Leica LTM Summitar- resolution at full aperture

[sanmich]

Hi

I have now a few LTM lenses that I decided to test not long ago to see if all are fully usable. Not any hairsplitting thing, just to know that resolution is ok on some of these oldies...

So I hanged a piece of newspaper on the wall and put my M2 on a tripod.

I compared only for the 50's

Summicron-M

Summicron coll LTM (very clean, CLA'd by DAG)

Canon 1.8, bad coating on an inner element

canon 1.4

and

Summitar coated, cla'd, very clean

Well, all in all, all lenses seem close. Definitely usable.

Of course the summicron-M is beautifull but the others really surprised me. Their resolving power is close.

But man, the Summitar is way off at f2 and f2.8. Only at f4 does it compare with the others,... at f2 mind you. untill f4 its resolution is clearly one degree under all the others.

Does anyone had the same experience? (or do I have a lemmon )

If it's normal for that lens, why should I love it?

It seems to have a cult going around this lens. Is it that its characteristics are so special and I should reserve it for general purpose, f4 to f11?

Michael

 

[sirius]

It's what I would call a "poetic" lens. It has many agreeable qualities when used at full aperture, especially for portraits. Try it with this! Someone close-up with opened all the way up. There is a Leica quality to my photos with the summitar that definitely say something special when compared to other lenses.

 

[FrankS]

I have a summitar lens as well. It would not be my first choice if my photographic requirement was to shoot newspaper text, wide open. Like Sirius posts however, it gives a result that you simply can not get, even with a $2000 Summilux asp. Finding a sharp normal lens is not at all difficult. Finding a poetic lens .... priceless!

 

[Dektol Dan]

Hmmmm

Hmmmm

I finally acquired a mint Summitar for my IIIf, and I have a close focus Summicron I bought new in '68 which is still mint because I almost never use it (I like 35's). I find the diffierence between the two negliglble, but the Summicron is better wide open at the extreme edges.

Something may be off. I have a 35 1.7 VC Ultron which is a complete turd wide open and the Summitar kicks it around the block and back again.

Are you using an M adapter made by VC? I've found some of them to be off in focus. VC quality control something of an oxymoron. Until I bought a Leitz adapter I was blaming things on the lenses (although the Ultron is still not something to brag about).

 

[FrankS]

Dan brings up a good point. Try testing the focus on that lens/adaptor wide open on something with detail, and at an oblique angle to the lens.

 

[Todd.Hanz]

it's characteristics wide open are subjective for some people, I love mine but shoot it rarely. Stopped down it's very sharp, wide open it has a dreamy-soft footprint, so for portraits it tends to soften details a bit, mine is the hexagonal version.

Todd

 

[FrankS]

When you do shoot with it Todd, the results are amazing.

 

[Todd.Hanz]

for a while it was my only fifty so I shot it alot then, now days it kinds sits and bekons me to use it.

 

[sanmich]

My adapter is from leitz, and it's the same I used with the other ltm's

from your answers, folks (Thanks!) I understand such a gap is not usual and only contrast is going down steeply at wider apertures...

 

[sirius]

Indeed Todd. Many of your photos are in my favorites list. You did a lovely job with the summitar here:

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=21486&ppuser=489

This forum and gallery is littered with Summitar threads. If you want to see more do a search in the gallery or in the forums. cheers!

 

[FrankS]

My fav Summitar shot by Todd is: the legs/ white shirted arms/ hand holding a cigar.

 

[raid]

This is a photo taken with my Summitar at 4.0:

http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=5288243

Sharpness is not a problem here. The same applies to the collapsible Summicron here:

http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=5288220

here is the image taken with the rigid Summicron 1:

 

[sirius]

The more I see of the Rigid/DR summicron, the more I think that it is one of Leica's best.

 

[sanmich]

Hi Raid

I was hoping that you join us...

I'll post a small, central part of my tests so you can get an idea of what I'm talking about.
BTW, I see now that part of my tests were done on a IIIc which exclude the adapter problem.

Those who think the resolution is crappy on all of these because they can't read, don't worry, it's Hebrew

I hope I'll get it right but it's the first time I post pictures so...

 

[sanmich]

The first one (former post) was canon 1.4 fully open (BTW I was really blown up by this one)

Now the summicron

 

[sanmich]

Canon 1.8 @ full aperture

 

[sanmich]

Summitar fully open


Does that kind of difference make sense to you?

Thanks!

 

[sanmich]

Just for scale

Just for scale

Here is the full picture...

The black area is approximately what has been enlarged in my former posts.

Have fun...

 

[Marc-A.]

... it gives a result that you simply can not get, even with a $2000 Summilux asp. Finding a sharp normal lens is not at all difficult. Finding a poetic lens .... priceless!

I agree with FrankS, Sirius and Todd. I would like to add that if you want to take photographs, then the Summitar is just beautiful; but if you want to make tests, it's not the right horse to bet on
Seriously, the Summitar is wonderful, but not for any purpose. Wide open, it's great for portrait ... soft, without filter! The irony is that modern lenses are so sharp that we have to put soft filter to take proper portraits ... that's insane. The Summitar is the right lens for portrait wide open, and it is as good as the coll. Summicron stopped down. Moreover, there are just a few pictures that my Rigid Summicron can make better than my Summitar.
My contribution (though they can't match Todd's pictures ):

wide open (Neopan 1600)

f 2.8 (triX)

f4 (Neopan 1600)

There are more in my PBase gallery (see the link in my signature).

 

[sirius]

Nice Marc, I especially like the violinist!