Your experience with Summicron C 40,2

[Ron (Netherlands)]

I am offered here at the local market a Summicron C 40mm f2. Since I have no Summicron 50 mm I am tempted to buy it. I would like to hear about your experience with this lens on an M camera (I don't mean the CL).

Other question: would you prefer this Summicron rather than the CV 40mm f 1.4 classic.

thanks

 

[EmilGil]

It's a grossly underestimated lens with very nice bokeh, that's where it will differ from the Nokton. I read somewhere that the rendition is very similar to that of the late pre-asph Summicron 35/2 but I haven't had a chance to compare them yet (I just got a 35mm and will develop the first roll on Sunday). Once the weather improves from wet snowfall and winds approaching storm speed, I will make a comparison between my 35, 40 and 50mm.

You might have seen that people have modified their 40mm to bring up the 35mm framelines instead of the standard 50mm frames. To me, the inside of the 35mm frames of my M6TTL is a perfect match on distances above 2-3m. Older M's (M2/4) have slightly bigger framelines that matches the 35mm better.

If you want some images from the 40mm, check out my pictures from the RFF Euromeet in Paris (link in my signature), most of those are taken with my 40mm.

 

[Ron (Netherlands)]

It's a grossly underestimated lens with very nice bokeh, that's where it will differ from the Nokton. I read somewhere that the rendition is very similar to that of the late pre-asph Summicron 35/2 but I haven't had a chance to compare them yet (I just got a 35mm and will develop the first roll on Sunday). Once the weather improves from wet snowfall and winds approaching storm speed, I will make a comparison between my 35, 40 and 50mm.

You might have seen that people have modified their 40mm to bring up the 35mm framelines instead of the standard 50mm frames. To me, the inside of the 35mm frames of my M6TTL is a perfect match on distances above 2-3m. Older M's (M2/4) have slightly bigger framelines that matches the 35mm better.

If you want some images from the 40mm, check out my pictures from the RFF Euromeet in Paris (link in my signature), most of those are taken with my 40mm.

Thanks Emil, the sum 40 looks promising. And your gallery is just my peace of cake, very beautiful pics with nice greys!

 

[amin_sabet]

It's a grossly underestimated lens with very nice bokeh, that's where it will differ from the Nokton. I read somewhere that the rendition is very similar to that of the late pre-asph Summicron 35/2 but I haven't had a chance to compare them yet (I just got a 35mm and will develop the first roll on Sunday).

Roland Ruehl posted a very nice bokeh test here, and from that sample it looks to me as though the Nokton does better than the Summicron-C from a bokeh standpoint.

 

[Ron (Netherlands)]

Roland Ruehl posted a very nice bokeh test here, and from that sample it looks to me as though the Nokton does better than the Summicron-C from a bokeh standpoint.

Thank you Amin, Since I am fond on sharpness, in that test, the Nokton SC seems to outperform the others, with a good second place for the Rokkor.

 

[jdos2]

Mine was pretty good. The few Flikr things I have posed, most (3/5) were using that lens.

It has nice color and a nice drawing. Mine had a bit of decentering- meaning that parts of the images are sharp, some not-so-much.

 

[thafred]

I´d say go for the Cron 🙂 I like it better than my Nokton 40, mostly because of the better center sharpness at f4-5,6 and the smaller size. Allthou the better wide open performance of the Nokton is something to consider.

If you want a nokton40 you can wait untill the Nokton 35 1.4 is out and get the 40 for cheap by someone dropping it for the 35. If you decide to switch to the Nokton you can resale the cron for no much loss I guess.

 

[VictorM.]

Summicron-C:

+: very small size, sharp, nice 'look', looks great on my M4-2

-: odd filter size, crappy rubber hood that must be used to retain filters, noticeable 'fall-off' at f/2, missing f/22 setting

 

[Ken Ford]

I'm very fond of mine, and would never trade it for a Nokton;

 

[WoolenMammoth]

if I was forced to chose one lens for 35mm photography and had to chose JUST one, it would be very very difficult for me to not chose this lens. Of course, everyone likes what they like, but Ive followed the hoopla about some lenses and just dont get it and then nobody talks about this one...

 

[davidbivins]

They're both great lenses. I used the Summicron, the Nokton MC and the Nokton SC. I have wonderful photos I took with each. After realizing I had far too many camera bodies and lenses, I sold the Noktons. I don't miss them because the Summicron performs very well, but they do give that speed edge. Since then I've bought a Summilux 50 though, and I still have my Minolta MC 58mm f1.2, (and I have a shutter speed dial that I can adjust) so I'm o.k.
I only use the Summicron on the CLE though. I don't bother on any of my Leica Ms. On those I would use a 35 or 50 rather than a 40 (because of the framelines).

 

[-kk-]

great shot!

 

[Vincenzo Maielli]

I own a Summicron C 40 mm f/ 2 that i use both on CL and MP or M5. This lens is razor sharp with excellent bokeh also, in the great sixties Leica tradition. The CV Nokton 40 mm f/ 1,4 work also very well, with a classic Leica optical rendition; is a perfect choice also, with better speed.
The Leica M (except CL) don't have the 40 mm frameline in the viewfinder. When i mount my Summicron C 40 mm f/ 2 on my Leica MP or M5 i move the manual lever on the camera left front in the 35 mm position and lock with a little piece of gaffer tape.
Ciao.
Vincenzo

 

[terrafirmanada]

If I were to have only one lense it would also have been my 40-C, which I just sold. The majority of my older images were taken with this lense. I could not see any difference in sharpness with my 50mm Crom in 8x10 prints. However, the fingerprint is different (Iam one of those people who can not tell the 40mm-C apart from the version IV 35mm). I decided after a long internal debate to trim down on my M lenses, and also have sold my 35 1.7 CV lense. The only lense in this focal length I have held on to is the 35mm 2.8 Summaron.
After years of thinking that I wanted sharpness and intense saturation in my images, I have stayed with old lenses with definite charecter instead. My line-up is now Canon 28mm 3.5, 35mm Summaron, 50mm Lux and 90mm Elmar. Since I seldom blow-up prints bigger than 8x10, I decided to go with lenses that have a LOOK I like.
Of course I am now obsessed with getting a late model Rolleiflex, but that is a different story.
I think you will be completely satisfied with your 40mm-C. It is tiny, well built and has a nice fingerprint.

 

[sepiareverb]

I found my example to draw with an extremely pleasing smoothness to tones, but it lacked the real overall crispness I like about the 35/2 ASPH or the 50/2. I also disliked the physical layout, a bit too compact for these hands.

 

[Ken Ford]

great shot!

Thank you! Cold feet!

 

[John Elder]

I have tested the 40mm Cron against a 35mm cron(iv version) and can not tell the difference . I believe the 40 Cron to be the best buy for the buck for M bodies. for what its worth. My comparison consisted of shooting the same scene using the 2 lens on the same body on same roll of film. Inspected with 8x loupe. Only way I could tell which negative were was the 40 was due to larger image of the 40. Its a great lens. I don't need a better lens than either of the above lens and I sometimes print full frame 12in X 18 inch prints.

 

[raid]

I compared the Summicron-C to the Pentax 43mm/1.9 limited edition LTM lens. I could not detect any differences between images from these lenses. Both gave me excellent results.

 

[RML]

Summicron-C:

+: very small size, sharp, nice 'look', looks great on my M4-2

-: odd filter size, crappy rubber hood that must be used to retain filters, noticeable 'fall-off' at f/2, missing f/22 setting

The Minolta Rokkor-M 40/2 is exactly the same as the 'cron, except with a normal filter thread size. And it's usually about $100 cheaper than the 'cron.