What exactly does "Summaron" classify a lens as?

[erikhaugsby]

I know that Summiluxes are usually f/1.4s, Summicrons are f/2s, Elmars are f/2.8s, and the current Noctilux is a f/1, but how did Leica choose to use Summaron? As far as I know, it was on a 28mm f/5.6, a 35 f/2.8 and a 35 f/3.5 (both 35s were in LTM and M, iirc). Is there a reason for such discrepency amongst Leica's standard nomenclature?

 

[rover]

A Summaron has not been made for some 30 years. I think if we look back we will see that as Leica generationally evolved their lens designs the names changed. Summarits became Summiluxi, Summitars became Summicrons, Elmars have been Elmars more or less. For the 35mm focal length the Summaron was an evolution and improvement from the Elmar, and when the speed increased to with further evolution to f2, it became a Summicron. In retrospect I think the Summaron step was part of the process of standardization, not an inconsistency.

 

[raid]

My Leica Mini has a Summaron. I doubt it is thirty years old.

Raid

 

[CDT]

Seems like a lot of the older lenses were named to identify a certain design type rather than speed. I'm just guessing.

What's the deal with the Hektors?

 

[xayraa33]

the Ltm Summaron was made from 1949 to 1960.

 

[jaapv]

Summaron was changed to Summicron when Leitz started to use their Kron glass that they developed in theit own glass new glass laboratory. Somehow in the marketing department Summikron was changed to Summicron. Basically all lenses with a double-gauss design, which are basically Sonnar derivates have names that start with Summ- The Summar/ Summaron/Summicron family are the slower lenses down to 2.0 aperture, the fast derivates, with a split rear element are the Summarit/Summitar/Summilux group from 2.0 to 1.4 . 2.0 can be both groups.Nowadays it is a bit different. Summicron=2.0 Summilux=1.4.
The Hektors are basically a triplet design, including the Thambar.

 

[FPjohn]

Classic 28 and 35mms

Classic 28 and 35mms

Hello:

Simply ,they are classic 28mm and 35mm wide angle lenses for ltm leicas- the later 35mm summarons were also available in m mount.

yours
Frank

 

[payasam]

Unless the Summaron on Raid's Mini is a normal or a tele, I'd say the name was given to earlier wide angles, of two different focal lengths and none with a large aperture.

 

[RichardM]

A little known fact is that the Hektor and Summarex lenses were named after Max Bereks dogs Hektor and Rex

Source: www.leicagallery.com/max_berek.html

 

[Ben Z]

Summaron was changed to Summicron when Leitz started to use their Kron glass that they developed in theit own glass new glass laboratory.

I must disagree. The 35mm f/2.8 Summaron was introduced as a completely new lens the same year (1958) as the 35mm f/2 Summicron, which was 5 years after the Summicron name was first used (1953 5cm collapsible LTM).

The Summaron name was used to designate 6-element double-Gauss designs in the wide focal lengths (28/5.6, 35/3.5 and 35/2.8). That held until 1969 when Leitz redesigned the 35/2 as a 6-element double-Gauss (v.2) but kept the Summicron name to signify the f/2 aperture, since the 35 Summaron remained in the catalog until 1974, past even the introduction of the v.3 (also 6 element) Summicron.

By the 1970s Leica did take most of the confusion out of their designations by consitently matching the names to maximum apertures (Summilux=1.4, Summicron=2, Elmarit=2.8, Elmar=4), but the 50/2.8 for the M6J in 1993 was named Elmar as a nod to its roots and the name carried over when the lens was put into regular production. And then there's the 135/3.4 which has no cutesy name other than APO-Telyt 😀

 

[Rico]

According to Puts, the first Summaron (35/3.5) appeared in 1948. The first Summicron (collapsible 50) didn't show until 1953. He states nothing about origins of the word "Summaron" but, given the three lenses bearing this name, aperture isn't a defining factor.

 

[jaapv]

I must disagree. The 35mm f/2.8 Summaron was introduced as a completely new lens the same year (1958) as the 35mm f/2 Summicron, which was 5 years after the Summicron name was first used (1953 5cm collapsible LTM).

The Summaron name was used to designate 6-element double-Gauss designs in the wide focal lengths (28/5.6, 35/3.5 and 35/2.8). That held until 1969 when Leitz redesigned the 35/2 as a 6-element double-Gauss (v.2) but kept the Summicron name to signify the f/2 aperture, since the 35 Summaron remained in the catalog until 1974, past even the introduction of the v.3 (also 6 element) Summicron.

By the 1970s Leica did take most of the confusion out of their designations by consitently matching the names to maximum apertures (Summilux=1.4, Summicron=2, Elmarit=2.8, Elmar=4), but the 50/2.8 for the M6J in 1993 was named Elmar as a nod to its roots and the name carried over when the lens was put into regular production. And then there's the 135/3.4 which has no cutesy name other than APO-Telyt 😀

You are also correct, but the two statements are not mutually excluding. I was talking about the etymology of the name. The Summaron did remain in the catalogue, as you state, but the glass type was never changed in the last production phase.The 2.8, which indeed was introduced in the same period, was a development of the 3.5 but still used glass not developed by Leitz themselves. It is quite possible that Leica simply sold off all Summarons that were in stock. The changeover from names designating a lens type, i.e. Summ* a double Gauss and Elmar a anastigmat type or Hektor a triplet (don't flame me- it is not consistent...) to designations indicating the lens speed started in the sixties. The whole history of all the permutations of the double Gauss design by Leitz, and indeed of the complete evolution of Leica lenses is extremely interesting and convoluted. Even the factory records are contradictory and led, for instance, Erwin Puts to confuse the various versions of the 135/2.8 M and R.