What version lens is this?

[Rob-F]

I see a possible cause of confusion when trying to discuss the version numbers. The Cameraquest article refers to the black 50mm Summicron 11817, made from 1969 to 1979, as Version 4. The tabbed Summicron, 11819, is then called version 5, making its successor, the one with the pull-out hood, version 6.

But some (many?) of us call the 11817 version 3; the 11819 (the one with two or three planar surfaces) version 4, and then the one with the pull-out hood becomes version 5. In my view this is accurate: Version 1 is the collapsible; The dual-range and the rigid both count as verison 2, because they have the same optical schematic--the same optical cell--and then the 11817 becomes version 3 (etc.).

Cameraquest says, along with some writers, that the 11817 is less good than the others. If so, it can't be by much; and it has a much better DOF scale than its successors.

 

[jsrockit]

Cameraquest says, along with some writers, that the 11817 is less good than the others. If so, it can't be by much; and it has a much better DOF scale than its successors.

I had this lens along with the Zeiss Planar 50mm ZM and another modern lens I cannot remember right now... and I thought the version 3 was something special. Not as good as generally means what? Sharpness? Sharpness isn't always the best remedy.

 

[David Hughes]

I think the best comparison site is:-
https://www.kenrockwell.com/leica/50mm-summicron-comparison-table.htm

I've have the V3, V5 and the Planar and like them all. But which is best is beyond me...

Regards, David

 

[benmacphoto]

Now I'm hearing that this a version 6 per Camera Quest article. Oy.

No version 6
The pull out hood is a 5.

After that the lens became the APO Summicron.

 

[Rob-F]

No version 6
The pull out hood is a 5.

After that the lens became the APO Summicron.

Yes, that's how I see it.

 

[Rob-F]

I think the best comparison site is:-


https://www.kenrockwell.com/leica/50mm-summicron-comparison-table.htm


I've have the V3, V5 and the Planar and like them all. But which is best is beyond me...


Regards, David

Yes, that is a very helpful site for the 50mm Summicron, as well as for many other lenses and cameras. This web page clears up any doubt or ambiguity about the 50mm Summicron.

The Version 4 was issued with two different types of focusing tab. One had the traditional shape, with the center scooped out to make a finger rest. The other one, which I have, is the "bear claw," having a convex end and serrated ridges to improve grip. You just roll your finger tip on the tab as you move it. It's easy to use. I think it's an improvement, though I think could have been a little shorter.

The version 4 has a very short focus throw, resulting in a compressed depth of field scale. In that regard the version 3 is better for checking DOF in shots that require deep focus.

Leica was able to achieve the degree of correction they wanted without the need to grind curved surfaces into both sides of some of its elements, simply leaving some of them as flat plane surfaces. My source for that is E. Puts' Leica Lens Compendium. This was partly done to save money. I find myself wondering how much better the version 4 could have been if they had taken the opportunity to bring the lens to the highest level of correction by curving all the surfaces.

This brings me back to Ken Rockwell's page. He shows a 50mm Summicron he says was made in 1999 and sold only in Japan. He says it's the best of all the versions. Could it be that this is a special case of the version 4, reformulated to grind all its surfaces, bringing the lens to the highest possible performance for a spherical lens? I had not known about this lens until I saw on ken Rockwell's page. Here's another thought: Leitz field tested the collapsible Summicron by marking the first few as Summarit* with the asterisk. Could the one Rockwell shows as a special version for the Japanese market be a test marketing of the aspherical design?

 

[Godfrey]

LOL! Whether it's V or VI, or 52mm vs 50mm, it looks identical to mine which I bought second-hand as "current series, with six-bit code" from Tamarkin. It's a lovely lens and a fine performer.

I fitted an aftermarket rigid hood ... I hate pull-out hoods, because what they generally mean is that I forget to pull them out and don't use them AND they offer no protection to the front element of the lens in my bag when I don't fit a lens cap between shooting sessions.

G

 

[AE_Conrady]

It's a Leica thing to let you know they are checking the lenses before they ship them.

Not exactly, the need the precise focal length for adjusting the rangefinder cam curve. Otherwise a lens could he critically focused at just one distance and would be off at any other.

 

[farlymac]

Yes, that is a very helpful site for the 50mm Summicron, as well as for many other lenses and cameras. This web page clears up any doubt or ambiguity about the 50mm Summicron.

The Version 4 was issued with two different types of focusing tab. One had the traditional shape, with the center scooped out to make a finger rest. The other one, which I have, is the "bear claw," having a convex end and serrated ridges to improve grip. You just roll your finger tip on the tab as you move it. It's easy to use. I think it's an improvement, though I think could have been a little shorter.

The version 4 has a very short focus throw, resulting in a compressed depth of field scale. In that regard the version 3 is better for checking DOF in shots that require deep focus.

Leica was able to achieve the degree of correction they wanted without the need to grind curved surfaces into both sides of some of its elements, simply leaving some of them as flat plane surfaces. My source for that is E. Puts' Leica Lens Compendium. This was partly done to save money. I find myself wondering how much better the version 4 could have been if they had taken the opportunity to bring the lens to the highest level of correction by curving all the surfaces.

This brings me back to Ken Rockwell's page. He shows a 50mm Summicron he says was made in 1999 and sold only in Japan. He says it's the best of all the versions. Could it be that this is a special case of the version 4, reformulated to grind all its surfaces, bringing the lens to the highest possible performance for a spherical lens? I had not known about this lens until I saw on ken Rockwell's page. Here's another thought: Leitz field tested the collapsible Summicron by marking the first few as Summarit* with the asterisk. Could the one Rockwell shows as a special version for the Japanese market be a test marketing of the aspherical design?

That is the LTM version. What he means by being the best is that it incorporates all the improvements of the previous versions in a lens that can be used on both LTM and M mount cameras. The only thing he could find fault with is it has 1 meter close focus, while most M lenses are 0.7 meter.

PF

 

[Rob-F]

That is the LTM version. What he means by being the best is that it incorporates all the improvements of the previous versions in a lens that can be used on both LTM and M mount cameras. The only thing he could find fault with is it has 1 meter close focus, while most M lenses are 0.7 meter.

PF

Aha. So it's not optically superior to the versions four or five, then.