Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1997/04/07
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Robert Brummett wrote: > > >Greetings, > > > > When I was in Singapore I bought a Summaron 35mm 3.5 (1958 according > >to the Leica pocket book) because it was in pristine shape, reasonable in > >price and I just liked the looks of it. I don't know a thing about this > >lens so I have a couple of questions: > > > >1. From what I have been able to find out so far the spectacle finder is > >for the M3. Should I just remove this for use with the M6 and M4-P? > > > >2. What kind of results should I expect from this lens? I haven't shot > >anything with it as yet. > > > >Ian Stanley > > > >Kathmandu, Nepal > > Ian- > > I, too, have a 35 Summaron in "pristine" shape. I had used it for B&W but > never for color and--against all precepts!--used it for some color > transparencies on a trip, only to discover a kind of foggy aura over all of > the slides. Very disappointing, but I got what I deserved for not checking > it out better. That adventure sent me searching for a 35/2 Summicron and > testing the two side by side was a revelation. The difference was very > dramatic, with the Summicron giving me crisp, contrasty negs and the > Summaron the same milky looking, flat stuff. I am NOT making any blanket > statements here: only stating my own experience with an apparently clear, > minty lens. Take this for what it's worth and test your own Summaron > against known lenses--as I should have in the first place! Good luck. > > Robert Ian, I've gotten nice sharp, contrasty images from my old Summaron SM. Your best bet is to shoot with it and tell us how it worked. Have fun, Colin