venchka
Veteran
As some of you may know, I own a Canon 35/2.8 and a 35/2.0 UC-Hexanon. No complaints about either lens.
Naturally I can't leave well enough alone. Recently I began to ponder the 35mm Summicron. Again. My recent mental wanderings have centered on the 8 element Version 1 Summicron. How would owners/users compare this lens to more recent Summicrons? Speciffically the ver. 2 and ver. 3? The UC-Hexanon? I'm not interested in the over hyped ver. 4 and the ASPH is always beyond by budget. I know, the Zeiss and Konica M-mount 35s are great too.
If I were lucky enough to find an affordable 35mm Summicron, I'll have to sell all a few lenses. That always seems to cure me. What to give up for a 35mm Summicron?
Thanks!
Naturally I can't leave well enough alone. Recently I began to ponder the 35mm Summicron. Again. My recent mental wanderings have centered on the 8 element Version 1 Summicron. How would owners/users compare this lens to more recent Summicrons? Speciffically the ver. 2 and ver. 3? The UC-Hexanon? I'm not interested in the over hyped ver. 4 and the ASPH is always beyond by budget. I know, the Zeiss and Konica M-mount 35s are great too.
If I were lucky enough to find an affordable 35mm Summicron, I'll have to sell all a few lenses. That always seems to cure me. What to give up for a 35mm Summicron?
Thanks!
raid
Dad Photographer
Hi Wayne,
I have such a 35mm Summicon with goggles for my M3. Maybe it is sentimental reasons that make me keep it as my only 35mm Summicron. It does have its charm though. It is not a bad lens at all, but there exist sharper 35mm lenses out there if sharpness is what you are after in a 35mm Summicron.
Good luck, and don't sell your kidney ...
I have such a 35mm Summicon with goggles for my M3. Maybe it is sentimental reasons that make me keep it as my only 35mm Summicron. It does have its charm though. It is not a bad lens at all, but there exist sharper 35mm lenses out there if sharpness is what you are after in a 35mm Summicron.
Good luck, and don't sell your kidney ...
venchka
Veteran
Thanks Raid
Thanks Raid
Don't worry, GAS isn't that bad. Besides, I have too many lens. Time to thin the herd.
I'm not sure that I could ever sell the 35mm UC-Hexanon. That's the problem. Is the UC-Hexanon better than an 8 element Summicron? What do the earliest, serial #167xxx, v. 1 Summicrons sell for these days? I remember silly crazy prices on ebay. I haven't looked lately.
Thanks Raid
Don't worry, GAS isn't that bad. Besides, I have too many lens. Time to thin the herd.
I'm not sure that I could ever sell the 35mm UC-Hexanon. That's the problem. Is the UC-Hexanon better than an 8 element Summicron? What do the earliest, serial #167xxx, v. 1 Summicrons sell for these days? I remember silly crazy prices on ebay. I haven't looked lately.
Vics
Veteran
I'm pondering EXACTLY the same thing! I spent the whole morning searching the threads here to keep from starting a new thread! Thanks for doing it for me! My preferred travel camera is my M3 and I use a DR on it, shoot only Tri-x. Someone once told me that the best optical match for the DR was the ver. 1 Summicron 35. Erwin Puts doesn't seem too impressed with it, but Antique-Cameras.net says, "Many users believe the Type 1 is the best non-aspherical version ever made." Also I like the idea of the goggles. Raid, do you agree with any of this?
Vic (my in-laws lived on Lake Murvaul)
Vic (my in-laws lived on Lake Murvaul)
Krosya
Konicaze
venchka
Veteran
It's the 35mm Summicron thing. I have come so close before, but always backed off. I do have a 50mm DR Summicron and a 90mm Elmarit, both about the same age as the 35mm v. 1 Summicron. I could find out pretty fast how the 3 lenses behave relative to each other and to my LTM 35-50-85 trio. This could be fun.
I have already resigned myself to the possible fact that the original 35mm Summicron can't touch the 35mm UC-Hexanon or 28mm M-Hexanon in flare resistance.
Keep the discussion alive.
I have already resigned myself to the possible fact that the original 35mm Summicron can't touch the 35mm UC-Hexanon or 28mm M-Hexanon in flare resistance.
Keep the discussion alive.
ferider
Veteran
If you don't want eyes, Wayne, the pre-asph Lux costs less than an M2 v1. And probably behaves similarly at f2.
And you can do stuff with it you cannt with the 35/2 v1.
Cheers,
Roland.
And you can do stuff with it you cannt with the 35/2 v1.
Cheers,
Roland.
venchka
Veteran
Clouding the issue, hey?
No eyes. I would buy a lens for the M5.
I'll add that to my podering.
Cheers!
No eyes. I would buy a lens for the M5.
I'll add that to my podering.
Cheers!
I've had a v.1 35 Summicron (no eyes) since new in 1967 and it was my main lens on the M2... indeed I had no other except a rarely used 90 TE. I can't really compare the lens to others, but it always had a nice quality to the images, gently sharp. And as you see in the samples below, not particularly subject to flare.
There's an outside window to the right of the artist...
There's an outside window to the right of the artist...
venchka
Veteran
Thanks Doug. The flare resistance is comforting.
Very nice photos as well.
Very nice photos as well.
Tom A
RFF Sponsor
When the version I Summicron came out, it was part of Leica's design "kit" for press photographers, the 35, the 50 and later the 90f2. All with the same speed and similar characteristics to the rendition. In the early 60's they were good "working" lenses and the only competition came from Nikon's 35f1.8, 50f1.4 and f2 and the 85f2.
Center sharpness on all of the Summicrons were good, even by todays standards, corners at f2 were soft and though not particularly flare sensitive, they could veil an image occasionally.
The 35f2 Version I has been hyped beyond rational thought though and prices pushed up to "fantasy" level. The "goggled" version seems to be the best bet as they are usually priced less. The M2 versions go for $1500 and up, with the black paint ones hitting double that!
I have used the version I since the early 60's - I keep accumulating newer ones and occasionally discarding them after some time. The Version 1 fits well on my M2's and it does give a nice "vintage" look to the image.
I suspect that you wont be satisfied until you have tried one - but the good news is that they are not too difficult to resell either.
I have only limited experience with the UC Hexanon 35f2 - but I like it and I suspect that in the end you will prefer it to a version I Summicron 35.
These lenses were made in an era when press photographers accounted for a substantial chunk of Leicas business and truth be told, at 80dpi and the limited grayscale on newspapers and magazines from that era - the speed of the lens was more important than the absolute resolution in the corners.
Center sharpness on all of the Summicrons were good, even by todays standards, corners at f2 were soft and though not particularly flare sensitive, they could veil an image occasionally.
The 35f2 Version I has been hyped beyond rational thought though and prices pushed up to "fantasy" level. The "goggled" version seems to be the best bet as they are usually priced less. The M2 versions go for $1500 and up, with the black paint ones hitting double that!
I have used the version I since the early 60's - I keep accumulating newer ones and occasionally discarding them after some time. The Version 1 fits well on my M2's and it does give a nice "vintage" look to the image.
I suspect that you wont be satisfied until you have tried one - but the good news is that they are not too difficult to resell either.
I have only limited experience with the UC Hexanon 35f2 - but I like it and I suspect that in the end you will prefer it to a version I Summicron 35.
These lenses were made in an era when press photographers accounted for a substantial chunk of Leicas business and truth be told, at 80dpi and the limited grayscale on newspapers and magazines from that era - the speed of the lens was more important than the absolute resolution in the corners.
MichaelHarris
Well-known
I just bought a brand new Summarit 35 f2.5. That guy Puts said is it as good or better than the 35 Summicron. I don't know about that but I know the Summarit is very, very nice and a 200 dollar rebate helps:
Vics
Veteran
Tom A, Good to hear that the goggled version is somewhat cheaper, as that's what seems to me to be best for the M3.
Vic
Vic
venchka
Veteran
Doug,
What size filters does the v. 1 Summicron take? I've seen mention of a strange hood and Series VII filters. I have 39mm, 43mm and 46mm filters and step up rings. Can I use these on a v.1 Summicron?
What size filters does the v. 1 Summicron take? I've seen mention of a strange hood and Series VII filters. I have 39mm, 43mm and 46mm filters and step up rings. Can I use these on a v.1 Summicron?
venchka
Veteran
peter_n
Veteran
Regular 39mm filters. I have a B+W MRC UV on the front of mine, and a hood labeled 12571J. I like the v.1, so different from my ASPH. Below are a couple of pics from mine on a day/time when the sun was strong and slanting in with a lot of reflections, especially in the first pic. Last pic shows the hood on the lens.
The hood I bought at the time I got the new v.1 was the 12585H, a vented reverse-taper metal hood.
amateriat
We're all light!
Golly...as the saying goes, "I've only been in this country a short distance...!"
"My" M2 has a v.1 35 f/2 Summicron on it, with a wee bit of "stuff" visible on one of the inside elements. Nonetheless, it seems to offer up decent results on my first test roll (granted, I was mainly worried about the somewhat dodgy shutter on the M2):
What I want, and need, right now, is the appropriate hood for the lens, partly for flare protection, mostly for physical protection of the lens. As far as optical quality goes, I like what I see, and I can't afford to compare it to v.2/3/4 Summicrons. How high the sky?
- Barrett
"My" M2 has a v.1 35 f/2 Summicron on it, with a wee bit of "stuff" visible on one of the inside elements. Nonetheless, it seems to offer up decent results on my first test roll (granted, I was mainly worried about the somewhat dodgy shutter on the M2):
What I want, and need, right now, is the appropriate hood for the lens, partly for flare protection, mostly for physical protection of the lens. As far as optical quality goes, I like what I see, and I can't afford to compare it to v.2/3/4 Summicrons. How high the sky?
- Barrett
Last edited:
raid
Dad Photographer
Vics,
Thanks for the confidence, but I am not a lens expert. Many things mentioned about lenses are personal opinions and sometimes even myths.The lens defintely is very well made and it is an excellent lens overall. I started out with the Suumicron 35-50-90 first versions in chrome with a chrome M3, and for me it is the perfect set of lenses with the M3.
I don't need other/better/sharper/faster/contrastier/improved lenses right now.
The DR is very similar to the version 1 rigid Summicron.
The goggles look super cool and vntage to me. Others hate goggles.
amateriat
We're all light!
I tried an M3 with goggles and a 35 Summicron once. Hated it. It "did the job", but I wasn't at all comfortable with the setup. Spoiled brat, I suppose.
35 Summicron (M-mount, no goggles/"eyes") with an M2? Nice, I must say...
- Barrett
35 Summicron (M-mount, no goggles/"eyes") with an M2? Nice, I must say...
- Barrett