Summarit 50 f1.5 & Photos

The lens is a heavy, chrome-plated, brass beauty with a nearly circular aperture and a character all its own.

I have owned two examples of this lens; the first was on the first Leica that I purchased, an M3, back in 1993. It is capable of fine results, with some caveats that don't apply to more current lenses. First, these lenses were soft-coated rather than hard-coated. I don't know what this means technically, but in practical terms the lenses were easy to scratch with normal cleaning and the coating is not as robust as in a modern vacuum-coated lens. Contrast-robbing cleaning marks on the front element are common, in my experience. Second, the lens flares badly if any light source is pointed at the lens. I happen to like this look, but it means that: Third - the lens has lower contrast than its more modern brethren. Flare can be controlled somewhat with a hood, but: Fourth--the filter size/thread pitch on these lenses is a little odd and the standard Leica hoods won't fit it. Special hoods (rectangular, pop-up) run over $100 used.

I have not used a Xenon, but my understanding is that the Summarit was an evolution rather than a revolution of that design (from Schneider? - -I think).

Now having said all of the above, it should tell you something that I always regretted selling my first Summarit, actively sought out a second and then paid extra to have Don Goldberg adjust it so that it will work with my M8. But you should realize that you are getting a lens with a certain, low-contrast character when you buy this lens. For a little more money, you can get the only-one-stop-slower, but revolutionary design Summicron -- better, in my view as a general purpose lens.


Ben Marks
 
 
I've only used my LTM Summarit for one film (Provia 100F) so far but from the results I've seen, Ben is spot on. It's a beautifully made, heavy lens and it certainly has relatively low contrast but mine appears to be very sharp. (From what I've read, I believe the Summarit is more or less a coated version of the earlier Xenon and so it has better control of flare but I can't comment on that as I've never used one.)

An interesting point about filters though and one that I found out purely by chance. The filter thread is (I think) 41 mm but Hoya 40.5 mm filters seem to fit perfectly. Other makes of 40.5 mm filter I've tried are definitely too small, so I'm not sure what that says about manufacturing tolerances! There are also dedicated bayonet filters which seem easier to come by than the special threaded ones.
 
Try to get your hands on any Summarit that you propose to purchase, and check all of the mechanical motions. The one that I had and sold made good images, but the aperture ring was worn and sloppy. A good one should be a fine lens, though, as said above, can be lower in contrast than modern lenses.

Jim N.
 
LeicaTom can weigh in on the performance comparison between the Summarit and the Xenon. AFAIK the only difference is coating. I like my M-mount Summarit very much (I have a pristine example) but as noted above it flares easily. The OOF rendition is more or less unique - different from Sonnar for example - and not to everyone's taste.
 
The Summarit is the ONE Leitz lens every artistic Leica Photographer should have/use.

Brian Sweeney told me when these lenses are CLA`d they work like never before and that cleaning them will make a noticeable difference, also a hood is a really good idea, the factory Leitz and Waltz hoods are very expensive $60 into the hundreds, best is to find a generic 41mm or use step-up rings etc. - the lens's service ring is 41mm

The Summarit`s older brother the Xenon is from Taylor & Hobson Patents (England) and most lenses after 70 years or so lying around are in fair to poor condition, I found a late 1936 version (first year production) one that`s very clean, with minimal scratches on the front element and maybe 10% haze.

The photos are very nice with a very artistic look that the models seem to love, quite a romantic look, the Xenon works pretty much like a compact Thambar lens, shooting soft "dreamy" images - the difference between the Xenon and the Summarit is that the Xenon is a tad bit softer, but this could also be in the glass too, while so few of these lenses survived the war and time in good condition, mine still needs a lens CLA and as soon as that`s done, then I`ll post more work

My lenses show only about 90% of the lens's real potential, so you can make your judgement on these shots, while almost ALL of these lenses have some haze that does effect the outcome slightly, the cleaner the glass the better the lens, maybe someone out there who just has had a Summarit CLA`d can share some work with us to see what I`m talking about 😀

The Xenon/Summarit line of lenses isn`t for everyone`s taste, these lenses produce images that are somewhat like an Impressionist Painting... if you are looking for dead on razor sharpness it`s NOT the lens for you, I know that some people don`t like the term "Leica Glow" , BUT I do and this is the lens that HAS it, if you want it 🙂

Tom
 
Last edited:
It's a fine lens, just be careful of your expectations wide open close up.
It's for someone who loves beautiful (unlike any other) tones and doesn't mind (or even likes) the way it flares.
 
I found it to be low contrast and soft wide open - which is where I wanted to use it. My father's postwar Zeiss Sonnar 50mm F:1.5 beat it to a pulp. I might have had a substandard example. . .
 
Hmmm. I think its a the worst lens I have ever used. It's heavy, it's soft, it's flary, it's got a long focus throw, it has horrible bokeh and it's hard to find in good condition. I'd look for something else - many better lenses out there. But as I see opinoins vary.
 
My Summarit pushes the limits in softness. I still don't know why, but DAG suggested that I don't alter the lens. The results are nice and could be called Thambar-Summitar like, even though Roger Hicks tells us that the Thambar is far softer.

776403-R1-06-6small.jpg


776403-R1-15-15small.jpg


776403-R1-33-33small.jpg
 
Raid,

When I saw the lens, there was this sub-conscious voice telling me grab it and not let go. I could not figure why, until I got home, did a search on RRF, and found your beautiful photos as well as others. I am holding you responsible for impulse acquisition of this lens!!

As for the lens, it is a special purpose lens, it does flare like crazy, it is soft, etc and etc. But it has a very distinctive and strong signature that adds atmosphere and feeling to portraits like few other lenses. Mine is very, very sharp in the center, even wide open, but the flare, low contrast and abundant scratches add a softness that is wonderful.

Definitely not your general purpose, walk-about lens, but great tool to have to that special purpose.
 
Wow. Everyone has beautiful shots with this lens.

I just passed up a very nice looking Summarit LTM for $225. Now I want it. Does that sound like a good price? I found no cleaning marks, and didn't see any haze, although I didn't do the flashlight test. Aperature and focus rings seemed OK. Barrel was very clean.

Should I jump on it?

Btw, LeicaTom-- next time you do a wedding shoot, can you get me an invitation? The weddings I get invited to don't look anything like yours.
 
There was a Summarit at the DFW show this weekend I wanted to buy but the seller wanted $1200 for it and would not come down to a reasonable price..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

peterm1
A night time walk with a Leica Summarit 50mm f1.5
Replies
1
Views
270
Richard G
Richard G
B
50mm f1.4 & f1.5 Max Aperture tests - Summarit, Summilux v2, Nikkor f1.4, Summilux ASPH
Replies
13
Views
1K
brusby
B
Sonnar Brian
Transition CZJ 5cm F1.5 Sonnar compared with an Early 5cm F1.4 Nikkor-SC.
2
Replies
28
Views
1K
boojum
boojum
R
Desert island RF 50mm m-lens shot at f2 (showcase pics please)
Replies
5
Views
520
Godfrey
Godfrey
Rikard
Voigtlander Nokton 50 1.5 II too modern?
Replies
11
Views
2K
Rikard
Rikard
Back
Top Bottom