squirrel$$$bandit
Veteran
Those comparisons are very helpful, thanks! And yeah, I can kick in a few bucks to Grandma's dough no problem, I'm just not interested in spending like a thousand bucks.
Leica LTM Which vintage Leica 50 is least like the Sonnar?
- Thread starter squirrel$$$bandit
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 34
- Views 5K
Leica M39 screw mount bodies/lenses
squirrel$$$bandit
Veteran
jmkelly
rangefinder user
John - $300 is a lot of money for the average Summar out there. Seems like I have seen most of them go for $100-$150, but at these prices the description always includes some mention of haze and "cleaning marks" or scratches. Of those I have personally handled, even a $100-$150 CLA would not return them to anything like "as new." So yes I am wishing you luck! I hope you get a really clean one. If it is, please post some pictures made with it!
squirrel$$$bandit
Veteran
Finally got to try out the Summar. It is super clean and you're all quite right, VERY distinctive. I'm liking it a lot! These are on the M8:
(that would be the veiling flare, then?)
(that would be the veiling flare, then?)
Just to let you know- That is the cleanest front element of a Summar that I've ever seen. I have two, one gives good results despite the marks, the second is very clean and gives beautiful results. Off-hand, $300 is a premium for a Summar- but in this case, think you got the pick of the litter. I've never seen one better, and that is worth the premium you paid.
squirrel$$$bandit
Veteran
It's what was available at the time, and I had exactly that much money! I am totally delighted with it, I must say. Plus I managed to find a 34mm UV/IR cut filter to use on the M8 and to protect that implausibly pristine glass...
fbf
Well-known
Clean one is hard to come by and they do fetch premium (very sought after apparently).
Looks great to me
Looks great to me
photovdz
Well-known
If want something different than a sonnar... try a tessar ;-)
a good 3,5 tessar is a wonderfully sharp lens...
may be I'm Biazeissed...
a good 3,5 tessar is a wonderfully sharp lens...
may be I'm Biazeissed...
I have a 5cm F2.8 uncoated Tessar in Contax mount.... And made one in LTM mount.
The Summar is "more different" from the Sonnar than is the Tessar, even though Summar and Sonnar both begin with "S".
The Summar is "more different" from the Sonnar than is the Tessar, even though Summar and Sonnar both begin with "S".
photovdz
Well-known
the 2,8 is reputedly a bit soft compared to the 3,5...
I would say that the least sonnary lens may be the planar (but there is no ltm planar...)
my sharpest, wowest lens is the G2 45/2 planar fabulous
I would say that the least sonnary lens may be the planar (but there is no ltm planar...)
my sharpest, wowest lens is the G2 45/2 planar fabulous
johannielscom
Snorting silver salts
I had the luck of handling a very rare nickel Summar last summer. It was in as mint condition, but the front element still was duller than the lens you bought, John! Very nice find!
My uncoated Summar is up for sale, if it were anything like yours I would keep it for sure.
The Summar is a classic 1-2-2-1 Planar configuration. Amazing how the later generation Summicrons went back to the configuration used by the Summar.
I have a first-version F2.8 Tessar, and it is soft compared with the F3.5 version. I've read that the F2.8 Tessar was recomputed early on. Mine is a "black-Face" version of the lens, Contax I generation.
I have a first-version F2.8 Tessar, and it is soft compared with the F3.5 version. I've read that the F2.8 Tessar was recomputed early on. Mine is a "black-Face" version of the lens, Contax I generation.
photovdz
Well-known
the other problem with all tessar at 2,8 seems to be vignetting... and loosing sharpness in the corner...
some say that the post war rigid 3,5 tessar is the best... but only in contax mount and quite expensive when you find one...
I've a collapsible post war one adapted on a elmar mount... pleasant to use... sharp...
some say that the post war rigid 3,5 tessar is the best... but only in contax mount and quite expensive when you find one...
I've a collapsible post war one adapted on a elmar mount... pleasant to use... sharp...
squirrel$$$bandit
Veteran
I am totally falling in love with this lens. It was worth the extra money to get a nice example, I think--I am actually getting pretty decent sharpness wide open, without any loss of the "glow." The pictures are VERY distinctive--and totally unlike the Sonnar!
Those shots look great. Did you use an IR cut filter?
Most Summars have poor front elements, and give a soft look. I was impressed by my recent one with a very good front element, but this one is better. That's what the lens was meant to do, and the shots look good. It's hard to judge the quality of the Summar with most examples in circulation.
Most Summars have poor front elements, and give a soft look. I was impressed by my recent one with a very good front element, but this one is better. That's what the lens was meant to do, and the shots look good. It's hard to judge the quality of the Summar with most examples in circulation.