Summarex 85 / 1.4

[Andy Charrier]

Dear Friends some months ago I found in a fleas market in Santiago an old Leica Lens.
I think is the most beautiful lens designed EVER for any camera. The owner an old rabid women never let me touch it, (that’s the sad part of the history) so I couldn’t know which lens was. Matu found some days ago a Leica magazine and inside appears a Summarex 85 / 1.4 exactly the same lens I saw in the fleas market.
I have to say that the Summarex is the most delicious lens I had ever see.
But in the web there is almost nothing about this lens.
So can any body out there give some information about this lens, Please?
I will really appreciate it.
I read that is was made in the 1956 maybe same year of the M3, very very heavy, made of brass and something that it was the first coated lens, nothing else.
Is it a rarity lens, a collection lens, how much does it cost, any experience with that lens, weight?
The price in the fleas market was almost US$ 2000.
If you can help me………..?!
Thanks a lot.

Andy

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

That is indeed a rare lens. That is also a high price, but it sounds about right. I think I saw one on eBay for a little bit less than that a few months ago. They say this lens has a beautiful blur. Too rich for my blood, though.

 

[jlw]

It's an 85/1.5, not an 85/1.4, but otherwise your description is right on target. It's big, it's very knurly, and it's very pretty if its chrome finish is in good shape.

Its price is high because of rarity more than because of exceptional performance.

Canon and Nikon also made 85/1.5s in the same era. These also are expensive, but not as much as the Leitz lens. I own the Canon model, and it's a reasonably good picture-taker, although it doesn't perform nearly well as most of their more conservative long lenses.

The counterpart for the Contax line was the 75mm f/1.5 Biotar, and this is even more difficult to find today.

I don't think any of these lenses sold in large quantities, partly because they were expensive when new, and partly because all of them are very heavy for a moderate tele lens.

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

You are right, it is f/1.5, not f/1.4. I don't know why they weren't consistent with their naming conventions and used "Summarit" and "Summarex" for the same aperture. Perhaps different optical design? Shows you how much I know.

 

[paulh]

Its a biggie. Unless you need a lens of that range in screwmount, for the same price or slightly lower I would take the 75 Summilux any day. Oh the creamy bokeh : )

 

[dr.kollig]

The 85 Summarex was developed around 1942 and was only delivered in LTM. It is said to be much softer than the 90/2. I own a 75/1.5 in M42 mount and is an excellent portrait lens, wide open contrast is really low, although it is coated, great for girls above 20.

Wolfram