Leica LTM summitar, summar or nikkor?

Leica M39 screw mount bodies/lenses
T

takeda72

Established
Local time
8:03 AM
Joined
Jan 26, 2008
Messages
92
Hi all,

Two months ago I sold my Summicron Collapsible because I needed the money to buy a Summicron 35.

Now I want to buy another 50 for my M6.

I dont want to spend so much and I found here in Argentina 3 options, all LTM: a Summitar, a Summar and a Nikkor 50/1.4. All in good conditions.

Speed is not the issue for me. I was pretty happy with my Summicron Collapsible, both for color and BW. I want something with that look... and if I can have some "dreamy" images wide open is even better!

Can you tell me your thoughts, please?

Thanks so much.

André
 
That 50mm f/1.4 Nikkor is as good or better than all but the latest generation of the Summilux. The Summitar isn't in the same league as the Summicron, which came afterwards. The Summar came before either. It was Leitz's first effort at an f/2 lens. It's quite soft at larger apertures and wasn't factory coated. Grab the Nikkor! Then look for the 85mm f/2 Nikkor (usually engraved 8.5cm). Those two lenses are what made Nikon famous.

If you want a soft low contrast dreamy look opt for the Summar and try to find one that wasn't aftermarket coated, as many of them were.
 
Last edited:
I think the Summar is under rated but having said that I also have to say it IS a special use optic - it has a particular "look" that other lenses do not have but it is not a look that suits every subject. (Good for portraits tho'.) The Summitar is very nice. A development of the Summar and worlds apart from it, it sits nicely between the former lens and the Summicron (which is technically a much better lens although the Summitar still makes very nice images). I like the Summitar and have a post war coated one that I would not part with. I think you will find that it fits your needs quite nicely although I cannot be sure that you will like it as much as I do especially as you have owned a collapsible Summicron and know what they are capable of. The Nikkor has a VERY good rep. Although I have not used one. I think it is a Sonnar based design and if this is true I have to say I would get one in a flash if I had the chance. (I love the Sonnar look and once owned a similarly designed Canon 50 f1.5 (not the 1.4 which altho a sharp and nice lens is I think a Planar design.) I can say that the Canon 1.5 was superb to shoot with. On this basis the Nikon may be hard to go past.
 
Last edited:
takeda72 said:
Thanks for your answers!

I really love the work of Nando (a RFF member) with his Summitar.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/fgsemedo/1313405949/

I want to shoot candid portraits with it... so I guess it will be fine.

But the Nikkor! Well, it's cheap and I read good reviews about it...

:confused:
Click to expand...

Thanks. :eek:

I love my 1946 Summitar and would never part with it. However, if I were in your situation, I'd probably opt for the Nikkor. I'd probably go back and forth, changing my mind quite a few times. I regard my Summitar as a special use lens because of the classic look it gives. But if you really like that look, then go for it.

I use the Summitar for portraits sometimes and I also tied it to a (hopefully) long term project of photographing worshipers in Portugal. One thing I like about the Summitar is that it collapses. I took A LOT of gear on my last (7-week) trip to Portugal but ended up using my M3 and Summitar 95% of the time because it was such a portable combo.

Summitar flares pretty easily and I usually have a hood on it. The veiling flare (or flair) can turn out nice on occasion. I didn't use a hood when taking that photo that you linked to in your post. I can't remember if I didn't use it on purpose or if I just forgot to put it on. Also, filters for the Summitar have a unique thread and its impossible to by new filters for it. I have an original Leitz yellow filter on it most of the time. Original filters are readily available on the internet and aren't too expensive but they're old and many have scratches. There is a very expensive Leitz adapter that allows the use of e39 filters. That adapter usually sells for more than the lens! A less expensive solution is a 3rd-party adapter for Series VI filters. I have one of those but rarely use it. Both of these adapters are a bit bulky.

The Nikkor at $190 is cheap.

Can you get all three? :D
 
Last edited:
There is a very expensive Leitz adapter that allows the use of e39 filters. That adapter usually sells for more than the lens! A less expensive solution is a 3rd-party adapter for Series VI filters. I have one of those but rarely use it. Both of these adapters are a bit bulky.

Wow are they really that expensive? I have had one for years and use it quite regularly. I like the way it looks too - it gives considerable extra depth to the front of the Summitar making it look rather like the Summicron collapsible. I must remember to treat it with greater respect in future. Although I do have quite a few Summitar filters in either chrome or black mount which I have accumulated over the years.These work fine too and I do not recall them being especially scarce or expensive.
 
The last time I saw the Leitz 'SNHOO' Summitar-e39 adapter on the auction site, it went for over $200. That was a while ago too. Those adapters don't come up very often. Apparently, SK Grimes makes a copy of the SNHOO on request but I haven't looked into it since I already have the Series VI adapter..
 
I have used the Summitar, Summar and Nikkor and of the three would choose the Nikkor. I however would have kept the Summicron collapsible :) Anyway the Nikkor is very sharp and with good color even at f/1.4 so if you want dreamy out of focus shots then you'll need the f/1.4. The Summitar is a great lens and almost as good as the Summicron collapsible but seems it can't beat the f/1.4 on the Nikkor. The Summar is favorite for certain types of portraiture but to me not right for general photography because the flare is so unpredictable when used outdoors.
 
Thanks again for all your answers.

In a few hours I will be in Brasil... I will surely contact the seller of the Nikkor.
 
peterm1 said:
There is a very expensive Leitz adapter that allows the use of e39 filters. That adapter usually sells for more than the lens!
Click to expand...

I have both the original adapter and also the S K Grimes version (black). Patience is key in sourcing for one.
 
Al is right about the particular "look" that the Summar gives. If, however, you want a lens which gives a soft "look" and also can work for more mundane purposes, the Summitar is your best bet: soft wide open, sharp when stopped down. For sheer optical quality, there's the Nikkor.
 
I've not used the Nikkor, so can't comment on how it performs against the others. Obviously it has an extra stop for low light, so if you shoot a lot in those conditions then it would be the one to go for. The Summitar is an excellent lens and I concur with what payasam says about it, whilst I've found that the Summar gives a more "plastic" warmer look to images. The main thing to check with both the Summar and Summitar is that the glass is clean and doesn't have any cleaning marks. I've only ever seen one Summar with clean glass in all my years!
 
3130156963_a7f120fcae_o.jpg
 
takeda72 said:
Speed is not the issue for me. I was pretty happy with my Summicron Collapsible, both for color and BW. I want something with that look... and if I can have some "dreamy" images wide open is even better!

André
Click to expand...

For that look, more specifically, the 3D look, the Summar is famous for it. I have the Nikkor 5cm f1.4 and the f2, both tend to have the more modern look but still "dreamy" wide open.

The lens mounted on the camera is the Milennium 5cm f1.4 issued in 2000, the other is the original LTM version.

2458684431_d13297b3be_o.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom