Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/08/07

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Vs: [Leica] Summicrons, M and others
From: "Raimo Korhonen" <>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 18:26:00 +0200

Mine - from 1982 - does have the M.
All the best!
photos at

- -----Alkuperäinen viesti-----
Lähettäjä: John Collier <>
Vastaanottaja: <>
Päivä: 07. elokuuta 2000 4:13
Aihe: Re: [Leica] Summicrons, M and others

>Most new M lenses have -M after their nominal maximum aperture name. Most
>older M lenses do not. The latest 50/2 apparently does while the previous
>version of the 50/2, same optics and different mount, does not. Big deal. It
>means absolutely nothing; or, perhaps even less than that. Best to check
>with B.D. :-)
>John Collier
>> From: "Bill Lawlor" <>
>>> someone else wrote:
>>> .  Technically, the lens is evidently not a Summicron-M but a
>>> Summicron, and you might suggest to the seller that it should fetch a lower
>>> price, if it has been advertised as the M model.
>> ...........................
>> Which brings up a question I have. What is the difference between a
>> Summicron and a Summicron M? I have a 35/2 Summicron in M mount s/n 2324***.
>> Erwim P's site has a page describing characteristics of M lenses and that
>> number is called a Summicron - M on his page, but, not on my lens. Wie
>> gehtz?