The Journey to an M

[JoelM]

Would anyone like to share images from a Summilux 50/1.4 V1?

Or a 35/1.4 pre-Asph?

35mm 1.4 Summilux pre-asph

Hi all, I currently have a v3. 35mm summicron which I love it’s glued to my MP. Just wondering if I should sell it to finance a 35mm summilux pre-asph. My current system is M10, M-P and M-A. Heard many good things about the tiny 35mm summilux pre-asph and its softness wide open (which I adore). T...

www.l-camera-forum.com

 

[algrove]

Wow! These are beautiful! That M9 sensor and that lens are a great match! Just as I thought it would be! Love these! Thanks so much for posting these!

Hmmmm… I never was able to get that elusive M9. Another missed opportunity!

So, this poses another question to ponder… if I start shooting the old slide film ((E100, etc) in the freezer, which does very well by the way, how will that lens render final images?

Oh the possibilities, which makes this a fun run-up to my personal project!

Dave
You have missed nothing. Just imagine the opportunities that lie ahead. The old Summicron Rigid V1 has VERY nice qualities even on a digital sensor and perhaps even better on film, the way it was designed to be used. The bokeh mine produces is what made it so very popular and why I love it wide open, but stop down and it takes on a whole new feel.

If you want all in focus landscapes then why not an f2/0?

 

[dave.gt]

Dave
You have missed nothing. Just imagine the opportunities that lie ahead. The old Summicron Rigid V1 has VERY nice qualities even on a digital sensor and perhaps even better on film, the way it was designed to be used. The bokeh mine produces is what made it so very popular and why I love it wide open, but stop down and it takes on a whole new feel.

If you want all in focus landscapes then why not an f2/0?

I loved my 50 Cron on the R4, but it was eventually included in a trade on some other equipment years ago. The body just sits and waits on me!

And yes, I do love 2.0 Leica lenses.... They are special!

 

[algrove]

That LLL 8 element 35 2.0 replica is a nice one.

 

[dave.gt]

That LLL 8 element 35 2.0 replica is a nice one.

This new lens?

Light Lens Lab 35mm f2 Summicron Review — The Codex

A Blue Moon Camera lens review of the Light Lens Lab 35mm f2 Summicron replica for Leica M.

bluemooncameracodex.com

This sounds interesting as I had not heard of this before. Cool!!!!

 

[algrove]

This new lens?

Light Lens Lab 35mm f2 Summicron Review — The Codex

A Blue Moon Camera lens review of the Light Lens Lab 35mm f2 Summicron replica for Leica M.

bluemooncameracodex.com

This sounds interesting as I had not heard of this before. Cool!!!!

Not very old maybe out 1-2 years. They also do an ELCAN 50/2.0 replica. Both lenses heavy.

 

[Godfrey]

When I decided to buy another M film body in 2011-2012, I considered all the ones I'd had before carefully. The M3 and M2 simply didn't appeal to me, for reasons I cannot easily articulate. The M4 was delightful but at the time M4s in good shape that I could afford were unfindable. My second favorite body in prior times had been the M4-P but I preferred the M4 viewfinder with its simpler frameline setup. The M6 and M6TTL that I had ... well, I liked the M6 but wanted the M6TTL meter display, or none.

I decided on the M4-2, preferably an early series one, and lucked out in finding a pretty nice one listed in rough condition on the KEH website. It was $720, their notion of "rough condition" was to me a "very good+" condition cosmetically, but the viewfinder was full of dirt and the rangefinder sticky and inconsistent. I had my local tech at the time check it out: he cleaned, collimated, and calibrated the viewfinder, found the shutter was a little slow at 1/1000 and 1/500 but not by enough to matter (about .5EV and .3EV respectively), and charged me $110 for his efforts. I was out shooting with it again yesterday. Still needs a shutter overhaul, still works just fine.

The M4-2 early series has exactly the same viewfinder optics as the M4, and the same thin frame lines without rangefinder patch flare, unlike the later models. The film wind is slightly noisier than the M4 and earlier because the gears are steel instead of bronze, which also means they are strong enough to use with a motor winder should I choose to (never have). There are a couple of minor other issues with the M4-2 as they came out new, which have long since been well known and easily corrected.

I love the camera, will never sell it.

When I bought the M4-2, I picked up a CV Color Skopar 50mm f/2.5: this is a wonderful lens, I still use it. I also found an early M-Rokkor 90/4 which is *exactly* the same lens as an Elmar-C 90mm f/4, built in Wetzlar by Leica, but with the M-Rokkor bezel and a 40.5mm filter size. It works beautifully on the M4-2.

In 2015, I happened on a nice shape '72 Summilux 35 v2 that had already been vetted on the M9 and M240 bodies. I had DAG code it for use on the digital bodies and have used it on M9, M-P240, M-D262, M10-M, and, of course, the M4-2. I'll never sell that either.

The M4-2, Summilux 35, Color Skopar 50, and M-Rokkor 90 are my standard film M kit. The 35mm cost me as much as the body and the other two lenses put together, and was worth every penny.

Good luck on your quest. Consider an M4-2 body ... they tend to go for less than the M4-P, M4, M3, and even M2 bodies (or at least they once did) as they have been looked down upon by Leica M fanatics over the years. Having used one for a decade, I can't really see why. (I don't really know what current prices are like at all... I only look at prices when I'm looking to buy something... )

G

 

[dave.gt]

Ah, yes, good friends, good advice! Each of you are very much appreciated and you make this forum community special. Thank you so much.

My journey is just beginning… and like the first day I began my Medium Format experience, life is a little sweeter when creative endeavors are pursued. It is a passion for most of us, I presume, and I look forward to the days and weeks ahead as Spring nears. The change of seasons is a time of renewal, and my mind races when I think of all the possibilities.

In spite of the challenges each day brings, the opportunity to be creative is always available. I must be patient as inspiration always finds me, not the other way around it seems. Spring! Timing could not be better, so let us see how each day unfolds, and thank you for the comments from everyone.

I am so ready for a renewal!

 

[algrove]

Somewhere I read that the body renews cells about every 100 days. Here we go!

 

[DDudenbostel]

A v1/v2 50 Summilux is one of the few vintage lenses I’ve not owned, unfortunately. I’ve always been curious.

I started my career as a photojournalist while in college in 1968. I quickly built a killer kit consisting of 2 M2 and 1 M3 body. I added a 21 SA f3.4, 35 Summilux 1.4, 5.0cm rigid Summicron, 90 Elmarit (before the tele version), 135 Hektor, viso 2, 65 Elmar and bellows and 200 f4 Tellyt. Since then I’ve hardly been without a similar kit.

I never cared for the M3 although they’re great cameras, I just like my M2’s better. It’s probably because I favored wider lenses but in a pinch the entire viewfinder area is pretty much 35mm in coverage. I compared it to my Leitz 35 finder and it was close enough. Anyway you don’t use an M for precise framing.

I can’t tell you weights but for all practical purposes the feel and operate the same no matter the body.

If you buy an M3 be advised they are very prone to the RF patch fading. I had one of my 3’s that had lost 90% of it contrast and the patch was barely visible. At one time it was possible to get the beam splitter resilvered and prisms recemented but I’m not certain if there’s anyone doing that now. You’d have to do some research. Other models M2, M4 and later models aren’t as prone to RF deterioration and share a common design. The M3 is the odd one in the bunch.

Also keep in mind some earlier M3’s do not have a frame preview selector. In addition early bodies were double stroke which I disliked. I had one DS, one SS and a DS converted by Leica to SS.

I’ve owned multiple M2’s, M4-2’s, M4-P’s, an M6, M4 and 3 MP’s and I currently own a pristine M4-P, Very clean M2 that I’ve owned for thirty years and a gorgeous A La Carte black chrome with black ostrich skin, high magnification (.85?) RF, M2/3 wind, preview and rewind controls and my signature engraved on the top. It was a 60th birthday gift 14 years ago.

I’ve run a ton of film through M’s and other than the plastic tip on the later M’s wind lever they feel pretty much the same.

If you buy from a dealer, be advised just because the dealer says recent CLA doesn’t mean a full CLA. I bought my converted M3 from a big dealer in the Cleveland area and he stated recent CLA. Well I had a little problem, just minor, and sent it to a trusted Asian repairman who had done the original CLA. I was informed this dealer had what I’d call abbreviated cleanings done not full. He had enough done to get it working ok but not really cleaned fully. What I wound up doing was having the remaining portion of the CLA done at my expense.

These are very old cameras so buy carefully. My advice is buy the latest model you can find within your budget. If you can afford a used MP especially with the .85x RF go for it. They’re excellent. If it’s an M6 that’s good then I’d look at the M4-P and so on. M4-2’s are fine as I owned one of those and like it just as much as an original M4 but they were brand new. You don’t want to dump a bunch of money in an old camera and loose months waiting on it to get something working. Also M3’s that have fading RF’s can be repaired but often the solution is to replace the entire RF with a .72 M6J RF. Then you have an M2/6 basically.

Good luck with your project and your quest.

 

[DDudenbostel]

Well I got a bit long winded in that last post but wanted to add another comment about lenses.
I listed my original kit and really love the images from those lenses with the exception of the 35 Summilux. Wide open it had some nasty issues with point source lights in or near the frame edges.

I purchased a set of the newest 24, 35 f1.4, 50 f1.4 and 90 f2 Apo. It’s just me but I tried to love them but overall hated them because the images looked harsh and plastic to me. They lost that beautiful roundness of tone and gradation that the old glass had. The edges and transitions didn’t look natural but I’m a guy that doesn’t like 4k tv.

I went back to basically the original kit of lenses but bought a v1 8 element 35 Summicron from a friend rather than the Summilux. In the 70’s I had a 90 Summicron and I bought another to go with my Elmarit (v1 non tele) 90mm. So I have close to my original kit minus the viso and 135 but added a 75 Summilux about twenty and I’m delighted.

edit: If I could only own two lenses it would be a 35mm (V1) and 75 Summilux. With those two you can shoot most everything.

I also have a 35mm f2 Biogon and 50mm f2 planar that I loved if I’m in a situation where flare might be an issue these are the ones I use. They’re not overly modern looking but the control flare very nicely. They’re sharp without being obnoxious.

 

[Godfrey]

...
I listed my original kit and really love the images from those lenses with the exception of the 35 Summilux. Wide open it had some nasty issues with point source lights in or near the frame edges.
...

This can be true if you don't fit the lens hood. I have the 12504 hood fitted on my just about 100% of the time: the flare and ugliness of point source lights near the frame edges, wide open, is just about totally removed this way. This is with a 1972 example of the 'Lux 35.

The 12504 hood also serves as a filter holder for Series VII filters, and I use Green and Orange filters about 90% of the time with B&W film, and a polarizer occasionally.

G

 

[med]

This new lens?

Light Lens Lab 35mm f2 Summicron Review — The Codex

A Blue Moon Camera lens review of the Light Lens Lab 35mm f2 Summicron replica for Leica M.

bluemooncameracodex.com

This sounds interesting as I had not heard of this before. Cool!!!!

I own it and as long as you are ok with the idea of LLL copying/replicating the old 35 Summicron then it is a wonderful lens. It certainly isn't cheap, as it costs in the same neighbourhood as buying a modern Voigtlander lens, but is a bargain compared to vintage Leica glass, especially the 35 8 element that it is copying.

It has superb build, fit, and finish (I bought the silver chrome version), has nice character wide open but sharpens right up by f2.8, and is nice and compact.

 

[DDudenbostel]

This can be true if you don't fit the lens hood. I have the 12504 hood fitted on my just about 100% of the time: the flare and ugliness of point source lights near the frame edges, wide open, is just about totally removed this way. This is with a 1972 example of the 'Lux 35.

The 12504 hood also serves as a filter holder for Series VII filters, and I use Green and Orange filters about 90% of the time with B&W film, and a polarizer occasionally.

G

I always used the lens hood.
Unless a person really needs/wants f1.4 and plans to shoot wide open most of the time I wouldn’t recommend the Summilux 35. Stopped down performance improves and aberrations go away but at that point you might as well have a Summicron or Summaron. Yes I know it has a cult following but I wouldn’t rank it that high. I’d pick any of the 35 Summicrons (1-4) any day of the week. F2 for most uses is plenty fast including myself. Since the 35 Summilux I owned in the 60’s to early 70’s and other than the original Noctilux I owned for a few years in the early 70’s I’ve not owned anything faster than f2. Oops, one exception is my 75 Summilux that I’ll never sell. It’s my only fast lens.
I always felt where the high speed lenses need to be is in the longer glass. You can hold a 35 steady at a much slower shutter speed than a 75 so why not make the longer glad faster. I know there are issues like size and weight and some people shoot wide open for bokeh but for me it’s capturing a subject that there’s no other way to do it successfully other that shoot at a max aperture. Different applications of the same lens for different people. Bokeh is something that has little interest to me. If you look at my subject matter you’d see why.

I believe the fire eater was with the 35 Summilux but stopped down and the boys on the bikes were with the 21 SA 3.4. Both from the mid and early 70’s. The boiled peanut stand is with my 35 F2 8 element.

Im posting small images from my phone so if the quality is bad please forgive.

 

[DDudenbostel]

Here are two illustrations of how the 35 Summilux from the 60’s can get ugly.

DISClAIMER:

I am not a membern or have I ever been a member or any affiliation with this group. I have no philosophical interests in common with them either. This was one of several documentary projects for publication and part of a museum exhibition on Appalachian culture. Please do not be offended!

The first image is from 1970 and was a joint crusade with Billy Graham and President Richard Nixon. The second was from 1971 or 73, can’t find my notes, in Knox County Tn and the Klan had a huge rally at a local farm.

We can go into this topic later if you’d like with additional images. Fortunately these folks are pretty much gone from Appalachia. Since that time I’ve covered a group of neo nazis which are of concern.

Notice how the 35 Summilux reacts with overpowering flare with light sources in the frame. It’ll do this if similar light sources are at or just outside the frame. This is @1.4. Stopped down it brings this under control.

The second shots show how it could form an inverted secondary image when a bright source was in the frame [email protected]. Lens hoods are of no help here and no filter was on the lens.

This wasn’t common with my lens but did happen when you didn’t expect it. I’ve read some people believe that there were two versions of the Summilux. I purchased mine in 1968 and was the black alloy version with the focus tab lock.

I spoke with a Leica rep several years ago about different versions and was told that there was only one optical version. Coatings May have changed but per Leica there was only one optical version.

 

[Godfrey]

I think we will have to agree to disagree on this. I have been using this lens on M9, M-P240, M-D262, CL, SL, M4-2, and now M10-M since 2013 or so. I have never seen a single frame in my photos that look as bad as what you posted in your 'problem examples'. Now, of course, being a photographer for 50+ years myself, I am well aware that having specular light sources in the image can cause all kinds of problems with many lenses, not just the 'Lux 35, and wide open lens performance with an ancient 35/1.4 lens design has its own unique issues. I tend to avoid doing foolish things like that, and if I have to, and I know that a particular lens has a propensity to flare and poor rendering when wide open in those circumstances, I tend to stop it down to where the problems won't happen and use a wide-open aperture for other situations.

That said, I bought this lens specifically because a- it is small and lightweight for a 35mm f/1.4 lens, b- the lens design nets a huge range of rendering qualities ... from a wide open look that is so similar to a Summicron 35 fitted with Zeiss Softar to a razor sharp f/5.6 or smaller lens opening. Spin the aperture ring and change the rendering, far more than my Summicron-M 35 offers as possibilities (yes, I've owned two of those over the years, and they're wonderful too ... just not like the 'Lux).

So, bad mouth the lens all you want, but I love it and it does wonderful service for me.

Here are a few sample photos at f/1.4 and f/2.


Coffee & Crossword
Leica M-P + Summilux 35mm v2
ISO 200 @ f/1.4 @ 1/250

The Light In The Garage
Leica M-P + Summilux 35mm f/1.4 v2
ISO 200 @ f/2 @ 1/45

Surprised
Leica M-P + Summilux 35mm f/1.4 (v2)
ISO 200 @ f/2 @ 1/90

Trees and Fence by Orchard
Leica M9 + Summilux 35 v2
ISO 160 @ f/1.4 @ 1/2000 sec

enjoy, G