Re: [Leica] Re: Summaron comments solicited

[Jay Kumarasamy <jayk@cisco.com>]

Gary,

The Summaron 35/2.8 is a brilliant lens. I have never owned or tried the
summicron 35/2.0 to compare with my summaron.  So can't say which is better.
Won't trade the 35/2.8 for anything.  If you LUGers own a Summaron
35/2.8, don't let it go. Its a keeper !.

- - Jay


> Hi Mike -
> 
> My first Leica lens was a 35/2.8 Summaron on a black M2, purchased used when
> I worked in Stockholm many years ago. I was amazed at the quality, and
> thought all Leica lenses were this good. In fact, I was then disappointed by
> the early 50/2.8 Elmar and 90/4 Elmar in comparison.  When a used 1st
> version 35 black Summicron came my way a couple months later, I traded the
> 35/2.8 for a 50 Elmar. Turns out the Summicron had numerous front element
> scratches, and was actually softer than the old Summaron.
> 
> I now have a 2.8 Summaron again (M3 style with the attached finder) and am
> thrilled with the brilliance of the B&W negs from this lens. Altho I have
> not done any strict testing, I just know that there is something special
> about the resolution and contrast of the 2.8 Summaron.
> 
> It's also a pretty  little lens and makes a neat  looking package on an M2.
> (With M3, the goggles are a bit much on the small lens and it feels a little
> bulky). If anyone were wanting a great "starter" Leica with minimum
> investment, it would be hard to beat the Summaron/M2 (altho a CL with 40mm
> Summicron is a great package, too - I just did some shots today with one
> while out on a sunny early morning walk)
> 
> Regards,
> Gary Todoroff
> Tree LUGger
> 
> > Mike Johnston wrote:
> > >
> > > I'm interested in hearing comments about either of the old Summaron-M
> > > lenses, either the f/2.8 or the f/3.5, either M-mount or screwmount.
> > > Anybody used one? Like it? Dislike it? Feelings and opinions much
> > > appreciated, on- or off-list.
> > >
> > > Thanks--
> > >
> > > --Mike
> >
> 
>