Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2007/04/22

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Re: Collapsible 50mm Summicron
From: glehrer at san.rr.com (Jerry Lehrer)
Date: Sun Apr 22 17:21:15 2007
References: <200704221452.l3MEpfwD066430@server1.waverley.reid.org> <0DCA3EA6-7F47-44F7-BAA1-EE8AD0D21C03@optonline.net> <001301c78520$fbfc1d80$2101a8c0@luispersonal> <200704222147.l3MLlmkC047647@server1.waverley.reid.org>

Marc,

Agreed, but the best Summitar I ever had was one with an asterisk after 
the name.  A local feather merchant talked me out that lens years ago.

The only 50mm lens I can tolerate now is my pre-Asph Summilux..  Among 
my dozens of lenses it is the ONLY 50mm lens I care to keep.
Except of course the 50mm Distagon for my H'blad.

Jerry


Marc James Small wrote:
> A lot of our view of the first-generation Summicron lenses comes from 
> aggressiving advertising by Leitz and by Leitz dealers between 1954 
> and 1968.  Allow us to move beyond this and review the bidding.
>
> The 2/5cm Summitar (1939 to 1954, only in LTM) is a really remarkable 
> lens, and is a most satisfactory normal optick.  The one I own was the 
> first Leitz lens I ever bought, and my family will have to peel it 
> from my dead fingers after my passage to the hereafter, as I have no 
> intention of getting rid of it any earlier!  I recognize that in hard 
> testing on an optical bench, the CZJ 2/5cm Sonnar edges it out a bit 
> on most parameters, but both the Summitar and Sonnar are quite nice 
> lenses in use.
>
> The 2/5cm collapsible Summicron was a marginal improvement in optical 
> performance on the Summitar but was not the earth-shaking explosion of 
> excellence Leitz claimed and the US photo press reported.  Leitz 
> claimed that the collapsible Summicron was redesigned to accomodate 
> the growing force of color photography but this is not really true:  
> the Summitar is perfectly capable of decent color imagery.  Leitz 
> started to wake up to market economics with the collapsible Summicron 
> by shifting almost all of their lenses to an E39 filter thread in 
> place of the unique threads used on earlier lenses, such as the E36.4 
> thread used on the Summitar, a unique design.
>
> The first versions of the collapsible Summicron contained radioactive 
> rare-earth elements.  These proved to be too expensive for mass 
> production and most of these lenses have non-radioactive glasses.  
> Leitz in those days had its own optical-glass lab but did not produce 
> the glasses it used in lens production;  these were purchased through 
> Schott, a Zeiss subsidiary and, thanks to the Versailles Treaty, the 
> only optical glass manufactory in Germany at that time, even though 
> Germany had renounced that Treaty two decades earlier.  Schott 
> supplied and supplies many glasses but does not make them all:  many 
> of the optical glasses listed in the Schott catalogue to this day come 
> from Hoya in Japan and a few come from the USA;  in recent years, they 
> have added glass suppliers from the former Warsaw Pact nations.  The 
> significant point is that Schott controls the formula and works with 
> its suppliers to meet the needs of customers.  All Hoya glasses are 
> made, for instance, to meet Schott standards, and I believe that 
> Schott is currently selling about 2/3 of Hoya's production, as Schott, 
> unlike Zeiss and Leitz, will cut one heck of a deal.
>
> The next version of the 2/5cm Summicron was the rigid lens, which 
> later appeared with a revised mount as the DR ("Dual Range"), also 
> known as the NF ("Near Focus").  This again tweaked the basic design 
> to produce incremental improvements in performance.  The difference 
> between a collapsible and rigid 2/5cm Summicron is really not great;  
> for that matter, the difference in performance between the Summitar 
> and the rigid Summicron is not that great.
>
> Those who do their own darkroom work can see the differences:  take a 
> roll of slow-speed film and take identical shots with all three 
> versions (Summitar, collapsible Summicron, rigid Summicron/DF) and 
> then properly develop the film for minimum grain (TMY and Rodinal are 
> not a recommended combination!).  Then play with cropped images to 
> learn the differences.  I have done this, years back, and the superior 
> performance of the rigid Summicron can only be noted with a lot of 
> printing enlargement.  (I used a DR, only available in M BM, so I used 
> adapters to fit the Summitar and collapsible Summicron to my M3).
>
> I own all of these lenses:  the 2/5cm Summitar is on my IIIc, the 
> 2/5cm collapsible Summicron is on my IIIg, and the 2/5cm DR Summicron 
> is on my M3.  In the end, there really is not much of a difference 
> between them, despite the claims of Lietz' advertising at the time and 
> the claims of the clerks at Leitz' dealers back in the Longago.
>
> The important point is to USE these lenses, as all are capable of 
> great work.
>
> Marc
>
>
> m


Replies: Reply from marcsmall at comcast.net (Marc James Small) ([Leica] Re: Collapsible 50mm Summicron)
In reply to: Message from lrzeitlin at optonline.net (Lawrence Zeitlin) ([Leica] Re: Collapsible 50mm Summicron)
Message from luisripoll at telefonica.net (Luis Ripoll) ([Leica] Re: Collapsible 50mm Summicron)
Message from marcsmall at comcast.net (Marc James Small) ([Leica] Re: Collapsible 50mm Summicron)