Leica LTM The joy of 50mm but do l really need to add a Summar

Leica M39 screw mount bodies/lenses
If you have to ask..?
Ask yourself why you are asking?
Every one of us usually knows if we should do something ...or not. ;)
 
I don't think it's so much "should I?" as "help me think about this" or kicking an idea around with friends, and "what can you tell me about this." Part of the fun of photography.
 
Mike, I didn't ask here and got one myself.
Lens choice is a personal matter just like what you want to eat for your breakfast/lunch/dinner. You don't have to care what others think.

Btw I am happy with my Summar.
 
So I have a Summar. But this particular one renders differently than any other lens I own. You see, the front element is heavily scratched. The glass is hazy. The blacking on the interior of the lens is flaking off in big chucks. The barrel wobbles and occasionally leaks light. But I got it precisely to use those deficiencies when artistic license calls for it.

It looks like it is a foggy day on every image it makes. Enough so I named it "Mist". It is almost always with me but is used sporadically.

The whole point is with your current kit, adding a Summar isn't going to change what you can already easily do with the existing lineup. However, a big difference can make it very, very fun.

Whatever you choose be it yay or nay, knock yourself out. 👍
 
I stumbled across a very good one at a steal price. So, yeah I got one. Now that I have it, I think I've used it about 10 times in over 3 years, maybe more. But having said that, I'm not anxious to part with it either. Funny -- Us and lenses, eh.

So my thinking: If you happen across one that's in good shape (unscathed front element and minimal, cleanable haze) and the price isn't bad, well get it. Otherwise, just put in in the back of your mind....on your "lookout list" and not obsess on it. That's my current strategy with a few lenses of interest. They will come to me eventually...
 
I have a post war coated Summar and by far it's my best 50, dreamy if you want to call it. I use a nooky and it gets even better. I have the Nokton 50/1.5. Nice lens, sharp but too big for the frame lines on my barnack and Bessa R.

You have to look inside yourself and decide. If you are one that prefers sharp, don't bother. If you like dreamy then get the Summar, get a coated one, more degraded coating the better.
 
Coated Summar's are uncommon, perhaps rare. But it sounds like it would be an improvement. It would have had to be something an owner did in later years after coating options were offered. All Summars were made before the war, and most were sold before the war. Coating in general came after the war (for most people). Someone will know more precisely, but I think it was possible to send your lens (e.g., Summar) to Leica for coating. There were also "third party" coating options as well. I've personally never seen a coated Summar, but plenty of post-hoc coated Summitars.
 
It's not like they cost an arm and a leg if you're not too picky about the state of the front lens.

Summars are a double gauss formula, It gives the best (contrasty) results between f/3.2 and f/6.3 with good color but shadows will be overly dark. OOF areas are exaggerated, adding to a 3D effect. At f/2 it vignettes and colors are very subdued.
 
Get it. You can never have too many 50mm lenses, except when you want to go out and take actual photographs and can't decide which one to take!

Mine has fine cleaning marks. If I want low contrast, dreamy pictures (which is rarely) I use it wide open. I use a Summitar and collapsible 'cron much more frequently, and an I-61 when I want higher contrast. Still lust for an Elmar, so I understand the desire :)

PS Daryl, thanks for the naming tip :)
PPS yes you can always sell it if you don't use it enough, but how many people can bear to part with a lens, once purchased?
 
Many thanks goes out once again, the replies have been thought provoking, l can grab the Summar for £140 and at that price l might just jump at it for a bit of experimental fun
 
rfaspen said:
Coated Summar's are uncommon, perhaps rare. But it sounds like it would be an improvement. It would have had to be something an owner did in later years after coating options were offered. All Summars were made before the war, and most were sold before the war. Coating in general came after the war (for most people). Someone will know more precisely, but I think it was possible to send your lens (e.g., Summar) to Leica for coating. There were also "third party" coating options as well. I've personally never seen a coated Summar, but plenty of post-hoc coated Summitars.
Click to expand...

Mine is coated, it probably helps control flare and increase contrast a little.
 
If you can afford it, why not? ;)
I ever had one, but sold it since couldn't afford to have too many lenses. Missed it every time I look at the photo taken with the summar. It renders highlight as glow. Use of hood improve sharpness and contrast. The compact size is also nice.
 
I've read recently that psychologists purport to have proven that often when we're wrestlling with a decision we subconsciously have already made up our minds. I'd be willing to bet that you've decided to have that coveted lens and that it will soon be added to your kit. Why wait? Hope you enjoy it!
 
Regarding Coating of Lenses

Regarding Coating of Lenses

"Interference-based coatings were invented and developed in 1935 by Dr. Alexander Smakula, who was working for the Carl Zeiss optics company". (Wikipedia).

Dr. Smakula did invent modern coatings. However, the German government thought that it was so important as a military secret for the upcoming war that Mr. Hitler et al., were scheming up, that even Zeiss was not allowed to put coating on their lenses for commercial sale. These were only allowed to be put on military optics e.g. binoculars, rangefinders, gunsights, aerial camera lenses, etc.

After the war, German patents were nullified by the Allies, and everybody could coat their lenses at will.
 
Excuse me for throwing a spanner into these works. Buy a 35mm. Learn to use it. You will probably never look back.

When I had Leicas (a long time ago!) I started out with an M2 and a 50/2.8 Elmar and then bought, in lightning-speed succession, an M3 and a 50/1.5 Summarit, a 50/3.5 Elmar, a IIIg with a 50/2.0 Summar, and lenses- 35/3.5 Summaron, 90/4.0 Elmar, 135/4.0 Hektor and 200/4.5? Telyt lenses with all the hoods, filters, close-up devices, and the rest. My bank manager loved me, as I borrowed most of the money to buy the above, from him.

In a very short time I found I was using almost exclusively, the 35 Summaron (most often), 50 Summarit (about a third of the time), and 90 Elmar (now and then). I used the 135 a handful of times, I think, and the Telyt only once before it was stolen from my car. Insurance paid out but I never replaced it.

The 35 with an adjustable finder will cover a lot of territory. Summarons are delightful lenses to shoot with, whether the 3.5 or the 2.8 version, whichever suits your budget best. They are very much the same, and give lovely not too hard definition and creamy mid tones and colors closer to pastels than the more harsh Fuji and Kodak Technicolors we look for nowadays.

The 50s are okay but somewhat too limiting for my viewpoint. Of my three standard lenses, I think I loved the Summarit most of all. It was a screw mount lens made in the mid 1950s for the IIIf and IIIg. I used it more than any of the other 50s,in fact whenever I shot in available light it was my preferred go to lens. It always delivered the goods.

All these beautiful cameras and lenses are long gone. Fiscal realities intruded in my dream world and I had to sell the entire lot to cover home emergencies. I miss my Leicas, but nowadays in my retirement, I realise I'm too old and wise (and let us not forget poor) to make the big bucks investment in all this gear. Even in the '80s Leica stuff wasn't cheap, but at least I had the money then. I don't now. (Sighs heavily.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom