paquito230
paquito230
Hello !!
This is for the summaron 35 2.8 users.
It is my first Leica lens but i have notice incredible sharpness results with it, in both b/w and color slides. Well in color i see very low saturation (i know this is normal with this old lens) but i´m triying with the velvia, have you tested this? I´d like to know if there are comparatives between this lens an the summicron 35 2 from the same (or similar) year. Mine is from 1960.
One question apart, Wich would be your next lens after having the 35, i´m thinking in a summicron 90 2, and (who knows) later a ´cron 50 2.
Thanks for the answers in advance.
This is for the summaron 35 2.8 users.
It is my first Leica lens but i have notice incredible sharpness results with it, in both b/w and color slides. Well in color i see very low saturation (i know this is normal with this old lens) but i´m triying with the velvia, have you tested this? I´d like to know if there are comparatives between this lens an the summicron 35 2 from the same (or similar) year. Mine is from 1960.
One question apart, Wich would be your next lens after having the 35, i´m thinking in a summicron 90 2, and (who knows) later a ´cron 50 2.
Thanks for the answers in advance.
Michael I.
Well-known
I have the above lens(with goggles for m3) and while love its results I hate its ergonomics. I think it is superb in black and white.
My next lens would be a 50 - I dislike using long lenses on rf - I have an slr for that.
My next lens would be a 50 - I dislike using long lenses on rf - I have an slr for that.
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
What was the question? The field seems to be blank. I had one, foolishly traded it--although I don't regret having the Summicron version I I got for it. Sometime I will buy another Summaron. Right now they seem to have peaked in popularity, so the prices are way up there. A fine lens!
ferider
Veteran
As for the next lens, a 90mm fits a 35 very well in a two lens combo.
The 90/2 from the same period is big and heavy. Maybe you want
to look for a 90/2.8 Fat Tele Elmarit - great lens and should draw
similarly to your Summaron.
There is not much you can photograph with a classic 50 of the time
(1m min. distance) that you can not photograph with your Summaron.
Best,
Roland.
The 90/2 from the same period is big and heavy. Maybe you want
to look for a 90/2.8 Fat Tele Elmarit - great lens and should draw
similarly to your Summaron.
There is not much you can photograph with a classic 50 of the time
(1m min. distance) that you can not photograph with your Summaron.
Best,
Roland.
like2fiddle
Curious
If you search this site you should find a 35/40 mm lens comparison performed by a member here last spring. Both the Summaron 35/2.8 and the Summicron 35/2 were part of the testing.
As far as the next lens goes, I agree with Roland; the 90 would definately provide a substantially different view from the 35. I have a first version 90 elmarit that I like very much - it does well in both B&W and color. You don't get the lower color saturations you are observing in the Summaron (I have the 35/2.8 so I understand what you are describing).
As far as the next lens goes, I agree with Roland; the 90 would definately provide a substantially different view from the 35. I have a first version 90 elmarit that I like very much - it does well in both B&W and color. You don't get the lower color saturations you are observing in the Summaron (I have the 35/2.8 so I understand what you are describing).
Dektol Dan
Well-known
Mate for Summaron
Mate for Summaron
As far as Summaron v Summicron just do a Google search for same; that will turn a up a bunch windy opinions as well as will a Flickr search. Trouble is, you will pull up a bunch of 3.5 Summaron stuff as well which is a different critter.
Be sure you get a take from folks that have actually used both the Summicron and the Summaron, opinion is often conjecture based on what others have read.
My old man had a Summicron 35 V 1 which I used extensively and I preferred the Summaron over it hands down. If you don't need the extra stop stick with the Summaron which does expceptionally well wide open at 2.8 which is better than the Summicron at 2. Folks that have sold their Summarons almost always will write that they regretted it.
I have the same 50 Summicron I bought new with my Summaron back in the 60's. I 've only shot 2 for 4 rolls behind the Summicron in all those years. That's how much I like the Summaron.
Thin 90mm Tele Elmarits can be had for $250, and are very small and light. For as much as you will use it, that and the f4 Elmar 90 at $125, are hard to beat. The Elmar has 'the look', and even with a ton of money it would probably be my favorite 90.
Rangefinders are poor as teles and killer as a platform for wide angle lenses. Why not look into a 24/25 wide angle instead of the the 90?
Mate for Summaron
As far as Summaron v Summicron just do a Google search for same; that will turn a up a bunch windy opinions as well as will a Flickr search. Trouble is, you will pull up a bunch of 3.5 Summaron stuff as well which is a different critter.
Be sure you get a take from folks that have actually used both the Summicron and the Summaron, opinion is often conjecture based on what others have read.
My old man had a Summicron 35 V 1 which I used extensively and I preferred the Summaron over it hands down. If you don't need the extra stop stick with the Summaron which does expceptionally well wide open at 2.8 which is better than the Summicron at 2. Folks that have sold their Summarons almost always will write that they regretted it.
I have the same 50 Summicron I bought new with my Summaron back in the 60's. I 've only shot 2 for 4 rolls behind the Summicron in all those years. That's how much I like the Summaron.
Thin 90mm Tele Elmarits can be had for $250, and are very small and light. For as much as you will use it, that and the f4 Elmar 90 at $125, are hard to beat. The Elmar has 'the look', and even with a ton of money it would probably be my favorite 90.
Rangefinders are poor as teles and killer as a platform for wide angle lenses. Why not look into a 24/25 wide angle instead of the the 90?
ferider
Veteran
Paquito:
just to clarify for the Elmarits:
- there is the v1 Elmarit
- the v1 (fat) Tele Elmarit
- the v2 (thin) Tele Elmarit
- the v3 (modern) Tele Elmarit
Like Roger said, the v1 Elmarit is very sharp and quite contrasty, a great
lens. The v2 Tele Elmarit is also contrasty but tends to flare. I meant the
v1 (fat) TE, it is quite a different lens than Elmarit and v2 TE, less flare,
and more mellow in contrast, similar to the classic 90/2. It even existed
in chrome but in chrome is very expensive. In black you can buy it for US 300-400 or so.
And: your M3 will be great with a 90mm lens
Best,
Roland.
just to clarify for the Elmarits:
- there is the v1 Elmarit
- the v1 (fat) Tele Elmarit
- the v2 (thin) Tele Elmarit
- the v3 (modern) Tele Elmarit
Like Roger said, the v1 Elmarit is very sharp and quite contrasty, a great
lens. The v2 Tele Elmarit is also contrasty but tends to flare. I meant the
v1 (fat) TE, it is quite a different lens than Elmarit and v2 TE, less flare,
and more mellow in contrast, similar to the classic 90/2. It even existed
in chrome but in chrome is very expensive. In black you can buy it for US 300-400 or so.
And: your M3 will be great with a 90mm lens
Best,
Roland.
Stu W
Well-known
How about the 75mm Heliar?
HuubL
hunter-gatherer
I have both the 35 summaron and the summicron (8-element). Physically and optically they're almost identical. I almost exclusively use the summaron. Not that the cron is a worse lens than the summaron, but since mine is in a pretty nice condition, its putative value is prohibitive, too high to risk scratches and other signs of use. I'm thinking of selling mine.
Rico
Well-known
Based on recent prices, the Summaron 35/2.8 is finding its rightful place in the pantheon. I love the ergonomics and the rendition. I also vote 90mm as a second focal length. The v1 Elmarit 90 has matching optical character, but is really quite front-heavy. The perfect counterpart in weight, image quality and fashion is the three-element Elmar. It's expensive, but so is the Summaron.
paquito230
paquito230
Thanks, thanks
First of all, as you can see, this is one of my first posts here and i am surprised and very happy with all answers.
Now i know that i own a good lens SUMMARON 35/2.8 (some pictures in a few days i promise)
And i also know that my next will be a 90... ¡but i still don´t know what! Don´t worry i´m hard for choosing. I´ll study the market for the best choice.
Again , THANKS
First of all, as you can see, this is one of my first posts here and i am surprised and very happy with all answers.
Now i know that i own a good lens SUMMARON 35/2.8 (some pictures in a few days i promise)
And i also know that my next will be a 90... ¡but i still don´t know what! Don´t worry i´m hard for choosing. I´ll study the market for the best choice.
Again , THANKS
HuubL
hunter-gatherer
paquito230 said:
early version Elmarit! Classic lens and superb quality!
BigSteveG
Well-known
Have you considered the
Have you considered the
Konica Hexanon 90mm 2.8? It's a sweet lens....compact, well built (just as good as modern Leica), and makes outstanding images.
Have you considered the
paquito230 said:
Konica Hexanon 90mm 2.8? It's a sweet lens....compact, well built (just as good as modern Leica), and makes outstanding images.
rui
M2&IIIf user
Another option: the collapsible 90mm Elmar. I have one and I love the look of the lens as well as the look of the pictures I've taken with it. I believe I read somewhere that it is one of the milestones of Leitz's mechanical excellence, together with the 50 DR 'cron.
Choices, choices, choices...
Choices, choices, choices...
Tom A
RFF Sponsor
Over the decades I have used (and frequently kept) lots of 35's. I have favourites, sometimes for sentimental reasons, but also for performance. The Summicron 35f2 version I and my Summaron 35f2.8 (M2 mount). The 35f2.8 is a little jewel and it also performs. It is particularly good in close quarters. In that 1m to 3 m range it is better than the early Summicrons. I still use mine regularly - Tri X and the 35f2.8 makes a nice "walk about" lens on a good day.
The later 35's have increased contrast (and in the case of the 35f2 Asph, the contrast is high enough to make it difficult to print black/white without chasing 0 and 00 filters!).
I often pair the 35f2.8 with a small, compact 50. The 50f.8 II Elmarit or the 50f2.5 VC and a VC 21 in the pocket. Two bodies, three lenses and that will do most of what I want. IF (and that is a biggish IF) I need a 90, I take either a 90f3.5 Apo-Lanthar VC (best bang for the buck) or a collapsibsible 90/4 Elmar. The latter is a bit of a technological marvel. Compact and quite good, but, truth be told, it is heavy and I use it more for nostalgia reasons than anything else.
The later 35's have increased contrast (and in the case of the 35f2 Asph, the contrast is high enough to make it difficult to print black/white without chasing 0 and 00 filters!).
I often pair the 35f2.8 with a small, compact 50. The 50f.8 II Elmarit or the 50f2.5 VC and a VC 21 in the pocket. Two bodies, three lenses and that will do most of what I want. IF (and that is a biggish IF) I need a 90, I take either a 90f3.5 Apo-Lanthar VC (best bang for the buck) or a collapsibsible 90/4 Elmar. The latter is a bit of a technological marvel. Compact and quite good, but, truth be told, it is heavy and I use it more for nostalgia reasons than anything else.
vrgard
Well-known
Okay, I keep reading about the Summaron 35/2.8 and now I want one. Anybody got one they'd be willing to let go at reasonable price?
-Randy
-Randy
Sjixxxy
Well-known
vrgard said:
Stay away! I'm putting an offer to buy one I'm using fair & square. You can't have it.
But, just to feed your fire a little more, I adore this lens. I've only ran three rolls through it, but I really like it. Performs quite nice wide open.
vrgard
Well-known
Gee, thanks Sjixxxy, for both fueling the fire AND teasing me about your opportunity. I hope you get it at a great price and love it. And then decide to sell it to me within about, oh, say, 2 weeks. What do you say?
Sjixxxy
Well-known
vrgard said:Gee, thanks Sjixxxy, for both fueling the fire AND teasing me about your opportunity. I hope you get it at a great price and love it. And then decide to sell it to me within about, oh, say, 2 weeks. What do you say?
If I lose all my fingers in an accident, I'll write you first to give it a good home.
Vincenzo Maielli
Well-known
I own the goggled version, from 1962, that i mount on my Leica M5. My Summaron 35 mm f/ 2,8 work very fine and i'm very happy to use. The sharpness, bokeh and color rendtion are very good. The Summicron 35 mm f/ 2 (the first version, with 8 lens) is slightly better than Summicron at f/ 2,8 and f/ 4 while, from f/ 5,6 to f/ 11, the two lenses are substantially similar.
The last version of the Summicron ASPH 35 mm f/ 2 is significantly better than the first Summicron and the Summaron, but is more weak in the bokeh rendition.
Now, there is the new Summarit 35 mm f/ 2,5 and i'm very curious to see the optical performance of this new tool.
Ciao.
Vincenzo
The last version of the Summicron ASPH 35 mm f/ 2 is significantly better than the first Summicron and the Summaron, but is more weak in the bokeh rendition.
Now, there is the new Summarit 35 mm f/ 2,5 and i'm very curious to see the optical performance of this new tool.
Ciao.
Vincenzo