Leica LTM summitar 50/2 opinions?

[jkelly]

I think both my Summar (left) and Summitar (right) are sharp lenses, but the Summitar is marginally sharper.

 

[OldNick]

Hoods and filters for the Summitar are no problem unless you are "hung up" on keeping everything authentic. I use a push-on Series VI adaptor and Series VI hood and filters. The unusual thread on the front of the Summitar requires a special match in accessories.

Jim N.

 

[Michael I.]

Hoods and filters for the Summitar are no problem unless you are "hung up" on keeping everything authentic. I use a push-on Series VI adaptor and Series VI hood and filters. The unusual thread on the front of the Summitar requires a special match in accessories.

Jim N.

is the adaptor dedicated(summitar to series vi)or tension or what?how do I find one on the bay?is there a way to adapt 40.5 filters to the summitar?

 

[OldNick]

Michael, my Series VI adapter that I use for the Summitar is marked as follows: Kodak Series VI Adapter Ring 1 5/8 in. - 41mm Made in USA. It is a push-on friction fit with slight adjustment for snug fit. Since the lens outer surface is ribbed, it will not mark the lens. You might check with some of the filter supply houses to see if they have something similar. The ring also fits my Steinheil Culminar 85mm f/2.8 lens, and another smaller, similar ring fits my Elmar 50mm f/3.5. Hence, one set of Series VI filters will work with all of my LTM lenses except for my Jupiter 12.

Jim N.

 

[Michael I.]

ok,thanks for the info.I will scan the summitar photos, compare them with the j-8 and decide which one to sell.

 

[payasam]

As I think I said, Michael, flare is a problem with the Summitar. Easily the best hood is the one which Leitz made for the lens, the SOOPD. Since your Summitar is an early one, you will need the clamp-on version of this hood, not one of the two later clip-on types. Alternatively, any 41 mm push-on hood will do. That is an uncommon size, so a 42 mm one can be used with narrow strips of paper glued around its inside to reduce the inner diameter. Felt is also good. Do remember, though, that round hoods aren't much help. If you cannot get a rectangular hood (at one time Leitz, Canon, Nikon, just about everyone made them, and today's "petal" shape is no different in principle), making a push-on mask for the front of a round hood is not difficult. The Summitar takes filters with a most unusual tapered thread. The Series VI way leads to both a hood and filters; but it is an old road, not much travelled now.

Jim, why is your Culminar 41 mm while mine is 42 mm? I measured the thing with callipers before getting hold of a hood. The push-on adapter says only "42 Combined". Combined with what, I shall spend the rest of my days wondering.

 

[VictorM.]

is the adaptor dedicated(summitar to series vi)or tension or what?how do I find one on the bay?is there a way to adapt 40.5 filters to the summitar?

I use the adapter that came with a Canon Ser. 6 hood. It slips right on the Summitar. Any day now, I plan to see if the old Canon 'square' hood made for the Serenar 50/1.9 works on the Summitar.

 

[payasam]

Comments invited.

Comments invited.

Comments invited on this Summitar picture. Aperture, I think, was f/4, and shutter speed either 1/40 or 1/30. Fuji C-41, ISO 100, 4" by 6" print scanned, no manipulation although I see too much saturation in the reds.

Michael, in post 29 I think you mean ISO 100 and *slower*.

 

[Marc-A.]

As I think I said, Michael, flare is a problem with the Summitar. Easily the best hood is the one which Leitz made for the lens, the SOOPD. Since your Summitar is an early one, you will need the clamp-on version of this hood, not one of the two later clip-on types. (...) Do remember, though, that round hoods aren't much help.

I agree with this, but I remember Todd Hanz said once (I didn't find the thread, but anyway) that he uses a round hood, the 12538 I guess, on its Summitar and it worked fine. That being said, you have to use a hood in order to reduce or eliminate flare: the square is probably better, and the second works at least.
Now this being said, Micheal, I do not understand why you're hesitating between the Summitar and the J8; though the J8 can be a great lens, properly used the Summitar is a fantastic lens.
Two examples from my last series:

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=43380&cat=6305

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=43376&cat=500&ppuser=4396

Best,

Marc

 

[Michael I.]

Comments invited on this Summitar picture. Aperture, I think, was f/4, and shutter speed either 1/40 or 1/30. Fuji C-41, ISO 100, 4" by 6" print scanned, no manipulation although I see too much saturation in the reds.

Michael, in post 29 I think you mean ISO 100 and *slower*.

Yes you are right

to Marc-A;

Since I got the lens in a bargain state and it has a scratch and flare is rampant in Israel and my j-8 is proved to act well it is a qestion. I also have a hood and filter for 40.5(and a j12 on the way).


I sot two films through the summitar but didnt scan\enlarge any pics yet.The negs look ok.

 

[Marc-A.]

Since I got the lens in a bargain state and it has a scratch and flare is rampant in Israel and my j-8 is proved to act well it is a qestion. I also have a hood and filter for 40.5(and a j12 on the way).

Oh ok, I just forgot your lens had scratch on the rear glass ... it's an old thread now, so ...
Then, you'd probably better keep the J8. I had a very good J8 (1955) until this morning ... sold with the Zorki 3M
Again from my last series, a pic taken with a J8 (Leica III, Trix)

 

[payasam]

Good picture, Marc, and a good lens. As for hoods, there can be no doubt that their shape must match that of the image recorded on film. It is no coincidence that rectangular hoods were made for nearly all lenses which did not rotate when focussed on different distances. Draw a 1:1.5 rectangle and a circle large enough to go around the rectangle. You'll see large spaces between the circle and the rectangle: they are where the light gets in which can induce flare.

Michael, flare is not rampant in Israel or anywhere else. You find flare wherever the conditions for it exist. Ihese include bright sunlight, reflective sand or soil: but they also include lens design, lens imperfections. If you got your Summitar cheap, I'd advise you to keep it. Use the Jupiter for the bulk of your work and the Summitar at full aperture for what it does better than other lenses in that state.

 

[jaapv]

Michael, flare is not rampant in Israel or anywhere else.

I think he means that harsh light is more prevalent in a country like Israel than in some other countries, and he is right. It is sometimes hard to take flare-free pictures in high-contrast situations, as we all can testify, especially using older, less sophisticated lenses. But I would argue it is not a bad thing. Flare is often a creative element that makes a photograph special.

 

[PaulEv]

I have an early Summitar, that I got in a bargain state, no scratches but cleaning marks on the soft coating, I use this with the "Barn door hood"and flare is not been a problem here in sunny Aus.

I purchased origninally as a second faster standard lens with my Elmar on the iiia it has gravited to my M3, where it seems to live and never fails to impress if treated right. Do note Colour, requires thought, I prefer use in the F5.6 to f 8 range, but on b& W with a yellow filter, the character of the lens comes into its own.

Do not use without a hood though it can bite!!

 

[Todd.Hanz]

nice images guys. Here is a pic of the hood I use on my summitar, the IROOA.

Todd

 

[Michael I.]

Looks pricey.I got the lens for 75$ - I am not going to spend 35-70 on a hood - I will get another lens\body for that money.I adapted a plastic fed rectangular hood to it. Seems to work.

 

[raid]

I hope to be able to try out my Summitar for the first time coming weekend. From what I have read and seen discussed on this lens, it seems to be very popular.

Raid

 

[payasam]

Jaap, possibly you did not read the whole of my post. I spoke of bright sunlight as a cause of flare. We have some pretty harsh light in India. Often enough, for some pictures even soft paper and dilute developer were not enough to cope.

Pretty IROOA, Todd, but for the Summitar the hood is the SOOPD.

Michael, despite what I said above, the FED hood should work admirably. Sounds like the one for the Industar 61.

 

[Michael I.]

I fitted a FED hood.I shot a couple of rolls but didnt scan\enlarge them - the negatives seem fine.

i decided to send the lens for CLA anyway(Oleg Khalyavin with a j-12 - A friend has family ion a city where he lives and she's off to see them so shipping is free) - what's the point of having leitz glass when it doesn't perform at it's best?

 

[planetjoe]

LOVE the Summitar.

LOVE the Summitar.

I've been working - almost exclusively, now - with a later Summitar ("hex iris", for those of you that keep track of that sort of thing). Can't seem to get enough of it. I got a great hood arrangement from a fellow here on RFF, using a Tiffen Series VI adapter with a dedicated Summitar thread and a Kenko Series VI vented hood. There's a UV filter in there, somewhere, too. Turns out to be functional AND smart-looking. Round hood, although I haven't yet wrestled terribly with flare.

As folks have pointed out, a push-on Series VI adapter would do nicely, too. There are also Summitar thread --> E39 adapter rings out there.

I really like what this lens can do wide open in low light, which of course complicates the flare issue when point sources are around. However, the results so far have been sharp where I want them to be. A recent example (Delta 3200 @ EI1600):

I've also got a round-iris Summitar, an earlier model, but I can't really tell the difference in performance...they say it's mostly a question of bokeh, but I think the signature (pardon the term) is very similar. The round iris is in need of a CLA, and then I'll probably decide between the two, and sell the other. Anyone have useful round vs. hex experience?

Because of my unabashed love for this lens, I'm leaning toward a Summar just for kicks...and, of course, a collapsible Summicron is inevitably in my future, as well.


Cheers,
--joe.