Summicron collapsible vs zeiss planar

[Summicronj]

I bought an m3 in great working order. It came with a 50mm summicron collapsible. As long as there is no contra-light I am happy with my pictures, but, I prefer to shoot wide open and occassionally during the daytime. I alternate between b&w and color. I am wondering if a more modern lens like the planar or nokton my be better suited. Is it worth selling the summicron?

Thanks

 

[andredossantos]

The planar is f2. Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the summicron the same? If so then you gain no speed by switching. You will get a more "modern" lens.

The nokton is f1.5 so you may want to consider it if you'd like that extra speed.

EDIT: sorry, it's late and misread your post. I may be wrong but I would guess the nokton/planar would be more flare resistant than the summicron.

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

A modern lens will have less flare. You might look through yours and see if there is any haziness inside, a lot of the old Collapsible Summicrons fogged up with age and this will increase flare and reduce sharpness. If so, it can be cleaned for much less than a new lens costs. I haven't shot the collapsible, my Summicron is an early 1980's model with focus tab (same optical design as the current Summicron 50, but the new one has built in lens hood and no focus tab). But, Many people here do shoot the collapsible and love it. If its hazed up, I'd get it repaired.

Another thing to look at is the front element, he coatings on the collapsible were very soft and most of these lenses have scratches on them, some quite severe. Minor scratches or cleaning marks wont affect the image but a lot of them or deep scratches will increase flare and reduce sharpness. That's harder/costlier to fix and I'd buy a newer lens if that is the case.

 

[Tom A]

I have a mint 50f2 Summicron collapsible (the former owner evidently put a UV filter on it the day he got it in 1955 and never took it off). In its time it was a good lens - but by todays standard it is a bit "flat" in contrast and somewhat prone to flare.
The Planar 50f2 is a superb lens - as good, if not better than even the latest incarnation of the Summicron. 50 years of lens design does show. The Planar is higher contrast than the "vintage" Summicron, by a fair margin. As for resolution - unless you are shooting Technical Pan or Fuji Minicopy II - both will do better than the film.
The Nokton 50f1.5 is the best deal around - very good lens. Sharp wide open and somewhat less contrast than the Planar. Some people dont like the Bokeh, but I have never had a problem with it. It is also a cutting edge optical design - double aspherical element and quite flare proof. Also a bargain compared to any other fast 50.

 

[mfogiel]

Keep this lens and never sell it if it has no maintenance problems. You will only understand how good it is, when you will buy a modern lens to compare it with. Sharpness and flare resistance are not everything. Save up some money for a Planar for colour work later on. And this is something told by a guy who owns 30 Zeiss lenses...

Summicron Collapsible

Zeiss Planar

 

[Sonnar Brian]

I use my collapsible Summicron with a hood, and cleaned the haze from the inner surfaces of the lens myself.

All shots wide-open at F2, Leitz UV filter and Heavystar vented hood on the lens.

Low-Contrast, preserves shadow details, "sharper than a Summitar". The color correction on the Collapsible Summicron is very high, the IR index mark is close to the F2 DOF indicator.

The modern lens is going to give higher contrast and a sharper image. If you do not like the Summicron, it will bring in a good bit depending on condition of the glass. I've paid a low of $70 to a high of $300.

 

[MCTuomey]

would it be possible for you to keep the 'cron while you buy the planar to try? use them alternately for awhile, then decide which to keep. if you are a fifty shooter (M3 owners usually are), having a vintage 50 alongside a modern one is a good thing if you can afford it. i have sold lenses to fund trying new ones and often regret the sale later.

i have a planar myself and like others have said believe it to be sharp, very flare-resistant, higher contrast. when i had a rigid cron and the planar at the same time, i used the cron in high contrast light (bright midday sun) and the planar on days with softer light. they complement each other that way quite well imho.

 

[Austerby]

My M3 came with a collapsible summicron too - unfortunately it was not in a good condition so I bought a newer summicron (and then some other new lens until I had several 50mm....). It was definitely worth getting a newer lens. I did keep the collapsible summicron and recently had it properly cleaned. It's good to have both the old and new lenses in good condition.

 

[SamStewart]

i just got an m3 with collapsible cron too and i love it - just not my scanner!

 

[hans voralberg]

Depends on how you like your colour, but the Planar will give you *very* punchy colour.

 

[Summicronj]

Thanks everyone. I have decided to keep the collapsible as the reason I love film and classic cameras is for the different look my pics have in contrast to digital. I do like using the leica and will get a more modern lens for those situations I really could do without flare. I will send it in for cla.

 

[FrankS]

the m3 with a col. summicron is a classic combination. they suit each other. both have been surpassed by newer technologies like built-in light meters and aspherical elements, but they are both still very satisfying to use, even more so than the newer gear, imo.

 

[Sonnar Brian]

I'm really getting a complex that I'm the only person that uses a Collapsible Summicron with Color Film.

So another color shot with the Collapsible Summicron, wide-open with Fuji-color 200.