sanity check: hunt for v1 35 summicron

[bucs]

Ok, so I've been chasing after a 35mm V1 Summicron for quite some time (> 2 yrs!!!!)

I went through two samples but then eventually found out each had flaws (circular inner haze, glass chipped on the front element) so I had to return them. Prices were in the vicinity of ~1,600 to ~2,000

I eventually bought a 35mm summicron V3 which served me well... but I just can't stop thinking about the v1 summicron.

I am considering the goggled version but I'm intending to use it on M2/4. I've read that it darkens the vf and rf patch. Also, more importantly, I've read that it's HUGE and I really want a small lens. And the price tag on these are already at least ~1,300 nowadays. :bang:

For the price I could already buy a 35mm f/2 Biogon AND a 35mm f/1.2 Nokton which are stellar performers in their own right. But alas, size matters for me.

Methinks I should just keep the v3. I realized after spending several months using the lens, the images that come out of it are as good as it gets.

 

[Erik van Straten]

Don't think the v1 is a perfect lens. The lens is very susceptible to flare. There are cheaper alternatives. If you want a really small lens, take a Summaron 35mm f/3.5, much better than the f/2.8. The chrome M version is one of the most beautiful lenses made.

If you want a faster lens, take a late (German) version of the Summilux 35 pre asph.

Erik.

 

[mpaniagua]

Erik beat me to it. I own both the V1 and a Goggled Summaron, as well as a LTM Summaron 3.5. I would say V1 is nice, but no $1,600-2000 nice, unless you want it as a collector item.

I would more often take either of the Summarons, because they will give me equal (or depending on circumstances, perhaps better) performance than the Summicron.

I would say go for the V1 only if you want a collector item.

Regards

Marcelo

 

[leicapixie]

I agree with Erik, my Goggled Summaron is a much sharper and better lens than my Goggled-Summicron.
I bought the Summaron lens because it was less expensive as "goggles" have faults, as did my Summicron.
The original 35mm Summilux rendered images that i hated.
I have only rid my self of very few Leica lenses.
The 135mm Hektor, 35mmSummilux and 90mm Elmar.
The Summaron stays, warts and all.

 

[jsrockit]

You have great enough lenses for photography. You need nothing else. However, if you are one of those people (and many of us are at times) that cannot get something off their mind until they find a one and try it for awhile, you might just have to buy one to get it out of your system.

 

[megido]

If you want a really small lens, take a Summaron 35mm f/3.5, much better than the f/2.8.

Erik.

Interesting Erik, would you care to expand?

 

[mpaniagua]

You have great enough lenses for photography. You need nothing else. However, if you are one of those people (and many of us are at times) that cannot get something off their mind until they find a one and try it for awhile, you might just have to buy one to get it out of your system.

And, like myself, most likely end up selling it 🙂

I would sell the Summicron really, but keep it for sentimental reasons (a heirloom from my late father).

Regards

Marcelo

 

[bucs]

You have great enough lenses for photography. You need nothing else. However, if you are one of those people (and many of us are at times) that cannot get something off their mind until they find a one and try it for awhile, you might just have to buy one to get it out of your system.

Just need to go out and shoot, really

Thanks guys. Sorry for the long rant

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Don't think the v1 is a perfect lens. The lens is very susceptible to flare. There are cheaper alternatives. If you want a really small lens, take a Summaron 35mm f/3.5, much better than the f/2.8. The chrome M version is one of the most beautiful lenses made.

If you want a faster lens, take a late (German) version of the Summilux 35 pre asph.

Erik.

Summaron M isn't very small lens. Summaron LTM is smaller.

I owned Summaron M twice. To me, it was nowhere near by 35mm lenses Leitz made after it. Not even J-12. Image wise. But I have seen one really good example. Just one... Boris Kireev street photographer owns it. https://www.flickr.com/photos/rodinabob/tags/summaron/

 

[Calzone]

I was interested in getting a 35 Cron V1 years ago. At that time I decided to go with a 35/1.8 Nikkor in LTM instead for the single coated retro look for B&W.

Anyways the price for the Nikkor was less than the going rate for the Cron V.1, and the lens is kinda rare in LTM (only about 1700 made in LTM).

Anyways now about 7-8 years later the 35/1.8 Nikkor is difficult to find, and the rendering I still love.

Love for old glass is not that crazy.

Cal

 

[Colin Corneau]

I lucked out and got the v1 of this lens when I first got my M6 a decade ago.

It's the only lens I have, so I've not much to compare it to, in Leica. A nice lens for sure, but I got one that was spotless. Some flare in direct sunlight but that's present in most lenses.

 

[Rob-F]

If you are looking for resolution performance, I believe you can find a 35mm ASPH Cron for the price of the V I.

 

[rfaspen]

For small, I'd say the ubiquitious v4 summicron. The v3 is just as small (slightly smaller?) and still an awesome lens. I let one slip through my hands a couple months ago (a v3 at a great price and I hesitated). Dumb. :bang:

I have the 2.8 summaron, goggled and un-goggled. I don't know what Erik meant by the 3.5 being a better lens, but I can say the 2.8 is pure gold. It is the perfect incarnation of that classic lens look with only the desirable bits and none of the undesirable characteristics of old lenses. Even flare is tolerable, and hoods are cool anyway 😎.

I also have the 3.5 summaron in LTM and that's a super tiny lens. Mine seems to have some haze, even though its hard to see with the flashlight test. Or more specifically, my 3.5 summaron is a flare machine! That thing will flare if I accidentally use foul language in its presence. I don't use it much. Use the J-12 on Barnack bodies instead. I would note that the late 3.5 summarons with e39 filter threads and ergonomic aperture rings are nice to use. I think there were LTM versions like this (M for sure).

Having said all of the above. I too want a v1 summicron 🙂 but I'm not actively searching, nor is the budget prepared. It's all "fluff" anyway. I clearly have plenty of 35mm lenses (didn't mention the CV or Biogon).

 

[Highway 61]

Methinks I should just keep the v3. I realized after spending several months using the lens, the images that come out of it are as good as it gets.

You think of it right. I have used a Summicron V1 in the '80s on a M2. It was spotless but I didn't find it was a superlative lens - just one of the very good 35/2 around. But back then the V1 didn't sell for the insane prices you notice nowadays on the 2nd hand market so at least you could afford one.

Just spotted one at a local photo fair recently. €2,500.- : total nonsense IMO.

The V3 is a better lens in every respect. Just keep it and go out to take pictures.

 

[rfaspen]

The V3 is a better lens in every respect. Just keep it and go out to take pictures.

In my long-winded post earlier, I say this ^ although the v3 isn't necessarily "better".

 

[bayernfan]

I've lusted after a V1 summicron for quite some time, but the performance to price ratio makes less and less sense.

The V2 is probably the best deal in 35 summicrons right now. The build quality puts the V4 to shame, and the optical signature is the perfect blend of classic and modern (for me at least). The images i've made with mine have totally blown me away.

If you don't need speed, the Summaron 2.8 and 3.5 are also fantastic. I really like what my 2.8 does on color negatives. I'm currently on the hunt for an LTM 35/3.5 to put on my If.

 

[Doug]

I have a v.1 Summicron, bought new in 1967 along with a used M2. Both are so smooth, a joy to use. It went to DAG for 6-bit coding for use on the M8, so it's now an unusual one.

I also have a goggled f/2.8 Summaron which seems very similar except for the presence of the goggles. Goggles make the M2 viewfinder slightly less bright but being able to see the full coverage area *plus* some around the outside is worth the tradeoff. There is no advantage to using this goggled lens on an M8 however, and on an M9 the Summaron has smeared corners, unlike the Summicron.

 

[Erik van Straten]

Interesting Erik, would you care to expand?

This is with the M2 version of the Summaron 35mm f/3.5. This lens is made in the same style as the first model of the Summicron 50mm f/2 rigid.
There are many versions of the Summaron 35mm f/3.5. The most beautiful IMO is this version (the last M2 version).

The Summaron 35mm f/2.8 is at the larger apertures not sharp across the whole frame (the corners stay back). The Summaron 35mm f/3.5 is.

Leica M5, Summaron 35mm f/3.5, 400-2TMY. (Sharp across the whole frame. No flare whatsoever. No distortion.)

Erik.

 

[andrewtc4]

Condition is important, a clean Summaron at 1/4th the price is much nicer then a rough v1 Cron. I am guilty of doing the magic bullet hunt for older 35s and ended up with a Summaron 3.5 after owning and being around them all. The goggles are fine, they feel strange for a few days but don't stick out more then the lens itself... I did cover mine in fingerprints though. My biggest sellers remorse was getting rid of a Zuiko 4cm f/2.8 I sold it to pay for a v4 cleaning and wasn't any better off for x10 the price. If you have money, Get the v1 for the heft, then try all the rest... just don't get rid of the v3, you might miss it.

 

[Erik van Straten]

This is with the M2 version of the Summaron 35mm f/2.8 at f/2.8. Just look at the corners.

Leica M2, Summaron 35mm f/2.8, Tmax400.

Erik.