Bernie/Is/No/More.
Member
What do you think about the condition of this summar? I bought it months ago and it's in a very good shape. The pictures I take with it are amazing.
Last edited:
mh2000
Well-known
hey Bernie! how about posting some of those amazing photos? My Summar looks about the same... and my photos are kind of "amazing" too ... like in some drug induced romantic dream ...
Mr_Flibble
In Tabulas Argenteas Refero
hahaha, If you say they're amazing, those cleaning marks might be part of the magic.
My Summar's lens is in immaculate condition, except for a few specs of dust. ...and I don't think my pictures are amazing.
My Summar's lens is in immaculate condition, except for a few specs of dust. ...and I don't think my pictures are amazing.
raid
Dad Photographer
We all search for the path to amazing images. May you have better luck than me.
myoptic3
Well-known
You seem to have one of the coated ones. The Summar is one of the all time under rated Leica lenses because there are so many bad examples around. Surface scratches/cleaning marks usually won't degrade the image. Flare is the problem w/ the Summars, along w/ internal haze. You have to put a hood on it. Unfortunately the Leica hoods are ugly and expensive. I put a 34mm UV filter on mine, used a 34 to 39 step ring, then screwed in a generic slotted hood from heavystar. Cheap, looks good, and works. I have an uncoated one that I took apart and cleaned up, and yes, my pictures are amazing too. The lens excels w/ Tri-X and HP5. Let's let others talk bad about this lens so we can buy them cheap!
Attachments
Last edited:
retnull
Well-known
My 1937 Summar is in "user" condition, and I'm pleased with the results:
Sanders McNew
Rolleiflex User
I have two Summars -- a coated one in
an ordinary barrel, and an uncoated one
in a nickel barrel. Both are clear and
recently cleaned, with none of the
scratches typical of the lens. Both
lenses return vivid images. Here's
a portrait I shot last month using the
uncoated Summar (no hood):
Pablo Kolodny, Photographer.
I keep trying other lenses but I seem
to keep coming back to the Summars.
Sanders
an ordinary barrel, and an uncoated one
in a nickel barrel. Both are clear and
recently cleaned, with none of the
scratches typical of the lens. Both
lenses return vivid images. Here's
a portrait I shot last month using the
uncoated Summar (no hood):
Pablo Kolodny, Photographer.
I keep trying other lenses but I seem
to keep coming back to the Summars.
Sanders
Mr_Flibble
In Tabulas Argenteas Refero
Heh, I've only shot one roll with it on my IIIc so far, so I'm sure I need a bit more practice with my Summar before making any judgement. Shame the weather doesn't permit me to go out and shoot some more at the moment.
All the pictures floating around RFF shot with Summar lenses were what finally convinced me to buy one (And a war-time Summitar is on the list too)
Great shots, Sanders and Retnull.
All the pictures floating around RFF shot with Summar lenses were what finally convinced me to buy one (And a war-time Summitar is on the list too)
Great shots, Sanders and Retnull.
Bernie/Is/No/More.
Member
I think mine is not coated. It has cleaning marks... and yes, maybe it is the essence of the lens "magic".
I shot this one in Spain with the Summar, M6 and Ilford HP5 developed with ID-11.
I shot this one in Spain with the Summar, M6 and Ilford HP5 developed with ID-11.
Last edited: