Summicron 50 V3 or V4?

[Kent]

I've got the V4 and I truely love it, on the M6, the M8 and the Sony A7II. 😉

 

[Steve Bellayr]

V4 over the V3 by specs but with that said I have the V3 and never looked back. With great lenses like these it is the photographer that makes the lens not the lens that makes the photographer.

 

[Highway 61]

Every v2 will develope haze, sooner or later. You can have this cleaned, but after the cleaning the lens will most likely not be the same as before the haze starts.

Haze is caused by grease coming from the focusing helicoid getting onto the aperture blades then outgassing and leaving an oily layer on the glass surfaces. I owned a V1 on which it started. I quickly took it apart and carefully cleaned the aperture unit and replaced the focusing helicoid grease. Cleaning the aperture blades on that lens was a difficult task because they don't come off as a unit, you have to remove all the blades then reassemble them one after another (the last one is of course the most difficult to install) before you put the retaining ring back on. Cleaning the hazy optical surfaces was very easy. After this, my V1 was absolutely perfect and it developed no haze onwards. I don't see why this shouldn't be the same on the V2, the V2 being essentially a not collapsible V1.

After that I got a V3 : the aperture blades were oily so a good cleaning was mandatory but because of the darn white metal ring mentioned above I never could take the aperture unit off. This specific problem of the V3 was confirmed by a reputable pro repairman I used to know then.

A bit later I got a black V4, Canada made. It had developed some haze already. I sent it back before using it.

A close friend of mine still has a V4, bought from new, German made, black. The lens is crystal clear : we have performed the Maglite test through it. The aperture blades are perfectly dry. But, every now and then, and especially when there are no special contrejour conditions and even lighting conditions, some heavy flare shows up on the picture. The friend got tired of that lens and he doesn't use it that much now. It's not the only V4 someone complains about, for the same and strange problem.

V3 or V4, personal preference. But I would advise to doublecheck the optics for haze beginning to show up indeed, and to go for a lens with 100% clean and dry aperture blades. I see so many of those lenses advertised as "fully recently serviced by a pro repairman, invoice will be provided" which have very oily aperture blades, that it is becoming quite discouraging.

 

[Erik van Straten]

It is hard to believe that the haze in the v2 is caused by the focusing helicoid. More likely it is caused by the grease of the aperture mechanism. The focusing mechanism is a totally different part. The optical unit of the v2 unscrews from the helicoid, just like the chrome version of the v4.

Indeed, the v4 can flare in a weird way. On this picture there was some flare in the upper right corner were you can see some trees. I corrected this flare in Photoshop. It was strange, because there was no direct sunshine on the lens.

Leica M5, Summicron-M 50mm f/2 v4 chrome, 400-2TMY, Perceptol.

Erik.

 

[Highway 61]

It is hard to believe that the haze is caused by the focusing helicoid. More likely it is caused by the grease of the aperture mechanism.

The aperture mechanism works dry. Only a tiny dab of grease on the outer click-stops track / friction track is enough.

Each time I took a lens apart in order to clean the aperture blades, I discovered noticeable amounts of liquid oil everywhere inside. This oil comes from the old focusing helicoid grease having changed into the two basic components of grease (soap and oil).

Hard and sticky focusing motion, hazy optics and oil on the aperture blades are the usual suspects on almost all vintage lenses. The focusing helicoid grease has turned into waxy soap, and the oil has migrated on the optical barrel and reached the aperture blades through the gap the aperture command dot slides in, at the middle of the optical barrel.

For instance on the Micro-Nikkor Ai-S 55mm f/2.8 the aperture unit was assembled dry from factory. But many of those lenses now suffer from oily and sticky aperture blades, making the diaphragm fail. Guess where that oil comes from...

😉

 

[rlouzan]

#31 M48.5 x 0.5 Retaining Ring for summicron-m 50mm V4.
https ://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=158983

 

[x-ray]

That is something to be aware of. Every link in the chain has to degrade the image somewhat. But I don't think a good enlarging lens would cause significant degradation. They are slow lenses corrected for the range of reproduction ratios that go with enlarging. A while ago I asked at my local pro shop if there was anything better than what I use (Schneider Componon). They said there is nothing better, not the EL-Nikkor, nor anything else.

I completely agree with the first part but have to disagree with your pro shop's evaluation of lenses.

I figured many years ago that I made over 100,000 prints as part of my work. I'd guess I've easily tripled that number now.

I've used a lot of top quality enlarging lenses in the process and talked to other printers at pro labs I've used. My favorite 135mm of all time is the Fujinon EX enlarging lenses with a really close second being the late version EL Nikkor lenses. The Fujinon don't come in all a focal lengths and have always been tough to get. Like I said the late model Nikkor EL are really close. They're consistently excellent in any FL. The early version is excellent too. The Componon S Schneider are excellent as are the old chrome non S. I use a non S 180mm on my Durst 5x7 with excellent results. I previously had a 180 Componon S and can't see any difference between the Non S and the S in that FL. I've used both the old non S and S versions in FL's up to 180mm. They're all good but I don't care for the ones with the plastic mounts. Inferior build quality. I have a 50mm S that's trash and falling apart.

I own several Rodagon lenses up to 210mm. They're excellent and on par with the Componon S but no better.

I have the mentioned early Focotar and imo it's not in the same class as the old non S Componon and certainly not the EL Nikkor or Fujinon EX. It's been a while since I printed with the late Focotar but nothing stands out about it that would make me want to buy it over any of the above.

I've even printed with the old post war Kodak Ektar lenses and Ilex. These are good lenses and are a bargain.

The one lens I'd love to own or at least print with is the Goerz 150mm. Was it a Magnar? When it was made it was billed as having double the resolution of others and double the cost. Printers that used it swore by the lens (before internet). I've only seen one for sale years ago and it was over $2,000. It would have to do more than make beautiful images for that price.

 

[Erik van Straten]

Each time I took a lens apart in order to clean the aperture blades, I discovered noticeable amounts of liquid oil everywhere inside.

I recently acquired another v2. This one is never opened, I just took a look. No oil nor soap whatsoever. No haze either, however, the grease on the focusing helical is dirty black stuff so focusing is stiff, irregular and produces a sound. I will replace the grease. Do you have a suggestion what to use?

Erik.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

It depends on how or if it is worn out and your personal preference.
On worn out heliciods I put more solid grease, because it will stay.
On tight heliciods I prefer more light grease.
The names depends on local market and where it is sold. I'm purchased premium grease, but in Canadian Tire store 🙂 and re-lubed FSU, Leitz and CV lenses. The real difference is in how good it is cleaned before new lube. If it is done with Q-tips or how it is called, it is sloppy way. Had to be soaked in light fuel, like nafta and cleaned while still in the fuel bath with the best toothbrush you have, which is the old one 🙂

I cleaned v2 optical elements, those which are removable. And it was sharp lens still.

 

[Erik van Straten]

Thank you, Ko.Fe. I will see what I can do.

Erik.

 

[Rob-F]

I completely agree with the first part but have to disagree with your pro shop's evaluation of lenses.

I figured many years ago that I made over 100,000 prints as part of my work. I'd guess I've easily tripled that number now.

I've used a lot of top quality enlarging lenses in the process and talked to other printers at pro labs I've used. My favorite 135mm of all time is the Fujinon EX enlarging lenses with a really close second being the late version EL Nikkor lenses. The Fujinon don't come in all a focal lengths and have always been tough to get. Like I said the late model Nikkor EL are really close. They're consistently excellent in any FL. The early version is excellent too. The Componon S Schneider are excellent as are the old chrome non S. I use a non S 180mm on my Durst 5x7 with excellent results. I previously had a 180 Componon S and can't see any difference between the Non S and the S in that FL. I've used both the old non S and S versions in FL's up to 180mm. They're all good but I don't care for the ones with the plastic mounts. Inferior build quality. I have a 50mm S that's trash and falling apart.

I own several Rodagon lenses up to 210mm. They're excellent and on par with the Componon S but no better.

I have the mentioned early Focotar and imo it's not in the same class as the old non S Componon and certainly not the EL Nikkor or Fujinon EX. It's been a while since I printed with the late Focotar but nothing stands out about it that would make me want to buy it over any of the above.

I've even printed with the old post war Kodak Ektar lenses and Ilex. These are good lenses and are a bargain.

The one lens I'd love to own or at least print with is the Goerz 150mm. Was it a Magnar? When it was made it was billed as having double the resolution of others and double the cost. Printers that used it swore by the lens (before internet). I've only seen one for sale years ago and it was over $2,000. It would have to do more than make beautiful images for that price.

Thanks for those comments. After reading this I wouldn't hesitate to use EL Nikkor if or when I needed to change. By the way, the store didn't say that EL-Nikkors were less good than the Componon. Just that they weren't better. I believe my 80mm Componon must be good: I blew up two Hasselblad shots to 16 x 20. One was taken with the 150mm Sonnar, the other with the 120mm Makro-Planar. Both were at infinity focus (subject distance over 1 mile). I was using a Tiltall tripod at the time.Enlarging with the Componon, I could easily see the Sonnar was sharper at infinity than the Makro-Planar. Which, of course, it should be, since the latter is corrected for best performance at closer distances.

 

[Highway 61]

I recently aquired another v2. This one is never opened, I just took a look. No oil nor soap whatsoever. No haze either, however, the grease on the focusing helical is dirty black stuff so focusing is stiff, irregular and produces a sound. I will replace the grease. Do you have a suggestion what to use?

Erik.

Modern 100% synthetic grease, but made according to professional standards so that it doesn't contain oily solvents which would quickly separate from the lubricant base and migrate everywhere in your lens.

Just have a look at Nye or Moebius products catalogs.

Loctite and Weldtite make some good white lithium grease designed for ball bearings or plumbing threads but I have had some unsatisfying experiences with them (oily solvents having migrated quite too fast after service).

The test is to put a dab of grease on a small sheet of glass and then look at what has happened after a month at ambiant temperature. Looks like the Loctite #30530 white lithium grease is acceptable to that respect.

For a Summicron V2 in like new condition, a small box of Nye or Moebius professional synthetic grease would be worth the investment.

Of course the helicoid must be completely cleaned and typically degreased with acetone before applying the new grease.

 

[Erik van Straten]

Modern 100% synthetic grease, but made according to professional standards so that it doesn't contain oily solvents which would quickly separate from the lubricant base and migrate everywhere in your lens.

Just have a look at Nye or Moebius products catalogs.

Loctite and Weldtite make some good white lithium grease designed for ball bearings or plumbing threads

Than you, Nicolas!

I have Nye Instrument Grease 750A, but that seems to be the same stuff that was already used on the helical of the lens. Horrible.

Tomosy advises ball bearing grease. I have ball bearing grease from Kroon Oil, a Dutch product, excellent in my opinion.

Scherpenborg uses for the helicals in M-lenses the special grease that Leica uses for their R lenses. This stuff looks like ball bearing grease, but is even smoother. Unfortunately this stuff is not available for ordinary mortals.

Has anyone more suggestions?

Erik.

 

[retinax]

Erik, check out https://www.osimoptik.de/gshop/inde...ath=30_31&=&XTCsid=2ooi9ce2setcepp1cr3v9e03r5 , quite affordable compared to most other options. I have a jar of one of these somewhere, no long-term experience to offer though (yet).

 

[Rob-F]

I read somewhere that Leica now uses synthetic lubricants to solve the problem of congealing over time. And I guess Sherry, DAG, etc. probably do, as well. Does that that sound accurate?

 

[Erik van Straten]

Thank you, Rob and retinax. If someone knows what exactly is being used by Sherry and DAG would that be nice.

Erik.

 

[philcycles]

I hate the pull out hood.

 

[peterm1]

I have had a v3 for years and have never had reason to not like it. It is just a lovely performer. I have not tried the V4 so cannot compare it but I would say anyone would have to be very picky indeed not to find it a terrific lens. But everyone has their preferences and I am sure some like the V4 just as much as I like the V3.

 

[happy]

one thing no one ever mentions with the V4 is if it develops a wobble the lens is essentially garbage. The helical in the V4 summicron is constructed in such a way that in order to disassemble the lens to regrease the lens or repair any wobble it may have you have a high likelihood that it wont reassemble to the same tolerances which means the lens will still be loose.

I had a V4 summicron that spent more time in the shop than with me shooting because of a wobble issue. Once I got it back it still had the same issue. I sold it off to an a7 user and it began its second life.

I thought my helicals were loose/worn as well, but turns out they are actually quite sturdy and I doubt they were the culprit with your lens.

I am pretty sure that your wobble was caused by wearing down of a brass retaining ring that clamps and holds the focusing ring to the mount. Since the focusing ring turns against it, it wears a groove into the brass over time. That's what was causing the wobble on mine. It was a pretty simple fix once diagnosed. I just had to abrade/polish the bottom of the retaining ring flat again, re-grease and replace with two teeny dabs of thread locker. The focusing action is as smooth as I've ever felt. Wobble gone.

 

[nightfly]

I've owned a v3 for a few years and had no issues with it but decided I wanted a v4 because of the shorter focus throw and notched focusing tab.

Found a nice one and bought but ended up returning because the aperture ring just felt a little too loose and not as nice to use as the v3. Purely subjective but it just didn't feel quite right. The shots I took with the v4 look lovely to me as do the shots I take with the v3.