine detail is as good as any lens I own. More or less.
matt_mcg2
Established
This is at about f5.6:
matt_mcg2
Established
This is about f3.5 ish:
matt_mcg2
Established
Sorry for spamming with several photos, but I thought it a good idea to show Summar shots that weren't wide-open with swirly bokeh, low contrast, and very soft corners. It does do that shot at f2, but they can be perfectly fine normal rather than special effect lenses when stopped down a few stops.
Brian Legge
Veteran
I have a fairly clean, uncoated Summar. Here are a few shots with it:
Probably around f/4:
Wide open:
Bright light:
Soft light:
I'm not a fan of swirly bokeh. I wasn't sold on the lens when I purchased it but have yet to shoot something that felt excessively swirly. I really love this lens for portraits on days with softer lighting:
Probably around f/4:
Wide open:
Bright light:
Soft light:
I'm not a fan of swirly bokeh. I wasn't sold on the lens when I purchased it but have yet to shoot something that felt excessively swirly. I really love this lens for portraits on days with softer lighting:
Harry Lime
Practitioner
I have one.
The glass is very soft and most likely already scratched. If you need to clean it use a wet lens tissue and basically use the weight of the wet paper to clean the element.
I think the Summar is dip coated, which is very soft.
Soft at f2.
Very high resolution, but low contrast. Low micro contrast, so while the lens delivers very high resolution, it doesn't get that crispness that makes images snap. Bokeh is unique, veryliquid. The tonality is also smooth as silk, probably because of the low contrast. Images can have a very unusual 3d appearance. Veiling flare is a problem with bright ought sources, but can look really beautiful.
All of that said, this is not a bad lens. But it depends on what you are looking for. The Summar delivers what could be called romantic or vintage looking images. Very nice if you are after a pictorial style. And for this reason I would not want one as my only lens. Something like the Elmar 3.5/50 or Summitar 2/50 are better choices among prewar lenses. They deliver a more neutral image.
If you are looking for a soild LTM mount 50 try....
Collapsible Summicron 2/50
Elmar 2.8/50
Canon 1.4/50 or 1.8/50
Jupiter 1.5/50
The glass is very soft and most likely already scratched. If you need to clean it use a wet lens tissue and basically use the weight of the wet paper to clean the element.
I think the Summar is dip coated, which is very soft.
Soft at f2.
Very high resolution, but low contrast. Low micro contrast, so while the lens delivers very high resolution, it doesn't get that crispness that makes images snap. Bokeh is unique, veryliquid. The tonality is also smooth as silk, probably because of the low contrast. Images can have a very unusual 3d appearance. Veiling flare is a problem with bright ought sources, but can look really beautiful.
All of that said, this is not a bad lens. But it depends on what you are looking for. The Summar delivers what could be called romantic or vintage looking images. Very nice if you are after a pictorial style. And for this reason I would not want one as my only lens. Something like the Elmar 3.5/50 or Summitar 2/50 are better choices among prewar lenses. They deliver a more neutral image.
If you are looking for a soild LTM mount 50 try....
Collapsible Summicron 2/50
Elmar 2.8/50
Canon 1.4/50 or 1.8/50
Jupiter 1.5/50
retnull
Well-known
Unlike many other lenses, the Summar has personality. It draws like no other lens.
You have to love it for what it does, not hate it for what it doesn't do. Sometimes I forget and start to think badly of it; then I have to remind myself that many of my all-time favorite keeper shots were done with the Summar.
You have to love it for what it does, not hate it for what it doesn't do. Sometimes I forget and start to think badly of it; then I have to remind myself that many of my all-time favorite keeper shots were done with the Summar.
Erik van Straten
Veteran
Personally I would avoid an uncoated Summar, but a clean postwar coated Summar is a joy to use, see the perfect images of matt mcg2 above.
Use a good shade, like the Leitz FLQOO, not the clumsy SOOMP or FIKUS.
Also fine on an M6 because it has no click stops so you can use the lightmeter very precisely.
They are quite difficult to find, but are worth seaching for.
Leica II, Summar 50mm f/2 coated, Tmax400.
Erik.
Use a good shade, like the Leitz FLQOO, not the clumsy SOOMP or FIKUS.
Also fine on an M6 because it has no click stops so you can use the lightmeter very precisely.
They are quite difficult to find, but are worth seaching for.
Leica II, Summar 50mm f/2 coated, Tmax400.
Erik.
Mr_Flibble
In Tabulas Argenteas Refero
Here's a few portraits taken with the Summar,
greyelm
Malcolm
I have an uncoated per-war Summar and I found it easy to dismantle in order to clean the haze from the inner surfaces of the glass using Zeiss cleaning fluid. Now it is an good lens for its age. Here's a shot with it on a Lumix m4/3.
Dralowid
Michael
The thread titled 49786 shows results from an uncoated Summar. The Thread titled 24650 shows results from a coated Summar, look back a page or two and you will find them.
If you get a poor example, stop down a bit, use a hood and don't shoot into the light!
Michael
If you get a poor example, stop down a bit, use a hood and don't shoot into the light!
Michael
lxmike
M2 fan.
wow, what a super bunch of shots, very nice many thanks for sharing everyone
lxmike
M2 fan.
I will probably hunt down one of these lenses but later, not beacuse of the image quality but because I have just grabbed a Leitz 5cm 3.5 Elmar M for my M2, but thanks you to everyone who joined in this thread
helen.HH
To Light & Love ...
such an Utterly FANTASTIC thread... The Images posted here are Sublime !
My Uncoated 1937 summar works Marvels
I find my Favorite Glass is going back to Leica's Oldies & Goodies
one's Belongings.... by helenhill_HH, on Flickr
The summar Glow by helenhill_HH, on Flickr
chasing the Pied Piper.... by helenhill_HH, on Flickr
My Uncoated 1937 summar works Marvels
I find my Favorite Glass is going back to Leica's Oldies & Goodies
one's Belongings.... by helenhill_HH, on Flickr
The summar Glow by helenhill_HH, on Flickr
chasing the Pied Piper.... by helenhill_HH, on Flickr
gwg
Established
Looking at this thread makes me want to take mine out again - got it with my first M - an early M3 - but went on to more modern glas soon. Mine suffers from some cleaning marks and some hairline scratches, but I still very much like the pictures it produced, even at 2.8 it's plenty sharp for most uses.
Here are some shots from my two very first rolls (no particular artistic merit and unfortunately badly scanned, but maybe useful for judging the rendering):
Here are some shots from my two very first rolls (no particular artistic merit and unfortunately badly scanned, but maybe useful for judging the rendering):
David Hughes
David Hughes
Hi,
Be careful, next you'll be looking for a body for the Elmar and then a Summar and the right lens for the M2. But don't worry. When you get to about two dozen, something kicks in and your buying slows down...
Regards, David
