Summaron M/LTM query

[Dralowid]

I seem to remember a thread about this...

Is it true that 35mm Summarons, both 3.5 and 2.8, that were sold as M fitting actually are LTM fitting plus adaptor locked by a little grub screw? (tiny screw on outside of flange on 2.8 lens)

If so, is the next step obvious as it looks?

Apologies in adavance, I'll post this on M and LTM list.

Michael

[richard_l]

Interesting conjecture. It would, however, not be true of the M3 Summarons equipped with goggles, because they focus differently in order to accomodate the rangefinder to an optically modified 50mm viewfinder.

[John Shriver]

Yes, many early M Summarons were based on the LTM Summaron plus a grub-screw secured convertor. Particularly the 35/2.8. But it wasn't the standard convertor, it had somewhat of a skirt up the side of the lens.

HOWEVER, the focusing mount on the M version had the stop set at 0.7 meters, and was engraved to that distance, whereas the true LTM version stopped at 1.0 meters.

There's no functional problem using the M version with the adapter removed on an LTM camera. But you need to be careful not to pay the "collector's scarcity based price" for such a lens. The true LTM 35/2.8 is much rarer than the M mount one, and commands a much higher price.

A Summaron that focuses to 0.7 meters in LTM should be priced at LESS than an M mount one, since something is missing, not more.

As ever, as Richard noted, goggled 35mm lenses will not rangefinder focus without their goggles. Buying one of those "converted" to LTM would be a particular sucker game. It would be a very tempting thing for a rascal to do, since the goggled versions are by far the cheapest. I don't know how to identify them, other than by comparing the action of the rangefinder cam to a known good 35mm lens.

[Dralowid]

As to price, it's not a problem, I already have an M 2.8 Summaron and it is one of my favorites. Just looking forward to using it on an old III.

I will have a go at the grub screw this weekend.

Michael