Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/03/17
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]At 06:10 AM 3/16/2000 -0500, Andre Jean Quintal wrote: >Would someone care to tell us about this lens ? >When was it made? >What were its relative merits for the time? >How does it compare to the current models ? AJQ - I have asked the same question of the LUG before, and it seems from the responses that very few people are using this lens. The one that I have is one of my favourite Leica lenses - and very useful, despite its less than stellar optical reputation. The two main uses that I have for mine are theatre and concert photographs and for Noctilux-style available darkness - but with a very useful longer reach. It may be old and far from the performance of the latest Leica generations but it is still uniquely useful - obviously the 75 Summilux is closest to it, and an absolutely wonderful lens by all accounts, but if you are shooting from the audience of a concert or theatre performance the extra 10 mm of focal length actually does make quite a difference to how close you can get. I was very pleasantly surprised with the performance at f1.5 - It is worst at close range, between four and eight feet - ranging from just adequately sharp to obviously 'soft focus'. This is not as bad as it sounds, though. That lack of sharpness has to be balanced against the fact that f1.5 allows you an extra stop on film speed over most of the other available 85 and 90mm lenses (Leica, Nikon and Canon LTM), which can make a big difference to subjective sharpness. The biggest problem is one of focusing accurately - just a matter of practice. I really don't think it is necessary to decide between latest generation Leica lens performance and the performance of the older lenses - I hardly ever look at a picture made with the Summarex, or with the first generation 35 Summilux, and think, oh my god, that's so soft - I'm too busy feeling happy that I was able to get the shot in such low light, and enjoying the depth and glow that come from the cocktail of flare, coma and other aberrations that these lenses have in such abundance wide open. When I use the 35 Summilux asph. I'm stunned by the extraordinary lucidity it gives wide open - but that is very rarely the deciding factor for the value of the picture to me. But then I am not a professional aiming for consistency and optimum quality... At longer distances, such as the fifty feet or so from which the 85mm will capture a couple of figures interacting on a stage, the supposedly poor optical performance becomes less of an issue. I usually shoot between f1.5 and f2 - at f2 performance is fine, definitely sharp enough. And at f1.5 it is surprisingly sharp at that distance - I have never been bothered by lack of sharpness. What is significant is the level of flare, or glow. I find that I need to underexpose as much as a stop if I want to stop bright stage light highlights from washing out into ethereal glows surrounding people - as long as I do this to keep the 'glow' under control the result is something that doesn't look absolutely natural and accurate - but often looks very effective - after all, the lighting in theatre or concert situations is rarely 'natural' looking anyway. I would love to hear from anybody else who has experience with this lens - I would hate to think that they are all on collectors' shelves. As with so many of the other older Leica lenses it would be a great shame if talk about what are often only marginal differences in optical performance compared to later lenses means that they are thought to be only of interest to collectors. Prices for a Summarex will range both a little below and above the 75 Summilux - which is undoubtedly a far finer lens. But the extra 10mm really can be useful in some situations - and, for what it's worth, the Summarex is probably the most substantially and beautifully built of all Leica lenses - the quality is such that my 1950 example looks as if it was bought yesterday, the surfaces of the barrel seem impervious to wear. For a fast 85mm lens it is surprisingly compact - mine has replaced a 90 Elmarit-M in my compact walkabout kit, along with a body and a 35 - at apertures smaller than f2 I am never aware of any deficiency in quality. So, notwithstanding comments from Marc and others that the Summarex is a dog both by name and by nature, I would urge anyone who can actually to USE one - it may be a pleasant surprise - as is true of so many supposedly inferior Leica lenses... Simon.