Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1995/02/14

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

Subject: Summicrons
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 1995 15:46:37 -0500

  I was interested in the comments about the rigid vs. the collapsable
Summicron f:2 lenses. I have both and used them extensively.
  To help settle the question about quality or design I asked Arthur Kramer,
who is one of the world's top guys with Leicas. I append his reply and that
of another very knowledgeable individual who was kind enough to comment.
#: 577731 S3/35mm Cameras
    12-Feb-95  16:36:36
Sb: #577622-Summicrons
Fm: Arthur Kramer 71140,3240
To: Bill Daniel 73557,237


The Summicrons remained virtually unchanged until the mid seventies when the
formula was upgraded with new glass and curvature changes, and the result was
improved performance. This is reflected in the Summicrons that were made in
Canada as well as Wetzlar. The collapsable Summicrons were good performers,
although not quite up to the rigid models. But this was as a result of
machining tolerences and backfocus errors rather than optical performance.

#: 577991 S3/35mm Cameras
    13-Feb-95  07:18:43
Sb: #577622-Summicrons
Fm: Don Hinds [Point & Shoot 76004,612
To: Bill Daniel 73557,237

According to several atricles, though Leica claimed diffently, they were
different fomulas. If you put both lenses on the table, the front element
will not be the same distance on both.  If formulas were the same, the
distance would be the same...