The "Real" Poor Man's Leica?

[NickTrop]

The quest for the true "poor man's Leica" leads to the Zorki 4K + good condition Summar 2/50.

I always thought a Leica was out of my price-range. So, like many on this site, over time I purchased several fixed lens Japanese rangefinders - Lynx 14e, GSN, Konica S3, and the Yashica Electro CC. These are all wonderful cameras which I'm sure have been called "the poor man's Leica" - only they're not.

Reason?

They all have fine glass. But it's not Leica glass. While I have been guilty of busting on Leicaphiles, it's true, Leica lenses have a unique and pleasing signature all their own. None of these fine Japanese rangefinders have "Leica" lenses, so they're not "poor man's Leicas..." though they are fine cameras, love and shoot them all.

So, in order to create the "poor man's Leica" one must first start with Leica glass. I wrote off all Leica glass - ltm or M as too expensive. However, there is one lens, imo, that is very affordable that definitely has the Leica look - in *****s. IMO that's the Summar. Enter "Summar" into Flickr tag search, you'll see what I mean.

So I bought one with the funds I recently received from selling off a few MF lenses. I waited for one in VG condition from a reputable seller - Cost with shipping $88. It arrived yesterday. No scratches on the glass, little if any hazing. Barrel functional but a bit scratched. Who cares?

Next, did some homework on FSU 35mm RFs. Decided on the Zorki 4K. Winder, removable back, slow speeds, tops at 1/1000, flash synch. $15 for the camera (body only), $18 to ship from the Ukraine. The camera hasn't arrived yet.

$88+$33= $121

In conclusion, if you're on the true quest for a "poor man's Leica" your quest must start with a Leica lens. The Summar would seem to qualify:

From "Leica Lens Reviews":

2/50 Summar:

The Summar is Leitz's first f 2.0 lens, introduced in 1933. It shows it's best results between f 3.2 and 6.3. In this range, it is comparably sharp, like my Kodak Retina Ia 3.5/50 mm Xenar from the 50ies. In this range, it is a "high contrast lens", but different than we use the phrase today. Here it means, that the lens shows clear colors but hardly shadow details. To give an example: When you look at a tree at dawn or sunset, you clearly see the colors of the bright parts, but the shadows are gone and almost black. That's what the lens does, even in bright daylight. Additionally, the unsharp areas are more unsharp than in a "usual" 50 mm, almost like from the 2/90 mm M Summicron. Both effects (suppression of shadow details and "increased" unsharpness) result in the most impressive 3D or pictoral effect I've ever seen from a 50 mm, incl Noctilux. The highlights are over-pronounced, which gives an additional impression of light in your pictures (like in impressionism). At f 2.0 the corners tend to be dark and the colors are almost gone. It is a warm to neutral lens.
http://members.aol.com/dcolucci/ll.htm

From Cameraquest:
50/2 Leitz Summar (1933-1940): Universally disparaged, I think it's a treasure. These lenses give a wonderful semi-soft focus effect when shot at wide apertures with color film. Very beautiful, great for scenics, women, nudes, romantic images.

Check out any images posted on the web and that this lens is a true "Leica" (perhaps "too" Leica) can not be denied. I really love the images it produced based on the samples on Flickr and other sites. Next, so's not to short-change it, a proper body - all shutter speeds (even if they might be off a bit) is a must. Trigger winder, yes, a must for me in 35. Flash synch - even if it's slow, yes. Something other than the what seem to be a pain in the azz bottom loaders... all roads lead to the Zorki 4k.

So, we'll see if my "theory" holds true once the Zorki arrives in a few weeks and I slap that bebe on her and go "all the way" (take pics), instead of just "fondling" her (the Summar) for now. $88 for the lens + $32 for the camera = po' man's Leica.

Next to locate a proper lens hood.

[Gabriel M.A.]

I heard this being the Canonet GIII, before prices broke the $40 mark again a few years ago.

But a Zorki 1 with an Industar 61 may fit the "label". That lens takes some nice images.

[gb hill]

Maybe it should be more catorigized like this:

Zorki & FED is poor mans Barnack Pre 1950s

Canonnet poor mans Leica 60s to 1999

Bessas poor mans Leica year 2000 to present.

Just my thoughts. Feel free to correct any dates for I'm not a collector and by looking at my arsenal of cameras listed in my profile, I'm defiently considered a poor man.

[raid]

I recommend for a "Poor Man's Leica" outift to get an Elmar 50mm/3.5 or Summar 50mm/2.0 and a Zorkiof FED. Your Summar is unusually inexpensive. It took me six months to find a Summar for around $130.

If you can accept a non-Leitz lens, then my choice would be a Konica S2. The lens is super sharp, and manual exposure control is possible. The camera is built like a rock.

Raid

[NickTrop]

Originally Posted by raid

I recommend for a "Poor Man's Leica" outift to get an Elmar 50mm/3.5 or Summar 50mm/2.0 and a Zorkiof FED.

Yep. What I did.

Originally Posted by raid

Your Summar is unusually inexpensive. It took me six months to find a Summar for around $130.
Raid

Dunno. Got lucky I guess. It was $78 + $10 shipping.

[gb hill]

Oh! you added to your thread. Now I see. Nick you got a heck of a deal. Less than what I payed for my elmar 50/3.5 to go with my zorki 2c. Way to go.

[raid]

Originally Posted by NickTrop

Yep. What I did.




Dunno. Got lucky I guess. It was $78 + $10 shipping.

Nick,

My first Summar was pristine optically, and it was stolen from my office, with a Zorki. Now I got my second Summar, and I will tomorrow pick up two developed and scanned rolls of film with it. I did well with the first Summar. Let's wait and see how the second Summar did.

Good luck with your set.

Raid

[Thardy]

Where do you find Zorkis?

[NickTrop]

Originally Posted by Thardy

Where do you find Zorkis?

eBay, there were a few. While I know the Jupiters and the Industars are fine lenses, I wanted to dedicate this to the Summar. Actually, buying just the body was less than I expected - $15, cost more to ship ($18).

[NickTrop]

Originally Posted by gb hill

Oh! you added to your thread. Now I see. Nick you got a heck of a deal. Less than what I payed for my elmar 50/3.5 to go with my zorki 2c. Way to go.

Thank you! The power of "sniping", plus some luck, I suppose. (Don't throw rocks. I snipe. It makes no sense whatsoever to bid early on eBay. You just run up the prices.)

[NickTrop]

Originally Posted by raid

Nick,

My first Summar was pristine optically, and it was stolen from my office, with a Zorki. Now I got my second Summar, and I will tomorrow pick up two developed and scanned rolls of film with it. I did well with the first Summar. Let's wait and see how the second Summar did.

Good luck with your set.

Raid

That's why I keep the Yashica GSN in my office as my "office camera". Plus, in my job I'm the designated photographer and I like the Yash but no loss in a $$$ sense if it's stolen. I leave it out in the open on my desk.

This piece of kit, however, will not be in the office.

[palec]

Summar is indeed wonderful lens, sometimes I miss the sharpness, but it definitely has soul.

"

[xayraa33]

I hope the 15 dollar Zorki 4k is in good nick and not another russian roulette buy.

[murrayatuptown]

Sorry to derail the focus of this thread, but I'm curious what descriptive terms people would use for the Argus C3 50 mm lens.

Your descriptions here are interesting in that they are more 'emotional' than the descriptions I read about the Argus (i.e., 'surprisingly good performer within it's limitations...that's cold & analytical and gives of no sense ofhow people really feel about it...maybe no opinion :O) ).

Thanks

Murray

[NickTrop]

Originally Posted by palec

Summar is indeed wonderful lens, sometimes I miss the sharpness, but it definitely has soul.

"

Cool shot! Actually, if you scan you can cheat it and add a little sharpness, post. I wouldn't mess with contrast levels, though.

[NickTrop]

Originally Posted by murrayatuptown

Sorry to derail the focus of this thread, but I'm curious what descriptive terms people would use for the Argus C3 50 mm lens.

Your descriptions here are interesting in that they are more 'emotional' than the descriptions I read about the Argus (i.e., 'surprisingly good performer within it's limitations...that's cold & analytical and gives of no sense ofhow people really feel about it...maybe no opinion :O) ).

Thanks

Murray

Check out some pics of the Summar on Flickr. I haven't shot with it yet, but there's something about the look of that lens I like and even in scans it is pretty distinctive. I actually like the color stuff better than the b&w. Hard to judge it by "MTF"-type talk and adjectives like "sharpness" and "contrasty". One is perhaps only left with "emotional" terms.

[palec]

Originally Posted by NickTrop

Cool shot! Actually, if you scan you can cheat it and add a little sharpness, post. I wouldn't mess with contrast levels, though.

This shot was overexposed and film pushed, the contrast is mostly natural.
Anyway, Summar looks interesting in colour, too. It's a bit saturated and blurred, dreamlike.

[raid]

Here are a few color photos that I took with the Summar before it got stolen.


Raid

http://photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=606483

[reagan]

I've never owned or even held a 4K, so I can't make a judgement there. I just never had the urge, even for $15. I do like the Gabriel & gb hill suggestion to take a look at a Zorki.1.

Except they fit none of Nick's criteria - no lever winder, removable back, slow speeds, 1/1000, or flash synch. (Of course, my Leica.IIIs have slow speeds, but none of the other qualities either. ) And it's likely, even with much patience and diligence, you'd end up looking high and low to find a Zorki.1 for even 4 or 5 times Nick's 4K money. So a Zorki.1 Po.Man would have to change criteria and add some dollars to the pot.

But if it's a Po.Man's.Barnack you're after, the Zorki.1 is just pretty darn close in size and feel... IMHO. Again, I've never even played with a 4K, so I can't compare, but I also very much like the quality build of the Zorki.1. Mine works quite nicely and feels tough as a tank.

I'm with ya 100% though Nick on the Summar choice. I've mostly been shooting 35 & 28mm lately, but my Summar is the one 50 I carry along.

[NickTrop]

Originally Posted by raid

Here are a few color photos that I took with the Summar before it got stolen.


Raid

http://photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=606483

Raid - I think these pictures are absolutely stunning. Great shots.

[NickTrop]

Originally Posted by CVBLZ4

I've never owned or even held a 4K, so I can't make a judgement there. I just never had the urge, even for $15. I do like the Gabriel & gb hill suggestion to take a look at a Zorki.1.

Except they fit none of Nick's criteria - no lever winder, removable back, slow speeds, 1/1000, or flash synch. (Of course, my Leica.IIIs have slow speeds, but none of the other qualities either. ) And it's likely, even with much patience and diligence, you'd end up looking high and low to find a Zorki.1 for even 4 or 5 times Nick's 4K money. So a Zorki.1 Po.Man would have to change criteria and add some dollars to the pot.

But if it's a Po.Man's.Barnack you're after, the Zorki.1 is just pretty darn close in size and feel... IMHO. Again, I've never even played with a 4K, so I can't compare, but I also very much like the quality build of the Zorki.1. Mine works quite nicely and feels tough as a tank.

I'm with ya 100% though Nick on the Summar choice. I've mostly been shooting 35 & 28mm lately, but my Summar is the one 50 I carry along.

I went round and round on it and considered the Feds, other Zorkis, but came around to the Zorki4. I'm a little leery of the price, but perhaps the cameras aren't worth as much as the lens. I know the FSU 50's are supposed to be very good, and from my experience with the MF Kiev 60, I have full confidence in FSU glass, but I wanted one without a lens (have too many 50's already in various mounts...) Low and behold, two were up on the bay.

We'll see how I fared when it comes in. Almost wish it was a little more pricey. The lens, however, is in very good condition optically. Not even light scratches but the barrel has lots of light scratches.

This will go off to DAG after I play with is a spell.

Another Summar fan, I see. Why do people hate this lens?

By the way - that's a sweet looking kit.

[Matthew Allen]

Some interesting thoughts in this thread. Forgive my lack of knowledge, but are there any issues of focus calibration when using Leica glass on FSU cameras? I was under the impression that even though the mounts were interchangeable, it was possible that without adjustment the Leica lens wouldn't focus correctly.

Matthew

[raid]

Originally Posted by NickTrop

This will go off to DAG after I play with is a spell.

Nick,

You do know the cost of sending items to DAG?
Maybe this is the best way; get something at low cost and then have it CLA'd by one of the very best repair people.

Raid

[raid]

Originally Posted by Matthew Allen

Some interesting thoughts in this thread. Forgive my lack of knowledge, but are there any issues of focus calibration when using Leica glass on FSU cameras? I was under the impression that even though the mounts were interchangeable, it was possible that without adjustment the Leica lens wouldn't focus correctly.

Matthew

Matthew: This is a good point that you have raised. I usually use FSU lenses on Leica cameras, and I have not found any problems yet. Maybe someone using Leitz lenses on FSU cameras can give us clarifications. I am sure that Brian Sweeney could help out here.

Raid

[reagan]

Originally Posted by NickTrop

"Another Summar fan, I see. Why do people hate this lens?"

My reading has indicated the Summars have a rep for being "soft" as opposed to [I presume] the "tack sharp" of other Leitz glass.

I guesstimate focus 90% of the time, so obviously tack sharp is just not that important in my world. The soft quality was actually rather inviting. But I found, as Raid's great shots demonstrate, there's just not much lacking in the Summar.... IMHO.

After paying a dirt.cheap.po.man's.price, mine came as stiff as a corpse with a bumper crop of fungus and a prize winning deep scratch in the front element. The barrel has 70 years of scratches as well with brass showing on several fronts, which, BTW, meshes well with my brass laden Barnacks. I gave it a good kitchen table clean and lube, eradicating the fungus with balsamic vinegar, removing/replacing old grease and praying over the scratch. It'll never be a showpiece, but I'm quite content with it's performance. Looking forward to your findings on the 4K. Poor.Man's.Leica sounds like a good ongoing experiment.

Matthew, I only have two Leica lenses; the Summar and an Elmar 9cm. Both are 1936 vintage. So in my limited experience (and failing eyesight ) as far as Leica lens on FSU bodies, thus far I've only used these two lenses on Zorki.1s and have had no problem. I consider myself fortunate.

But I would hazard a guess that there's no guarantees either way; that they'll work or need work. Despite what the factory's original intent was, in both Germany and Russia, the fact is, old cameras and old lenses that are 50 to 70 years along have almost assuredly been taken apart and put back together numerous times by pillaging bunglers like me. And even the best advertising photos don't reveal the aftermath's condition. You just can't know what has been mis-aligned, mal-adjusted and generally screwed up until you get it in your hands.

Should they work? Yes. Can they work? Yes. Will they work when you first pull them out of the brown paper wrapping and yak hair string? Who knows? "Finding out is the fun part..." the voices tell him as he awaits the postman with twitching eyes and trembling hands.