[New test photos released] Leica Summicron 35/2 Eight Element copy made in China

[CharlesDAMorgan]

I do have a Summaron 2.8 - I'll do some comparison shots when my 8 element arrives froyd. My understanding was that the Summaron was marketed as the consumer quality lens and obviously a 2.8 is cheaper to make.

 

[Erik van Straten]

In the sixties Leitz offered the Summaron, Summicron and Summilux as options for M-Leica users of the 35mm lenses. The Summaron (f/2.8) was the cheapest and the Summilux (f/1.4) was the most expensive. That is why the Summaron is now the most common lens of the three and thus cheaper.

Maybe we see now big differences between the lenses, but I am sure that back in the day only the speed and the price were relevant.

The Summaron has only six glass elements in its optical system. Therefore there are less air/glass surfaces and because of that the lens will be a bit more brilliant.

There are many versions of the Summilux. There is a lot of difference in rendering between the versions.

The Summicron with 8 elements seems to be unchanged during its lifetime. The lens was built only from 1958 to 1969. Maybe that is the reason that it is less common than the other two 35's.

Erik.

 

[Erik van Straten]

Leica M2/Leitz Summicron 35mm f/2 (8el)/Tmax400/AdoxMCC110

Erik.

(this is with the real one, not with the replica)

 

[raid]

I recall having used a Summaron 35/2.8 in a 35-40mm lenses comparison many years ago. This lens has increased in cost in recent years as B&W photographers seem to really like it. It used to be inexpensive compared with a Summicron 35mm.

old link: https://ferider.smugmug.com/Technical/Raids-35-40mm-Lens-Test

 

[Deleted member 65559]

I recall having used a Summaron 35/2.8 in a 35-40mm lenses comparison many years ago. This lens has increased in cost in recent years as B&W photographers seem to really like it. It used to be inexpensive compared with a Summicron 35mm.

old link: https://ferider.smugmug.com/Technical/Raids-35-40mm-Lens-Test

Raid, I remember selling my version iv Summicron for $1k before the 'bokeh king' rage. I think maybe the steep rise in the Summilux/Summicron lens prices brought the Summaron prices along with it. In addition, for anyone who develops an appreciation for the brass mounted lenses and the feel of the scalloped finger tab, the Summaron feels just right.

 

[D&A]

What's wonderful about the lenses being discussed, including the replica, is their combination of central sharpness, moderate contrast and gentle rollout of resolution both at the periphery of the frame as well as the areas just out of the zone of focus.

One thing I've noticed in some of the earlier test images as well as Raid's comparing the original 8 cron vs the replica, at the wider apertures....is how the sharpness of the background is more acute and pronounced in the replica. This has been mentioned earlier in this thread. Interesting. The more I see these images made with the replica lens, the more I am extremely impressed.

Dave (D&A)

 

[KEVIN-XU 愛 forever]

My Leica 35mm lens collection

My Leica 35mm lens collection

my Leica 35mm lens collection by Kevin-Xu, on Flickr

Here is my Leica 35mm lens collection.

I am very tempted to compare them all in the same scene on film, include the newly made 8-element replica. I hope I will have the time to do this soon.

Kevin

 

[froyd]

Wow, Kevin. You certainly are someone who believes you can't have too many 35s!

 

[raid]

I am very tempted to compare them all in the same scene on film, include the newly made 8-element replica. I hope I will have the time to do this soon.

Kevin[/SIZE]

Very impressive and GAS causing exposure here! 😀

Thanks, Kevin. Such a Marathon lens comparison by you would be very welcome. 😎

 

[raid]

What's wonderful about the lenses being discussed, including the replica, is their combination of central sharpness, moderate contrast and gentle rollout of resolution both at the periphery of the frame as well as the areas just out of the zone of focus.

One thing I've noticed in some of the earlier test images as well as Raid's comparing the original 8 cron vs the replica, at the wider apertures....is how the sharpness of the background is more acute and pronounced in the replica. This has been mentioned earlier in this thread. Interesting. The more I see these images made with the replica lens, the more I am extremely impressed.

Dave (D&A)

I read Dave's comments, and I went back to my (posted) images of replica versus the Cron, wide open. The fishing boat in the back of each image clearly show more definition and sharpness in the boat name for the replica. Based on Eric's comment on classical vintage lenses having a curved plane of sharpness (In Jason Schneider's thread at RFF on vintage lenses), does this mean that the replica is "more vintage" than the Cron?

Food for thought :bang:😀😕😱😎

 

[D&A]

Raid I assumed the point of focus was the boat. I then looked at the distant backgrounds of those near wide open images and noticed the large tanks with their ladders and the distant trees were much sharper with the replica lens than the original 8 Element. Some of this could be explained by more or excessive field curvature in the original 8 Element cron.

As for that collection Kevin....beautiful and comprehensive lens comparisons was something I loved to do in my younger days. Would be quite a task but very informative.

Dave (D&A)

 

[raid]

You are right; the focus was on the boat name in the front of the image. The background is less sharp looking in the Cron.

 

[D&A]

Raid, I also noticed that in some of the early test "matched" pairs others have posted. Again I suspect (just a hunch), that the cron has a notable amt of field curvature. This may account for this difference that's seen.

Dave (D&A)

 

[raid]

This is a reasonable conclusion by you, Dave.

 

[Erik van Straten]

I recall having used a Summaron 35/2.8 in a 35-40mm lenses comparison many years ago. This lens has increased in cost in recent years as B&W photographers seem to really like it. It used to be inexpensive compared with a Summicron 35mm.

This is a shot with a Summaron f/2.8, a very early one, in an aluminium mount, very light weight, M-mount, but also LTM. The M-mount can be removed, but the red dot can not.

Leica M2/Summaron 35mm f/2.8/Tmax400/AdoxMCC110

Erik.

 

[raid]

Thanks Erik. A great composition. The man in the far right corner, and the background being a brick wall. The post separates the man from the rest of the image.

 

[Doug]

In Erik's photo... the man seem to be making the first move preparing to draw a pistol from a belt holster on his right hip! 😉😱

I have both the original 8-element Summicron and a goggled f/2.8 Summaron bought more recently for use on my M2 in order to see the 35 framelines better. While both work fine on film, I found the Summaron unfortunately less suited to digital M due to corner smearing. The Summicron doesn't show this effect...

I think this Summaron shot wide open on a M240 shows it...

 

[raid]

I was not expecting a 35mm lens to smear corners on a digital Leica. My Hologon smears really badly.

 

[f.hayek]

In Erik's photo... the man seem to be making the first move preparing to draw a pistol from a belt holster on his right hip! 😉😱

I have both the original 8-element Summicron and a goggled f/2.8 Summaron bought more recently for use on my M2 in order to see the 35 framelines better. While both work fine on film, I found the Summaron unfortunately less suited to digital M due to corner smearing. The Summicron doesn't show this effect...

I have a non-goggled Summaron I shot on an M9M stopped down and didn’t appreciate smearing.

 

[steveyork]

New film (to me), so I haven't figured it out yet, but it's high resolution, which better shows some of the characteristics of the lens. This was likely shot at 1/1000 at f/4; bright sun, sunny 16.

Danger, Danger by Steve, on Flickr

SC version, yellow filter, on Astrum 100 in Rodinal (1:50 @ 68 deg. for 13 min)/Vuescan