Summaron 2.8

[HuubL]

Considering the classic 35mm Summaron F/2.8, what is worth more, the M-mount version originally meant for the M2 (focusing to 0.7m), or the LTM-only version for the IIIg (focusing to 1m). I've been offered an original LTM-mount and as those are not frequently available on eBay, it's difficult to get an idea of the value. Accoring to “Antique and Classic Cameras” (http://www.antiquecameras.net/leicascrewlenses.html) the value of the LTM Summaron is US$ 450, while the M-mounts are over $ 600, despite that there were more M-versions made. Is this the general idea?

I know there is also an in-between M2 type with a removable dedicated LTM-to-M-mount.

 

[Ronald M]

You can always use it on a LTM camera, so I prefer it. Use an adapter to M camera.

I prefer my 3.5 to the 2.8 and my son has the 2.8 now for his M3. I added a V1 and V4 Summicron to my collection.

 

[Oh Two]

The gift that keeps on giving

The gift that keeps on giving

I prefer my 3.5 to the 2.8 and my son has the 2.8 now for his M3. I added a V1 and V4 Summicron to my collection

You are indeed a generous self sacrificing father. I prefer my 2.8 Summaron to my Summicron.

 

[Erik van Straten]

I have a very early M2-Summaron 35mm f/2.8, nr. 1627826, of wich the M-bayonet is removable. When removed, the lens can be used on a screwmount Leica. That looks odd, because the red dot is fixed on the body of the lens and not on the removable M-bayonet, but works fine.

Erik.

 

[bob338]

i have an LTM M2 Summaron with serial number 1808419, but mine has a standard M adapter on it. it focuses to 1 meter, so i know it's a real LTM lens.
as far as prices are concerned, i think the $450 price would be for a goggled version, $600 for an M and the LTM version going for a couple hundred more than the M version.
you won't be disappointed with this lens, it's one of the most quietly loved leica lenses there is.

good luck.

bob

 

[elude]

Oh man, I've just bought an LTM Summaron from the U.S. (I live in France) and I did not know that the minimum focus was different. Argh !!

 

[helen.HH]

I have a very early M2-Summaron 35mm f/2.8, nr. 1627826, of wich the M-bayonet is removable. When removed, the lens can be used on a screwmount Leica. That looks odd, because the red dot is fixed on the body of the lens and not on the removable M-bayonet, but works fine.

Erik.

Oh Eriik, my is kind of near yours in Number...1666468...😀
yours a 1958...mine a 1959

 

[maggieo]

I want one of the 2.8s now, too! GAS!

 

[Vincent.G]

But it is a pity not many appreciate this lens due to its relatively slower speed compared to a lux or cron.

I have a M2 version M mount. This lens is very well-made. Definitely a keeper for me.

 

[Rico]

Impossible to predict fleabay, but I say the (true) LTM commands a $100 premium. Since the Summaron 35/2.8 price is drifting upward, budget $800 for a mint copy. I definitely exercise the mounting flexibility:

 

[HuubL]

Impossible to predict fleabay, but I say the (true) LTM commands a $100 premium. Since the Summaron 35/2.8 price is drifting upward, budget $800 for a mint copy. I definitely exercise the mounting flexibility:

That's a beautiful IIIb Rico. That makes me wish one also!


I already have the convertible Summaron, but bought the original LTM version yesterday also. It looked pretty and the price was good!

 

[HuubL]

I have a very early M2-Summaron 35mm f/2.8, nr. 1627826, of wich the M-bayonet is removable. When removed, the lens can be used on a screwmount Leica. That looks odd, because the red dot is fixed on the body of the lens and not on the removable M-bayonet, but works fine.

Erik.

Like mine Erik (#169...). Always wondered why the red dot was glued to the lens body instead of the removable M-mount.

 

[David Murphy]

Around $400-550 would be a reasonable price for a Summaron 35/2.8 of any sort in good shape (condition is the paramount factor for Leica valuation). I own the Googled M version, which is really a work of art mechanically and optically and it looks kool. The Googled verison works well on all the Leica M's (except perhaps the M8), although it's best use is on the M3 which lacks an inherent 35mm frame line. While the LTM version certainly offers a lot of flexibility, you will need a 35mm finder to go with it on many cameras.

The Summaron 35/2.8 is really a fantastic lens mechanically and delivers simply wonderful results.

 

[Vincent.G]

Hmmm.... after seeing rico's summaron which has a later s/no compared to mine.... i am starting to wonder whether my summaron can be converted to LTM or not. My copy has a serial number of 1662***, how do I know whether it can be converted to LTM? Any way to check?

 

[cnphoto]

I have the goggled F2.8 on my M3 and it is my favourite lens, easily. slightly lower contrast and sharp, sharp! it works very well on the M3.

The goggled version on an M3 also focuses down to .65m! instead of .7m or 1m.

 

[Vincent.G]

My summaron on my M2. I like the classic looking combination.

 

[HuubL]

Hmmm.... after seeing rico's summaron which has a later s/no compared to mine.... i am starting to wonder whether my summaron can be converted to LTM or not. My copy has a serial number of 1662***, how do I know whether it can be converted to LTM? Any way to check?

166**** is an early lens (mine is 169****), so I think it should be the convertible type. I see the red dot is on the body of the lens rather than on the glossy lens mount ring. If that M-mount ring contains only one (tiny) screw (the set screw) you should be able to unscrew that with a small screwdriver and unscrew the M-mount ring from the body. This will reveal the thread which is LTM.

Good luck.

 

[rover]

1 meter close focus for the LTM
.7 meter close focus for the M2 version
.65 meter close focus for the M3 w/eyes version

What does your lens barrel say?

Oh, and there is an M3 Summaron in the classifieds.

 

[Vincent.G]

Mine focuses to 0.7m. But I see one small screw on the glossy lens mount ring as what HuubL mentioned. I don't have a screwdriver small enough for the tiny screw though. So mine is a LTM that focuses to 0.7m??

 

[archive59]

166**** is an early lens (mine is 169****), so I think it should be the convertible type. I see the red dot is on the body of the lens rather than on the glossy lens mount ring. If that M-mount ring contains only one (tiny) screw (the set screw) you should be able to unscrew that with a small screwdriver and unscrew the M-mount ring from the body. This will reveal the thread which is LTM.

Good luck.

Thanks for this specific info. It looks as though my lens (16627**) has a removable M-mount that I was not aware of.