New collapsible Elmar-M, old collapsible Summicron.

[captyng@vtx.ch (Gerard Captijn)]

>I guess that if 2.0 is an absolute must, go for the Summicron, increasing
>development somewhat (B&W). At all other apertures, the 2.8 Elmar is
>preferable. The hood from the new Elmar can be used on the Summicron,
>replacing the massive original barndoor construction.
>
>How does the new elmar compare to the older version?

Just to avoid any misunderstanding, the above text relates to the first
Summicron 50mm/f2 (1953) and the last Elmar 50mm/f2.8 (1994)! 

The new Elmar 50mm/2,8 is entirely at the level of most recent Leica glass,
meaning high contrast, reduced difference between corners and center of the
image, better image quality at larger apertures plus high microcontrast. It
is interesting that Leica was able to improve the Tessar-type design further
as the general opinion of the optical community was that the potential of
the design has been realized. The new Elmar at f2,8 is better than its
predecessor at f5,6. The old Elmar was an excellent lens in its days but is
not up to present Leica performance anymore, specially wide open.

At f2,8 there is some light fall-off, more than with the old Elmar. The
contrast however is much better. Some field curvature results in slightly
diminished corners and borders, but this is not really a problem with 3
dimensional subjects. At f4 light fall-off is gone and contrast becomes even
(slightly) better. The new Elmar is at his best at f5,6 with very good
sharpness and contrast, practically without distortion.

The bottomline, I think, is that if you use your old Elmar often wide open,
consider buying the new Elmar. If you use the lens often in the f5,6 - f8 -
f11 area, you may as well continue with what you have. Also, remember that
the f2 Summicron offers one stop more plus marginally better performance at
approximately the same price.

Gerard Captijn,
Geneva, Switzerland.
E-mail: captyng@vtx.ch
Fax: +41 (22) 700 39 28