Paul C. Perkins MD
Perk11350
Then you're not buying it either - eh? ;-)
cjm
Well-known
Here's some more color Summar photos:
LeicaTom
Watch that step!
Raid,
Ohh it`s just the year I want, the #491xxx+ lenses are uncommon and the gear matches up better for me with most of my "wartime" /postwar US Army equipment (it`s more a collectors thing I guess, with this lens being the last version of the formula as well as in construction)
Leitz had most of the Summar stock all gone by the start of hostilities in Europe and some of the last of these lenses sold were by Leitz New York in July/August 1939 - they were all stamped in "feet"
And as for the way it shoots, call it flare/glow who cares.........it`s a good performer for it`s time and now is a very beloved lens for bringing back that "vintage look" in photography (use a hood and the performance is just what it`s supposed to be......a perfect black and white film lens)
Tom
Last edited:
mauro scacco
Established
Thx ALL !
My summar isn't "coated" so colours are very typical
I have showed what scanner directly produce, without modifyng
Working instead with "autocolor" function in Photoshop, this is the result :
My summar isn't "coated" so colours are very typical
I have showed what scanner directly produce, without modifyng
Working instead with "autocolor" function in Photoshop, this is the result :
TheHub
Well-known
sfb_dot_com
Well-known
Gosh!
All this Summar lore in one place! Mine is I think an early one (1934 - but I'll have to check) and is in generally good, though probably not mint condition. I'm intrigued as to whether it's one of these more collectable 'black nose' versions or not. Not that it will affect my use of it.
I think on reflection (geddit) I'll make the effort to obtain a decent lens hood for it, though I'd hope not to have to pay the equivalent of $100. What should I look out for Leica Tom?
Regards
Andy
All this Summar lore in one place! Mine is I think an early one (1934 - but I'll have to check) and is in generally good, though probably not mint condition. I'm intrigued as to whether it's one of these more collectable 'black nose' versions or not. Not that it will affect my use of it.
I think on reflection (geddit) I'll make the effort to obtain a decent lens hood for it, though I'd hope not to have to pay the equivalent of $100. What should I look out for Leica Tom?
Regards
Andy
Matthew Allen
Well-known
The Leitz FISON (meant for the Elmar 50) fits and can be bought quite cheaply in user condition.
I'm also curious about the 'black nose' thing, and in fact my Summar is also a 1934 one. It's in very nice shape with only very light cleaning marks. Here's a sample (sorry, I don't have any colour shots from mine):
Matthew
john neal
fallor ergo sum
Finally!! I may get a chance to make you drool, Tom.
My Summar is in between Raid's serial and your (418***) marked in feet and it look like new (really!). There is a little llight haze inside + a couple of dark spots, but otherwise really clean. I have been meaning to send it to Sherry for a CLA, but have not had the time, nor will I before I go to Istanbul in a couple of weeks. Sorry, no pics from it at the moment, as it has been boxed up waiting to go off for service.
I think I'm going to unpack it and take it with me to see if it can capture the flavour of Byzantium in B&W. I will post results here
sebastel
coarse art umbrascriptor
my (coated) summar is 383xxx and in pretty good condition, but i prefer the (uncoated) summitar, or even better, the (uncoated) sonnar 1,5 (***)
how did i get so many 5cm lenses? .... too many, too many ...
(this disqualifies me as a collector, hopefully)
s.
(***) please note, this is my personal preference only. i am happy with everybody who is happy with his different preference. and mauro's pics really show very delicate and nice colours.
how did i get so many 5cm lenses? .... too many, too many ...
(this disqualifies me as a collector, hopefully)
s.
(***) please note, this is my personal preference only. i am happy with everybody who is happy with his different preference. and mauro's pics really show very delicate and nice colours.
Last edited:
LeicaTom
Watch that step!
Finally!! I may get a chance to make you drool, Tom.
My Summar is in between Raid's serial and your (418***) marked in feet and it look like new (really!). There is a little llight haze inside + a couple of dark spots, but otherwise really clean. I have been meaning to send it to Sherry for a CLA, but have not had the time, nor will I before I go to Istanbul in a couple of weeks. Sorry, no pics from it at the moment, as it has been boxed up waiting to go off for service.
I think I'm going to unpack it and take it with me to see if it can capture the flavour of Byzantium in B&W. I will post results here
Hahahahahaa!!!!!
Well, going to Istanbul, that`s exciting enough, wow! Wish I could run around there with an old Leica, but with my luck, the Turks would cut my throat for the IIIC K
opps! - JOHN - PLEASE POST A SPECIAL THREAD HERE ON RFF WHEN YOU ARE BACK AND I`M SURE THERE`S TONS OF COLOURFUL STUFF THERE, SO I`D BE USING BOTH COLOUR AND BLACK AND WHITE FILMS
*HAVE A SAFE TRIP!*Really clean Summars are rare finds, like the Xenon`s of the same era, many were mishandled and poorly cleaned and the results are horrible cleaning marks that do effect and or soften the performance of the lens from it`s original manner
Back to that hood question....with the Leitz Summar hood, it`s all luck and where you find it, on evilbay they can go for $65 to $100 that seems to be the going price, if you can buy one under those prices quoted, you have made a deal, I think Kodak made a hood (prewar) and Waltz (postwar) both are also, uncommon, I don`t think a FISON (Elmar 50mm) hood will work well on a Summar, I`m sure it would vignette and anyway - the FISON hoods are
NOT CHEAP either, they run from $60 to $200 depending on what era they are from, the 1920`s 30`s black versions are very collectable and the 1940`s one is also rare and not often seen - I`ve noticed even the beater hoods on evilbay seem to get fought after, I`ve never seen one sell for under $50
With the Summar it`s best to go with the factory issued hood in my opinion
Tom
Last edited:
Ronald M
Veteran
The little 50 clamp on one for 50 3.5 works ok. The 50/90/135 is very good. At 50mm it is twice as deep as the 50 3.5. The proper one is the barndoor variety, clumsy and big and probably not much better than the 50/90/135.
Sometimes I use 36/39 adapter ring and a vented shade. depends on what i have with me.
Sometimes I use 36/39 adapter ring and a vented shade. depends on what i have with me.
LeicaTom
Watch that step!
Here is the CORRECT hood/shade for the Summar - follow link and look at the hood they accidently put on an Elmar
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=58691
....and as for the Leitz made barndoor folding shades, they were only for the Xenon, Summitar and at last the Summicron lens
I mean you can try anything you want on it really if it`s 36mm, but the shade on that Leica I is the correct original shade for the Summar f2/50mm (1933 to 1939) code name SOOMP
Tom
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=58691
....and as for the Leitz made barndoor folding shades, they were only for the Xenon, Summitar and at last the Summicron lens
I mean you can try anything you want on it really if it`s 36mm, but the shade on that Leica I is the correct original shade for the Summar f2/50mm (1933 to 1939) code name SOOMP
Tom
Last edited:
Matthew Allen
Well-known
Why do you think the FISON should vignette? The proportions of the Elmar and the Summar aren't all that different when it comes to hood placement. I haven't tested mine yet but I'll report back when I do.
Anyway, the dented chrome one I got only cost $18 from a UK dealer and I seem to remember that at the time they had a nice-ish one for about $30. I have never seen a SOOMP anywhere near that cheap.
Matthew
John Shriver
Well-known
Some FIKUS hoods are marked for some "interesting" lenses. I've seen them with marks for Summar 50mm, Hektor 50mm, and Elmar 35mm. In every case, said mark is at the fully-collapsed position, at the end of the chrome section. The normal 50mm position is only for the Elmar, with it's very small front element.
The FIKUS is a more practical part of a travel kit. (Elmar 35/3.5, Summar 50/2.0, Elmar 90/4.0, FIKUS, VIOOH, and IIIa in my case.)
An excellent uncoated Summar should be water clear when you look through it. If it isn't, there's a problem, which may or may not be repairable.
Any Summar will have veiling flare at wide apertures, and thus low contrast. But there shouldn't be a "lot" of reflective flare, there's only four groups, it's a classic double-Gauss design.
(Corrected: FISON to FIKUS!)
The FIKUS is a more practical part of a travel kit. (Elmar 35/3.5, Summar 50/2.0, Elmar 90/4.0, FIKUS, VIOOH, and IIIa in my case.)
An excellent uncoated Summar should be water clear when you look through it. If it isn't, there's a problem, which may or may not be repairable.
Any Summar will have veiling flare at wide apertures, and thus low contrast. But there shouldn't be a "lot" of reflective flare, there's only four groups, it's a classic double-Gauss design.
(Corrected: FISON to FIKUS!)
Last edited:
retnull
Well-known
The Summar was designed before color rendition was a consideration, so it's kind of interesting to see how it handles color.
I love my Summar -- the results are so atmospheric. Have never shot color with it. It's got such a vintage look; no mistaking it for digital. (My philosophy is, if you're going to go through the hassle of shooting film -- make it look like film!)
Re: flare vs. glow. I think there really is a difference. They are the same phenomenon, in different degrees: glow is sutble and controlled, while flare is extreme and obvious.
My B+W Summar shots:
http://flickr.com/photos/11058951@N00/sets/72157604857508080/
I love my Summar -- the results are so atmospheric. Have never shot color with it. It's got such a vintage look; no mistaking it for digital. (My philosophy is, if you're going to go through the hassle of shooting film -- make it look like film!)
Re: flare vs. glow. I think there really is a difference. They are the same phenomenon, in different degrees: glow is sutble and controlled, while flare is extreme and obvious.
My B+W Summar shots:
http://flickr.com/photos/11058951@N00/sets/72157604857508080/
mflannery
Member
Noe Valley, SFO
Noe Valley, SFO
I have a very nice 1937 version of the Summar and really enjoy the colors it produces. Here is a shot of a store front in the Noe Valley area of SFO. I am confused by the different versions of this lens-such as black front(nose), # of leaves, etc. Is any version considered to provide a better picture or redition than another?
Thanks, Mike
Noe Valley, SFO
I have a very nice 1937 version of the Summar and really enjoy the colors it produces. Here is a shot of a store front in the Noe Valley area of SFO. I am confused by the different versions of this lens-such as black front(nose), # of leaves, etc. Is any version considered to provide a better picture or redition than another?
Thanks, Mike
Attachments
Matthew Allen
Well-known
Are you talking about the FISON or the FIKUS? The FIKUS is the collapsible one. That does suggest though that the FISON wouldn't work on the Summar - I'll have to try it.
Matthew
bcostin
Well-known
Those are lovely. The soft colors remind me of a 1950's issue of National Geographic.
LeicaTom
Watch that step!
John,
Do you mean the FIKUS?
(all those Leica codes can make you crazy) lol!
I have seen a FIKUS with Elmar and Hektor settings (black paint with that really shiny chrome and nickel knob - I think like 1933/34 era) I just never saw one with a Summar setting, so that`s very interesting - Leitz made so many items stamped both Wetzlar and N.Y.C. before 1940, it`s often mind boggling....
Tom
john neal
fallor ergo sum
I have a reaally nice Omag hood from Switzerland that fits both Summar and Elmar 50mm.
It consists of a clamp ring (Omag K36) which has a 36mm filter thread, and a screw-in hood (Omag 54), both in black anodised finish. The beauty is that you can fit a standard 36mm filter between the two, plus they are not anywhere near as expensive as a Leica part - about $50 tops for a minter.
When I get the digithing charged up, I'll post a pic or two.
It consists of a clamp ring (Omag K36) which has a 36mm filter thread, and a screw-in hood (Omag 54), both in black anodised finish. The beauty is that you can fit a standard 36mm filter between the two, plus they are not anywhere near as expensive as a Leica part - about $50 tops for a minter.
When I get the digithing charged up, I'll post a pic or two.