[Leica] Re: Low contrast 50s

[lrzeitlin at optonline.net (Lawrence Zeitlin)]

On May 6, 2007, at 5:23 PM, Jeffery wrote:

> I mean pancake flat, like an Elmar. Daniel want to put it in his  
> trouser
> pocket.
>
> But now that you mention it, last week a guest speaker at the LHSA  
> spring
> shoot mentioned some excellent low contrast Leica lenses, but I  
> failed to
> write it down. Like you, I get terrible contrast problems in the  
> subtropical
> sun down here. The lens he mentioned was probably single-coated,  
> post-WWII.
> It wasn't the Summarit or the Summaron (I have both of those). My
> recollection (fuzzy) was that it was a Summitar. Anyone out there  
> use one of
> those these days?


I had a Summitar on my first Leica IIIf, bought in about 1950. It was  
a fine lens, sharp and with little corner vignetting. I used the  
camera for B&W and as a backup for the 4x5 Speed Graphic I was  
required to use for my job as a photo stringer. I didn't mind that  
the negs had low contrast since our paper rarely used anything softer  
than Kodabromide #3 and had a plentiful supply of #4. Our photo  
editor liked contrasty prints. At the time Leica lenses were designed  
for high resolution to the detriment of contrast. This was OK for B&W  
since contrast could easily be boosted with the right choice of paper  
and developer. The lens did show some flare if a light source was in  
the field. Certainly the coating could have been better. But all in  
all it was not much inferior to the follow on Summicron. The Summitar  
was collapsible and protruded about 5/8 inch from the IIIf body. The  
camera, with lens, was still pocketable although a bit heavy for an  
unreinforced pocket.

Perhaps the lecturer was referring to the Summar, the first of the 50  
mm f2.0 Leica lenses. This was a much softer, low contrast lens and  
retracted even flatter than the Summitar. I got one of these a few  
years ago on a really beat up Leica III I bought at a flea market for  
$50. I used it a few times but the low contrast, soft images were not  
my cup of tea. I guess I'm far too used to the snappy images of the  
later Leica lenses.

Larry Z