Re: [Leica] 50/3.5 Elmar vs. 50/2 Summar

["Dan Post" <dwpost@email.msn.com>]

Xavier-
I have both; each is unique in it's redition. The Elmar is not really fast,
but sharp as a tack, and good color rendition ( mine is coated, and I use a
VALOO hood to reduce flare). It also folds down very compactly and makes you
LTM camera truly pocketable.
The Summar is faster, and resolves pretty well, but it has a 'softness' that
some Leicaphiles find objectionable. It is a very flattering lens for
photographing the ladies, and my uncoated one renders an 'old fashioned'
look with distance objects of significantly lower contrast.
My suggestion is to try the lens, and if you like it better than your Elmar,
by all means, trade; it all depends on the 'look' you want your work to
have, and what you like!
Dan
- -----Original Message-----
From: Xavier Logean <xavier.logean@epfl.ch>
To: LUG <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Date: Tuesday, May 11, 1999 9:22 AM
Subject: [Leica] 50/3.5 Elmar vs. 50/2 Summar


>Hi LUGgers,
>
>First of all I would like to thank all the luggers that give me info
>for a trip to Paris last week. Paris has nice but *expensive* shops ...
>
>
>My interest today is on a 50/2 Summar.
>
>I have a 50/3.5 Elmar and have also the opportunity to trade it for a
>Summar wizh
>$50 more.
>
>Has anybody experienced both lenses ?
>
>What is the quality of the Summar vs. the Elmar ?
>
>Thanks,
>
>Xavier.
>
>