Re: [Leica] 35/f2 Summicron - Genesis to Judgement Day

[Nathan Wajsman <nathan.wajsman@euronet.be>]

Hi Randy,

I had one of the earlier Summicrons, from the early 70s. I am not sure if
it was the 6-element or 7-element version, but it was an excellent lens. I
have since upgraded to the latest ASPH model, mainly because I had an
opportunity to do that at a very good price. Comparing the two lenses, I
found (with slow slide film, shots on tripod, viewed on a light table with
a good loupe) that there was a difference at f2 and f2.8. At f4 and smaller
I could not detect any difference in image quality. Since I do shoot a lot
at the wide apertures, the upgrade was worth it for me. But it does come at
a cost of money and larger size. I would say that you cannot go wrong with
any of the post-1969 Summicrons.

Nathan

Randy Holst wrote:

> Hello all,
>
> I've been (somewhat) trying to follow the discussion on the Aspheric
> lenses, which has led me into another question.  While attempting to
> familiarize myself with the evolution of the Leitz 35/f2 lens (for a
> future purchase), I've found that:
>
> In the beginning, there was the 8 element Summicron 35/f2 and it was
> good.  Then came the 6 element Summicron 35/f2, which was purported to
> be gooder.  That then beget the 7 element Summicron-M 35/f2, which had
> to be even 'M'ore gooder.  Finally came the prodigiously priced
> Summicron 35/f2 Aspherical, which has got to be Immaculate in
> Conception.  This lens has gone through more versions than Nikon's
> equivalent 35/f2 for their SLR's.
>
> Can anyone explain to me what these improvements actually mean in terms
> of sharpness, color, contrast, distortion, etc.?  Under what conditions
> would I notice a difference between the first and last versions?
>
> Randy Holst
> Boise, Idaho

- --
Nathan Wajsman
Overijse, Belgium

General photo site: http://belgiangator.tripod.com/
Belgium photo site: http://members.xoom.com/wajsman/
Motorcycle site: http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/Downs/1704/