Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1996/12/03
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I've had a couple of 35 F3.5 (for M) and have one now. Don't notice any difference between that and the 35 F2 I own. (except for speed). since it takes the 39 mm filter it is a good deal. 35 F2.8 go for a lot more money and is closer is price to the F2. If money is a real concern go for which ever you can get cheapest. > > A question about 35mm lenses for the M3. Is there a difference other than > speed between the 3.5 and 2.8 versions of the Summaron with "eyes". The 3.5 > 35mm Summaron was only made though the early 60s while the 2.8 version was > produced for a much longer period. Was the design altered in the 2.8 > version and is it an improvement? I assume it would be easier to find a > clean 2.8 as some of the older 3.5 Summarons I have seen are clouded or > fogged. There is a considerable price difference and I wonder if one gets > more than 1/2 a stop for the money? How do the various Summarons compare to > the 35mm Sumicron? Any help out there?? > > Steve