Some tests with a Summarit 50mm f1.5 on an M8

[peterm1]

I recently picked up a Summarit with a serial number dating to 1957. I had one some decades back from the film era but never used it very much preferring my Summicrons (I was lucky enough to have a DR summi and a late black version from about 1980). I eventually sold the Summarit to pay for some other kit - not because I did not like it but more because it was just not getting the use it deserved and I knew I could use the $ for other kit.

In any event I took my new one out for a run today and was pretty impressed with it - especially its color rendering. Low contrast, plenty of colour but almost a bit pastel. In these following images I have boosted contrast a bit but not the color which to me has a very traditional look to it.

These test photos are nothing much really just quick street shots near where I work, but I do like the rendition when using the M8. Low contrast lenses seem to be ideal for digital photography.

All are shot at f5.6 or f8. At these apertures its not surprising that all images are more than acceptably sharp. But its the color and tone that really impress and interests me. Sorry about the smallish size- photobucket seems not to accommodate larger images for their free accounts.

I think I am going to enjoy using this sucker.

 

[rbelyell]

very nice shots that certainly illustrate your point. ive had one for years that ive used on a variety on digi and film cams, and for the life of me, i dont understand the criticism of this lens. mine is very sharp from 2.8-5.6. yes its low contrast, but so are most all lenses from this era, many of which get far more love. and, as you say, it has a unique color profile, and it creates lovely skin tones. i can only account for what imo is unwarranted crticism because for the last ten years or so everyone just wants to shoot wide open, and if a lens isnt bitingly sharp at 1.5 its considered garbage.
tony

 

[Mudman]

I had one briefly, and found that it did give lovely rendering to tones, but mine wasn't very sharp across the frame, even stopped down to f8 (It may have been the particular copy) and had a number of issues compared to my 50's summicron. Sent it back, but I do think it could have been a nice portrait lens.

 

[LCT]

Interesting thanks. Would you have some pics at f/1.5 by chance? Just curious as i wonder if it has the same type of glow as the Summilux 35/1.4 pre-asph at full aperture.

 

[FrankS]

Special lens! Remember that on a cropped sensor you are not getting the full/complete edge and corner characteristics as you would on full frame 135 format.

 

[peterm1]

Interesting thanks. Would you have some pics at f/1.5 by chance? Just curious as i wonder if it has the same type of glow as the Summilux 35/1.4 pre-asph at full aperture.

I will try to get a couple of shots today and post them here. I tried a couple of wide open shots and there is a glow to them. Unfortantely I did not keep them so need to reshoot them and upload.

 

[peterm1]

OK here are a couple more shot open. All in all I can see the attraction of this lens. It produces some nice effects and its low contrast is a nice complement to a digital camera, particularly the M8 given how older sensors tend to struggle with high contrast images.

BTW I have established that the photobucket image will open up to a full res version. click on the image in the post then another one opens up in Photobcket. Click on the small plus sign in the bottom right corner then click it again in the new image that opens after two or three clicks a full res image opens.

This first image one shot wide open at f1.5. Focus point on the leaf in the centre area. Plenty of Leica glow here but not terribly sharp even at the point of focus. OK for portraits though.


And this one stopped down one stop to f2 (Or was it at f2.8? Sorry I did not make notes but its in that vicinity). Focus point on the centre jug and that jug is already sharp enough. A much "cleaner" and more conventional image although still very low contrast overall. I noticed that the lens quickly goes from being funky and glowing to more conventional within only one or two stops.



This one at f2.8 - nice rendering and colour.



And finally one at f5.6. You can see that at this aperture its now a pretty conventional lens although the colors are still a bit soft and old world. This image is helped a bit by being indoors I think as the other images shot yesterday are even more pastel in style. I am sure that some lenses I have would have thrown the background into darkness much more where as the low contrast rendering of this lens allows much of it to come through.

 

[LCT]

Many thanks 🙂

 

[peterm1]

About the only real disadvantage I can find for this lens right now is its annoyingly odd sized filter ring.

I am at least fortunate in that I owned such a lens back in the film days. And I still have some original Leitz filters in the correct size. This is fortunate as the asking price on eBay for these filters is crazy high. So I have a UV filter that fits - sadly no IR cut filter of course but I am working on it........... I have found a source of stepping rings which sells both 41-40.5mm (a much more common size) and 41 - 43mm (a somewhat more common size). Other sizes are also available such as 41 -46mm if needed. So I guess that will be my path for this accessory.

This allows me of course to use a stock standard IR cut filter and an inexpensive Chinese made metal hood instead of the $200+ price for an original Leitz Summarit hood by taking advantage of the stepping ring. Sadly I used to own a lovely old Walz hood designed for the Summarit and made in the 1950s. Like an idiot I sold it when I sold my original Summarit.

 

[Mark Wood]

I've mentioned this before but I've found that Hoya 40.5 mm filters work nicely on my Summarit and although they might feel very slightly loose as you start to attach them, they actually tighten up nicely. Very useful then as you can also add a 40.5 mm hood on top of the filter. Other 40.5 mm filters I have are too loose but I've yet to come across a Hoya one that doesn't work. (I'm sure the lens thread isn't distorted at all, so I don't know what this says about Hoya's tolerances, especially as these filters also seem to fit 40.5 mm threads perfectly!) Of course, "YMMV" (as they say nowadays) but worth a try.

 

[peterm1]

I've mentioned this before but I've found that Hoya 40.5 mm filters work nicely on my Summarit and although they might feel very slightly loose as you start to attach them, they actually tighten up nicely. Very useful then as you can also add a 40.5 mm hood on top of the filter. Other 40.5 mm filters I have are too loose but I've yet to come across a Hoya one that doesn't work. (I'm sure the lens thread isn't distorted at all, so I don't know what this says about Hoya's tolerances, especially as these filters also seem to fit 40.5 mm threads perfectly!) Of course, "YMMV" (as they say nowadays) but worth a try.[/quote

]

Actually now that you mention it, I recall I bought (circa 20 years ago) some nice chrome Zeiss filters in 40.5mm and just as you describe they were loose at first but cinched up nicely when screwed down. But I have also like you, found that this does not apply to all filters - some do, some don't. That's my experience anyhow. I have not tried Hoya lenses but will bear it in mind. thanks and cheers

 

[Richard G]

Lovely rendering Peter. Pastel is a good way of describing it.

 

[Dralowid]

For what it is worth, the Summarit 41mm filter size is the same as the 65mm Elmar for Viso...but I doubt many people have one of those lying around with a filter on it!

 

[Mark Wood]

I've mentioned this before but I've found that Hoya 40.5 mm filters work nicely on my Summarit and although they might feel very slightly loose as you start to attach them, they actually tighten up nicely. Very useful then as you can also add a 40.5 mm hood on top of the filter. Other 40.5 mm filters I have are too loose but I've yet to come across a Hoya one that doesn't work. (I'm sure the lens thread isn't distorted at all, so I don't know what this says about Hoya's tolerances, especially as these filters also seem to fit 40.5 mm threads perfectly!) Of course, "YMMV" (as they say nowadays) but worth a try.

An update to this, I have now found several Hoya 40.5 mm filters that don't fit! I forgot I had two Hoya X0 yellow-green filters in that size and one fits the Summarit, the other is too loose (as it should be). A couple of Hoya skylight filters are fine but some other coloured ones aren't. A couple of Tiffen ones I have are too loose, as is a Kood skylight.

So the conclusion to this remarkably "interesting" information? I wonder if very slight distortion of some of the filter rims makes them usable but a perfectly circular one isn't? So what I've discovered is that a circle with a particular diameter is just that. Exciting stuff...!!

 

[peterm1]

An update to this, I have now found several Hoya 40.5 mm filters that don't fit! I forgot I had two Hoya X0 yellow-green filters in that size and one fits the Summarit, the other is too loose (as it should be). A couple of Hoya skylight filters are fine but some other coloured ones aren't. A couple of Tiffen ones I have are too loose, as is a Kood skylight.

So the conclusion to this remarkably "interesting" information? I wonder if very slight distortion of some of the filter rims makes them usable but a perfectly circular one isn't? So what I've discovered is that a circle with a particular diameter is just that. Exciting stuff...!!

(I understand the following may not be the issue you are referring to above considering you seem to be using the same lens. I however am not. I only provide this for interest.)

I have just discovered that a Zeiss 40.5mm filter that I am sure worked with my "old" Summarit - now sold, is too loose for my new one. No distortion on either lens ring as far as I can recall (and I am very picky about cosmetics and would notice something like that). In short its not just variation in filter sizes - but variation in lens filter rings that are important (unsurprisingly I suppose when one thinks about it).

Now one thing I can say that may be relevant is that my old Summarit dated from memory to 1952 or thereabouts. My new one dates to 1957 according to the serial number and published tables for Leica production dates.

Its entirely possible, I imagine, that Leica changed tolerances in this 5 year period.

I recall that Summarits really benefit from use of a hood to avoid flare when the sun is nearly in frame. I found a nice looking (older style) lens hood on e Bay in 43mm thread. I use this on the Voigtlander 40mm f1.4 as the newer style hoods with the cut outs do not look quite right on that lens (or so I think) . I have also tracked down a 41 - 43mm stepping ring and now propose to use the same hood on the Summarit.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/281081773845?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1423.l2649

The hood should also be effective considering how deep it is. As it does not vignette on the wider Voigtlander lens it should be fine on the Summarit.

 

[peterm1]

Here is another I found shot I had taken the other evening at or near wide open by a room light behind me a TV in front. Quite dim conditions. Low contrast and a touch of flare are obvious as is a touch of image softness - still a pleasant rendering though. I know that about 10 minutes in photoshop would lift the contrast significantly on this shot although some of the flare would still be present.

 

[Daryl J.]

Snapped a couple "from the hip" photos today of my neighbor's Aston Martin Vantage at F5,6 on Fomapan 100 using a ND8 filter and hood. I'll be anxious to see results as this is my first use of that lens.