Help me find my next lens. LEICA 50mm f/2 SUMMITAR or other?

[vroger]

I'm really enjoying my recent purchase of my Jupiter 3. thus I'm looking for something small and silver ( I just like them silver.. ) that is good at portrait. has a fun , unique look / lens bokeh. I would like F 1.4/1.5 but i think that's out of budget. So around F 1.8/2.0 It doesn't have to be perfect wide open but usable as I'll mainly use it wide open.

Main contender is LEICA 50mm f/2 SUMMITAR

budget is $150-250 usd. Main source is here, fred or ebay. Prefer to do private sales via pp.

I will use manly on my Fuji X-E2.


Thanks


Roger

[newst]

Roger,

The Summitar is a great lens. I just recently bought one off Ebay and am duly impressed. The price of mine was $216.00 with free shipping. If you go the Ebay route be prepared to take your time. Most of the Summitar's run in the $400 range so you need to be patient and wait for a good price.

Two things to look out for:

1. The early Leica lenses used a softer, chalk like glass. Make sure that any lens you decide to buy is not badly scratched-many of them are. I've seen them listed with major scratches and with so many small "cleaning marks" that it had to affect image quality. Sellers are pricing on the Leica name and trying to move damaged lenses for top dollar.

2. Like many of the Zeiss Jena lenses the grease in the helicoid in older Leica lenses tends to harden and outgas, resulting in stiff focusing and fogged inner elements. The one I bought has this problem, but the glass is pristine without a mark on it. A CLA will bring it to a like new condition.

Here is a sample in its fogged state.




You might also look into the early Canon Rangefinder lenses. Since you already have the Jupiter, a Sonnar design, you might look into a Canon 1.8/50.

[iangreenhalgh1]

Schneider Retina Xenon 1.9/50 in DKL is cheap and as good as any other 1950s/60s 'normal'. Sharp as hell, bags of character, lower contrast due to single coating. I love mine. Build quality is first rate, has moving dof indicators like a Hasselblad lens.

[newst]

[vroger]

I don't own a dlk adapter but would consider it. But would enjoy a m39 as the adapter is tiny.

[Attila]

May suggestion is Kodak Cine Ektar 63mm f2.0 C mount lens if you looking for extra bokeh and pretty good sharpness wide open. Summitar is okay, like a Jupiter-8 I doubt offer anything above like you already have with J3. Cine Ektar has circular bokeh like Helios 40 or Biotar 75 has

[iangreenhalgh1]

The DKL adapters are pretty cheap and the Xenon is pretty small too.

[vroger]

[vroger]

[vroger]

[vroger]

thoughts / Comments on the Leica 5cm f/2 Summar? could be to expensive.

[scsambrook]

I'm with newst in what he says about the Summar. Still, an optically clean Summar is quite difficult to find as the front element's glass in indeed realtively easily abraded. I'm not sure, but I think getting one apart is a bit trickier than with some other types - The CRR company of Luton UK used to have something about refurbishing the Summar on the their website. Might be worth Googling it.

But if you can find a good one, its unfairly maligned reputation should keep the price within your planned budget. A "good" one is indeed good as I was surprised to find many years ago. But to be safe you probably need to buy from a source familiar with such things who will tell you the truth about the condition. If you prize small size, it wins hands down.

The chrome Canon 1.8/50 can typically be bought for less than a Summar, and much less than a Summitar (in the UK at least) and - provided it's optically clean and un-tampered with - will do better than an uncoated Summar. Peter Kitchingman's Canon Lenses book implies that the optical package is the same as the later black and chrome models, but that may or may not be so. If it is, then I guess you won't find a better L39 standard lens at an affordable price. The later ones were very good indeed, pretty close to the early model Summicron. That's based on what I found back in the 1960s and 70s when all these were relatively cheap to buy and play with.

The Summitar is good too - hardly anything to tell the later ones from the first Summicron, on film at any rate.

Good hunting!

I know you're in the USA, but have at look at the UK websites for MW Classic and Peter Loy. Both regularly get the sort of thing you're after and have good reputations. I've bought things MW Classic in the past and their descriptions are honest.

[tb_a]

Do you look for an collector's item or a lens to use?

If you are looking for a lens to use then I would like to know what are you looking for?

If you look for an outstanding lens in terms of performance and not for any "creative features" then I wouldn't recommend a Summar or Summitar (except when you get it really cheap). In this case you should look at least for a Summicron as from 1953 or later.

If F2.0 seems not enough then the CV Nokton 50/1.5 is most probably the best lens to get in LTM.

However, both would be slightly above your budget.

If you just want to achieve some creative effects then there are cheaper and maybe also better alternatives available in LTM.

Gandy's site might be helpful for further recommendations: https://www.cameraquest.com/ltmlens.htm

[Attila]

[kds315*]

Cannot more that agree with Attila, that Kodak 63mm certainly is a gem, I should use it more often!!
(Look for glass browning if you find one...)

[vroger]

[vroger]

[rbelyell]

if you want a decent price 1.5 50mm, i suggest the leica summarit 50/1.5. its silver, has classic rendering, beautiful bokeh and m39 mount. check out rangefinder forum to see lots of samples. its a wonderful lens.

[vroger]

[tb_a]

[vroger]

[tb_a]

[Attila]

Summitar picture did come today to our FB group, photographer is one of the best what I know, looks confirm it what I said before , not offer anything above J3 to you.

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=993378644026865&set=gm.1031196263571742&type=1&theater

[vroger]

[padam]

Canon 50/1.8 LTM in chrome