Summicron 35/2 type 2/3

R

Rich1950

Member
Local time
4:42 PM
Joined
May 17, 2021
Messages
34
View My Gallery
I have a perfect Canadian 35/2, serial number 2461396. The SN belongs to the type 3 production run but its clearly configured as a type 2. This lens has threads for a filter in addition to the off-set aperture. I suspect the lens was modified for PJ work as the aperture off-set facilitates an aperture change with the right hand #2 digit.

Chime in if you think this has been modified or if it was released for sale with this configuration.
 

Attachments

  • 89D3D87C-343A-4A6E-9863-3E7E80810027.jpeg
    89D3D87C-343A-4A6E-9863-3E7E80810027.jpeg
    375.9 KB · Views: 101
  • FDCFC75F-37D7-4723-945D-4606964E8CAA.jpeg
    FDCFC75F-37D7-4723-945D-4606964E8CAA.jpeg
    260.5 KB · Views: 100
I personally have never seen a Summicron with the tab for the aperture. I have owned two. My current Summicron's seriel number is 248xxxx.

Edit: There is one on flea-bay right now that has the tab.
 
Last edited:
The V2 Summicrons had the tab. I have a feeling the offset index dot was a modification. I have a90mm Elmarit (not tele elmarit) that is offset like that.
 
How about the off-set aperture? I don’t think they made the lens this way but I have seen another on the web that had the off-set.
 
Just to be clear its the white index dot next to the aperture that I’m referencing. Positioned as it was allows the aperture stick to be in a position where the stick can be operated by the second right hand finger….. a stop up or down from f/4. The lens was part of a M2-R kit and came with the proper series VII hood. it does have the thread for 39mm filters which was a type 3 configuration change.

Did the lens come from the Canadian plant configured this way? If it did perhaps they where using legacy parts with the new filter thread during a production transition????? Or perhaps it was a thing for PJs to alter the lens to fit a shooting style?
 
My lens has a earlier serial number than yours, has the tab and 39mm threads but not the offset aperture. I have several LTM lenses that are offset and was always told that this was so you can see it with a accessory viewfinder in the flash shoe. I have no experience with Leica lenses but this is a very easy modification to make or change back on Voightlander LTM lenses.
IMG_2953.png
 
As a big fan of focusing tabs I also really like the aperture tab on this lens and always wondered why this idea was abandoned.
 
That tab was required because the body is so short. Its purpose is to improve handling. The OOF quality is smooth at f/2.8 - f/4. Wide open its too soft for me.
 
I have a Wetzlar Version 2. It has 39E filter threads, and also has the offset aperture index and the small aperture setting tab.

I wondered about it at first, too; but I'm sure the offset was designed in at the factory. And I believe its *main* purpose is that it keeps the aperture tab from overlapping the focusing tab at any point in its travel--as designed, the aperture tab will stop on either side just short of the focusing tab, whether it's at the close focus or infinity position. If the aperture index were at the 12 o'clock position, then from F2 to F4, the aperture tab would overlap the focusing tab at infinity or a bit less, and it would be difficult to change the aperture easily from one of those settings in that case. If they had put the aperture setting tab in any other position there would be either aperture tab/focus tab overlap at some point, *or* it would have been easier to change the aperture with the left hand rather than the right, which I'm sure Leica wished to avoid as being unnecessarily awkward.

By the way, I use a modified 12524 plastic hood, that I got cheap, with my lens, as I prefer the rectangular hood to the 12504 or 12525. I sawed & sanded off the tab on top of the hood designed to hold it square on the Version IV, so that it didn't interfere with the movement of the aperture tab (I left the other tab, in case I ever get a Version IV it will still work fine), and painted a red index dot in the same position as the aperture index on the lens (which is covered with the hood attached). Works great, mostly!
 

Attachments

  • IMG_1529.JPG
    IMG_1529.JPG
    191.2 KB · Views: 8
Ruinacco, its interesting your Wetzler produced lens is an off-set. You may be right about the reason and why it was done. Your explanation makes sense. It is definitely quirky to use the lens. However the focus tab is positioned just right. If more of these turn up as a result of this post I have to think the factory designed them this way. on the other hand I don’t recall any collectors book identifying this unique off-set feature.

I lost the correct lens hood and use the one shown in your post.
 
Last edited:
Rich1950 said:
its interesting your Wetzler produced lens is an off-set. You may be right about the reason and why it was done. Your explanation makes sense.
Click to expand...

Yeah, examining it practically brought me to that conclusion. If you stop down to F16 and focus to 0.7 meters, you'll see that the aperture setting tab just overlaps the flange of the focusing tab on the left side of the lens (looking from the back of the camera)--but there is still separation between the focusing tab notch and aperture tab that can easily be felt (and manipulated) without removing your eye from the viewfinder. If you go the opposite way and open up fully while focusing at infinity, you'll see that the aperture tab and focusing tab notch are separated just a little more, this time on the right side of the lens, than in the preceding situation--but they're very close to being in the same relative positions as in that case. Try it with your own lens, you'll see what I'm talking about.

So by placing the aperture index where they did, it provides the exact location, for all practical purposes, where you can most easily simultaneously manipulate the focus tab (with your left index finger) and aperture setting tab (with your right index finger) without interference between them at any point. It also maintains consistency with other lenses when zone focusing--when the focus tab is at 6 o'clock, the lens is focused at around 6.5 feet, which is the same as my 50mm Summicron Version IV.

It is quirky, having the aperture index not at 12 o'clock--but, in line with Leica's philosophy, it makes actually using the lens as rapid and ergonomic as possible, while maintaining an undistracted view through the viewfinder. It's a case of where practicality trumps an aesthetic consideration--makes perfect sense, really.
 
Thats a great analysis. But I have not read of this off-set in any book written about Leica lenses. Its so unusual you would think Jim Lager would mention it. i believe Lagers book identifies my lens sn as a type 3. its clearly not.
 
Last edited:
It's a conundrum. In this photo of the various versions from L-Camera-Forum, the V2 clearly has the aperture index at the 10 o'clock position (viewed from the rear of the lens). But I have a copy of the Leica Pocket Book, which combines V2 and V3 into the same entry, as optically they were so similar. The single lens photo has the index at the 12 o'clock position; it appears to be a V2. And if you did open up the aperture on the pictured lens all the way, you'd get awkward aperture tab/focus tab overlap. So there are some possible scenarios:

1. Leica produced lenses at various times with the aperture index at either 10 o'clock or 12 o'clock; it would be interesting to do a serial number vs. aperture index location survey to see if they "settled" on one being better (or producing fewer questions/complaints) over time.
2. The index came from the factory at 12 o'clock and some users got irritated by tangling up their left and right index fingers while simultaneously focusing and changing aperture, and so had the lens adjusted to 10 o'clock.
3. The index came from the factory at 10 o'clock, and some users got freaked out that the index was at that position, or bought the lens used and assumed there was something wrong with it because of this, and had it set to 12 o'clock.

I wouldn't be surprised if all three scenarios--plus one or more I didn't consider--play some role in where that index is oriented.

(Oh, aaaaand--there are the weird ones. This lens, for example, has the aperture index at about the 1 o'clock mark, I can't imagine why. I would assume on the evidence it's probably not at all difficult--maybe loosening a few set screws?--to rotate the aperture index anywhere desired...or to where it ended up accidentally.)
 
The same seller in Asia has two off-sets for sale on link reference in last post. Anyone with collector books have more info on why there seems to be variations.
 
Here’s my 35/2 v4 Summicron with the index at 11:30. Indices on the 50 and the 90 are at 12:00.

I always thought someone messed with the index before I bought it.

The v4 seems to have such a flimsy aperture ring - its poor quality does not seem worthy of a German product.

IMG_0462.jpeg
 
Tuna, Its all odd how the off-set may or may not be configured on either the German or Canadian produced lens. No collector books mention it.

I had a v3 and the reason I sold it was the aperture was hard to operate with a hood. Both the v2 and v3 are well made tiny bodies.

Now that I think about it the handling of the v2 with stick makes it easy to change apertures. The off-set however is an acquired taste. Habit informs the off-set is not optimal. But the alternative of the stick interfering with a focus tab is worse. So the off-set makes ergonomic sense.

I also can change my off-set f-stop by feel with the second right digit finger. My original post mentioned f/4 but I think it is a bit more like f/2.8 when the stick is near the 3 o’clock position. Its easy to change the aperture one stop up or down.

Discovering more lens bodies with the off-set points to an intentional factory configuration and not a user hack. Being dissatisfied with the aperture handling of the v3 with hood I’m more agreeable with the unique v2.

Type 2 build and image quality are classic Leitz.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom