Summaron vs Elmar

[haagen_dazs]

ermm what is the difference between

Leica 35/3,5 Summaron

Leica 35/3,5 Elmar

which is better?
how much is it used?
any websites explaining the difference?

are there any good budget LTM 35mm lens?

[back alley]

canon 35/2.8 lens

[wlewisiii]

The difference is 4 elements in 3 groups (tessar) for the Elmar vs. 6 elements in 4 groups (planar?) for the Summaron. The importants of that difference is if you like one lens's look over the other.

I'd agree with joe about the Canon lens. There are some very decent prices out there for the 35/2.8 & it's probably what I'll get unless my serious bottom feeder tendencies lead me to a Steinheil 35/4.5 ...

Also consider the Jupiter 12 35/2.8 lens. If you have a camera that it will fit, it is probably the best of the FSU lenses and is an wonderful bit of bang for very little buck. I have one that I use on my Canon 7 and it is a lovable little lens...

The VC 35/2.5 is also an exquisite & inexpensive lens. I had it in Contax mount (same optical formula as the Classic in LTM) and it was marvellous if you want the super sharp look of a modern multi-coated lens.

William

[Ronald M]

The Elmar is not nearly as nice. Mine did not sharpen up til well stopped down, maybe 11 or 16. I would have been upset except it came as part of a package of 4 lenses for $100 from a motivated seller.

It also suffers bad field curvature.

My LTM 3.5 Summaron is with me daily on a 111f or 111c and is a small gem. The 50mm clamp on shade works well and does not vignette. The image is much like the 8 element Summicron.

Count on getting it cleaned internally. The old Leica haze is a killer for the Leica image. It needs to be perfect. Sharpness won`t be effected if light, but the nice way the old glass images will be.

My other 35`s are a version 4 Summicron and 8 element with eyes for my M3, but they won`t go on a 111c. Each is nice. Just the elmar was a DOG. It ran away.

[scigeek]

Ronald M.
My 3.5cm Elmar is a fantastic lens.
See here:

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/foru...chmentid=22142

There's a pic (under the 111c) taken with this lens. (Read the post for the explanation!).

It vignettes wide open, but that's part of the charm of the lens.
I've been warned about Summar's which have had their front elements reground to remove scratches, and this has resulted in a changed concave lens surface. Could that have happened to yours?

[doubs43]

IMO there's no question that the Summaron is a sharper, contrastier lens than the Elmar. )The coated Elmar, as would be expected, is better than the uncoated versions.)

The Summaron uses a collar to adjust the "click-stop" aperture settings which is more convenient than the Elmar's slide adjustment on the front of the lens. The collar also means that filters and hoods that clamp on the Summar won't impede adjusting the aperture setting.

I own two 35mm f/3.5 Summarons. One cost me $120 while the other came with a "set" and cost even less when the various parts are divided out. The Summaron is not difficult to clean and I've done both of mine.

Canon optics are certainly excellent and I'm sure Joe and others with experience using them are happy with the results. I have no experience with the WA Canon 35mm f/2.8 lens but would think it's a fine lens. I know my Summarons are excellent so can't justify buying the Canon to compare. Then again, shopping and comparing and making a choice is half of the fun, isn't it?

The image below was taken with my first Summaron.

Walker

[scigeek]

Originally Posted by doubs43

IMO there's no question that the Summaron is a sharper, contrastier lens than the Elmar. )The coated Elmar, as would be expected, is better than the uncoated versions.)

Given that my image was re-taken, using a point-and shoot digital, available light, and with no copying-stand, and the auto-focus auto-focussed on the 111c rather than the print - I'd say the bit of the print that's in focus - thats the bench (on the original print much more is sharp) compares favourably with your print for sharpness. BTW this is an uncoated Elmar.

No question about it being a pain in the bum to take the hood or filter off to alter the f-stops though.

Summar or Scanner?
Hmmm.......