Leica LTM Summarit Too heavy?

Leica M39 screw mount bodies/lenses
P

projectbluebird

Film Abuser
Local time
5:44 PM
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Messages
330
I bought a summarit today for my IIIf. The guy I bought it from said they were famous for pulling the mount out of focus, because they were so heavy.

Does anyone know if there's any truth to this? I've never heard of this, and I searched out everything I could find before I bought this lens.
 
HOGWASH!!!

I've used the Summarit for years on both screw mount Leicas and M mount Leicas with no problems..
 
NO! It is not that heavy of a lens. It is quite nicely balanced on a Canon 7, a little big on a IIIf. But the mount will be safe and sound.

attachment.php
 
Last edited:
projectbluebird said:
I bought a summarit today for my IIIf. The guy I bought it from said they were famous for pulling the mount out of focus, because they were so heavy.

Does anyone know if there's any truth to this? I've never heard of this, and I searched out everything I could find before I bought this lens.
Click to expand...


..that is realy funny!..:D....
 
It's not going to mess up the mount on the camera.

However, my understanding is that the internal mount of the lens is built up of many parts, and can get on the loose side. There's a lot of glass held in place by many little bits of brass.
 
Never heard of that and I have had one for years! Plus I read a lot about this stuff. Sounds to me like an urban myth. They are reasonably heavy but I would have said not much moreso than a non collapsible summicron. Besides, the LTM mount is pretty robust and secured by a few screws so I would be very surprised. Besides, as the post below asks, what about the Canon 85mm. That thing is a monster by comparison. I also had one of those and never had this problem.
 
That`s nonsense.......the Xenon which is the Father to this lens is just as heavy and it didn`t bother anyone and worked just fine, another case of someone not knowing what they are talking about

But that`s ok - Summarit`s are all JUNK and I`ll buy them off of everyone`s hands for $25 each no problem LOL!!!! :D

Tom
 
Thanks for the replies everyone, I thought it didn't sound right. I know the 1st version 90 'cron came in SM too, and that thing is a true monster.

Keep in mind, this is the same guy that said that fast lenses were useless because they were shallow at all apetures, not just wide open.
 
Keep in mind, this is the same guy that said that fast lenses were useless because they were shallow at all apertures, not just wide open.


Hmmmm explains a lot!
 
Fine bit of urban myth, as others have said...BUT...

The focussing mount on a Summarit can become a bit stiff with age and requires an occasional CLA, probably more so than the smaller lenses?

HOWEVER

...the 73 Hector is well known for exploding at low temperatures due to a build up of pressure between the second and third elements and IIIbs can go critical at any time.

Michael
 
Somewhere on the planet, sitting in some collector's cabinet is the massive 85/1.5 Summarex. That lens makes the 50/15 Summarit seem like a miniature toy.

Back to that collector, I'll bet he has an 85 bright-line finder that would match perfectly with my 85/2 PC Nikkor, which is another heavy weight.
 
This belief probably dates from pre-IIIc days, when the shutter crate was fabricated from thin brass, not a die casting. The mount was frankly weak, and heavy lenses could distort it, either over a long period or with the aid of a knock.

This is not the same as pulling the mount out, however, and the original Summarit is a lot lighter than some of the other lenses you could stick on a Standard/II/III/IIIa/IIIb.

It is however true that the f/1,5 demands the best possible alignment, and if the mount had been dragged out of alignment by some other cause, the f/1,5 would show it up. For those who are not too clear on cause and effect, it would then be a short step to saying that the f/1,5 caused the misalignment...

Cheers,

R.
 
Another Leica Urban Myth

Another Leica Urban Myth

Using 90 Summicron, 135 Nikkor, 85 Canon, and Visoflex II with almost anything has caused the vulcanite to loosen on my IIIa.
 
FWIW-

Paul-Henry van Hasbrbroeck, in his massive compendium on the Leica, mentions that the design Leica IIIb was changed to reinforce the lens flange. This was done because the weight of the newer telephoto lenses of the period had a tendency to warp the flange. Conceivably, this folklore might have arisen because of warped flanges on the IIIa and earlier models.
 
So, does that mean that those of us still shooting with "pre-b" Barnacks should not plan on using anything longer than a 50mm lens ?

I wonder if this is why Leitz put a tripod mount on even its earliest 135 lenses ?
(I have a 135 Elmar, black/nickel, old enough that it is not RF coupled, nor does it bear a serial number ( that I can find anyway) )

I would be more worried about an 85mm or longer lens distorting the body than I would a Summarit or Xenon - the longer lenses develop more "leverage" against the body.

Luddite Frank
 
Luddite Frank said:
So, does that mean that those of us still shooting with "pre-b" Barnacks should not plan on using anything longer than a 50mm lens ?

I wonder if this is why Leitz put a tripod mount on even its earliest 135 lenses ?
(I have a 135 Elmar, black/nickel, old enough that it is not RF coupled, nor does it bear a serial number ( that I can find anyway) )

I would be more worried about an 85mm or longer lens distorting the body than I would a Summarit or Xenon - the longer lenses develop more "leverage" against the body.

Luddite Frank
Click to expand...
Dear Frank,

If the body is already out of true, it can easily be shimmed.

Using a 90 or 135 (or indeed 73 or 105) is not a problem but yes, that IS why there's a tripod socket on 135s. And I'd agree completely about the leverage.

Cheers,

R.
 
blue bird, if it is any help for you, I got jupiter 8 50/1.5 and I think that this is too light for me. I don't know what material was the glass mounted on. probably aluminium. This feels much lighter than a modern summicron lol. Maybe this is something for you. Or we can switch the lenses lol
 
I agree with Roger. I wanted to add that the IIIb mount was strengthened compared to the IIIa and earlier.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom