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

["r g" <photos@nyc.rr.com>]

I recently got a summar for $65 on ebay.de, ltm stuff tends to go cheaper
there even factoring in the money transfers and postage.

- ----- Original Message -----
From: "onetreehillclw" <onetreehillclw@compaq.net>
To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2001 1:12 AM
Subject: Re: [Leica] How good is the 50mm Summitar?


> 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
> >
>