Re: [Leica] How good is the 50mm Summitar?

["onetreehillclw" <onetreehillclw@compaq.net>]

Summar's are no longer dirt cheap. Ebay sellers have been getting about $200
for them. I remember a few years ago, you could buy one for about $60. I
have one coated and one un-coated. True, they don't beat the Elmar, but the
lens is a great user. Try it with some Tech Pan. No softness with that film!

Chris Williams
Summar User(And Summitar)
- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Howard Sanner" <flagstad@mindspring.com>
To: "Leica Users Group" <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Sent: Friday, July 13, 2001 7:28 PM
Subject: Re: [Leica] How good is the 50mm Summitar?


>    I had a coated Summitar (50mm f/2, not to be confused with the
> 50mm f/1.5 Summarit) for a while. I wasn't impressed with it. The
> one I had didn't have that indefinable Leica look that we all
> know when we see it, and it had quite a bad tendency to flare,
> even with the barndoor shade on it. Maybe flare isn't the right
> word, but I was using it to take pictures around twilight one
> evening, as street lights were coming on, but with plenty of
> light from the sun left. There were lots of "ghost" images of the
> street lights in the pictures.
>
>    Of the older lenses, I think the Elmar's probably the best. It
> doesn't have as much glass in it as the faster lenses, which is
> probably why even uncoated ones have pretty decent contrast and
> low flare.
>
>    If you really need the two extra stops, why don't you spring
> for a Summicron? Frankly, I even prefer the Summar I have to the
> Summitar I got rid of, though Summars are almost universally
> despised. (The Summar does lose lots of contrast in any
> backlighted situation, though--be warned. However, they're dirt
> cheap because no one wants them.)
>
> Howard Sanner
> flagstad@mindspring.com
>