Re: 35mm f/3.5 Summaron

[jvr@inescn.pt (Joao Ranito)]

>
>I picked one up a while back in mint condition, but found it brought up the 
>50mm frame in my M2.  DAG machined the mount so it now brings up the 35mm - 
>beautiful job.  After years of using a bespectacled 35mm on my M3 (an f/2.8 
>Summaron, later an f/2 Summicron) it's great not to have the bulk and weight 
>on the M2.  (I think my version is probably and early pre-spectacle M3 
>version for use with a separate viewfinder, hence the frame problem).
>The aperture ring is a little tough to grasp with the ITOOY lens hood in 
>place (I may revert to just the UVa filter, no hood, depending on how much 
>flare there is) and the aperture setting dot is a bit tough to see. Also, 
>the aperture scale is non linear, albeit it has click stops. Otherwise, it 
>handles very sweetly - cost me $350, cleaned, lubed, machined and adjusted. 
> I have yet to get the first results back and am interested what other users 
>think of this lens.

I have been using one in an M3 (without spectacles and using the whole
viewfinder as frame, sigh!) for 1 year and I am glad you people in
leica-users have convinced me to keep it. It flares a bit (the hood is a
must) and vignettes a bit wide-open but it is light and sharp. Major gripes:

1) Changing the aperture with the hood is a pain
2) The lack of a 35mm frame on the M3, but that's an M3 problem...
3) Color rendition and contrast is worse than my 50mm Summicron but the
Summicron is more recent (better coating?), so I don't use it with slide film.

I have beem learning a lot with it and, although I tend to use it in
low-light situations, I haven't still decided to part with the $$$ to trade
in for a Summicron... I have been descovering why people enjoy Tri-X... ;-)

HTH,

Joao

>ThomasP@nacm.com
>
>