thoughts on the 35 summaron

[shaaktiman]

I have been considering buying an old 35 2.8 summaron for awhile but I have never spoken to anyone who has actually owned one yet. Anyone out there have any user feedback on this lens?

I already have the VC 35 2.5 classic and I wonder if the summaron's signature will be different or better enough to warrant buying it. It gets hard to compare brand new VC glass with older Leica lenses, sometimes they feel very similar aside from minor contrast differences, sometimes one slams the other outright and sometimes they are just really... different.

Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated.

Adam

 

[jaapv]

I've got the 3.5 version and it is a great lens for atmospheric shots. In this shot I used it at full aperture and you can see the vignetting (which I like)

 

[richard_l]

Stopped down a bit, the f/2.8 Summaron is similar to the 35mm Summicrons. It is not low contrast like the old Elmars. The f/3.5 version is no slouch either. I have both, and they are my favorite 35s. There are a couple of albums in my gallery devoted to the Summarons.

 

[Treb]

The Summaron is a cool lens. Not quite like the v4 Summicron I now have but very nice in an Old Skool kinda way.

 

[Tony Salce]

Hi,

This is my first posting on this forum having lurked for some time.

I feel compelled to respond about the Summaron.

It is a very underrated lens. It is really a stellar performer equal to if not better and sharper than the 8 element Summicron.

It has a 3 dimensional quality unmatched by other 35's.

I like it so much I have two of them. A googled 35mm/2.8 and a normal one for an M2.

It is a great lens.

Get one if you can.

Regards,

Tony

 

[jaapv]

Hi Tony. Welcome on the forum. You have a good taste in camera's and lenses 🙂

 

[Rico]

I'm having a small love affair with the Summaron 35/2.8 in LTM. It delivers a fairly modern image. Besides the quality of finish and metal construction, I find the ergonomics to be addictive: great DOF scale, tab focus, full-aperture detents (for LTM anyways). The milled aperture ring is design perfection.

By way of comparison, the Summicron-M 35 version III has a less convenient aperture ring yet really nice DOF scale, while the version IV is the other way around! Maybe I'll use them again, one day. 🙂 All three lenses have very similar character image-wise. For the record, I only use the 35mm FL on my Leica.

Be aware that the Summaron 35/2.8 (in either mount) has an infinity lock.

Summaron portrait: http://patternassociates.com/rico/d30/misc/summaron.jpg

 

[rover]

Rico, that is a pretty deep front element, do you find it necessary to use a hood with it?

 

[Rico]

I have the 12504 (circular metal) and 12524 (square plastic) hoods which should fit the Summaron, but I don't like hoods. For RF cameras in particular, they get in the way of the VF and increase the bulk up front. But that's just me. I'll test stray-light effects at some point, but I find flare from most lenses to contribute positively to a pic. Call it photography vérité!

 

[jaapv]

The Heavystar hood is fine and looks rather nice classic style. It is somewhat smaller than the Leica hood and vented, so no or minimal VF impairment.

 

[payasam]

Agree entirely with Tony about the Summaron's three-dimensional quality.

 

[doubs43]

Here's a shot taken with my 3.5 Summaron. It's a sharp lens and a nice improvement on the Elmar. IIRC, I used an orange filter for this picture. Film is Ilford FP-4.

Walker

 

[Ken F.]

Hey Shaak,

I also agree with Tony on this one.
Mine has been getting a lot of use lately!

Cheers,
kf

 

[amateriat]

I borrowed a (obviously early) 3.5cm Summaron from a fellow shooter a little while back and shot with it on one of my HRF bodies. Liked it a lot, and if I were to find one for not too heavy a price would likely consider it.


- Barrett

 

[taffer]

This forum is dangerous, I just agreed today to buy a nice M Summaron 35/2.8 for my M2 😀

I've always loved that barrel shape, which I think it shares with some version of the Summicron.

I'm a sucker for 35s 🙄

 

[wtl]

Can someone show a couple of samples that this lens is sharper than Summicron? I am a bit surprised.

 

[FrankS]

I'm waiting at the moment for an f3.5 Summaron from Kyle! This is likely my last lens purchase unless some kind of amazing deal falls into my lap. (I'm done with cameras too.)

 

[Oh Two]

I use the 2.8 Summaron 99% of the time on my M4. I prefer it to the early Summicrons. It gives the classic Leica image, small and light weight. I couple two filter adapter rings together to make a compact yet plenty deep hood that does not interfere with the rangefinder view and can be accomodated by an M3 leather case. I judge it to be one of the best classic Leica lenses of all time.

 

[Peter Klein]

For what it's worth: After I got my 50/2 Dual-Range Summicron, I was raving about its particular quality with a well-known official of the LHSA. He told me that if I liked the DR, I should try the 35/2.8 Summaron--that in his opinion, the two lenses drew similar images.

Those who love the 50 DR will know what I mean by this quality. It's sharp, but not painfully so like the modern ASPH lenses, the bokeh is very smooth, and there is a bit of flare at the micro-level which renders the edges of highlights exquisitely. I hate to bring up that much-lampooned term "Leica glow," but I know it when I see it, and the DR has it. From our discussion, I believe the LHSA gentleman was referring to the same quality.

I used to have a 35/3.5 Summaron, which I liked very much, but I've never owned the 35/2.8 version.

--Peter

 

[tajart]

I bought Peter's 35/3.5 and traded it to another rff member last summer. It was the second time I had the 35/3.5 having used one as my primary lens on my IIf during the late 70s through the end of 80s. It is a great performer and oh so compact.