35/2.8 Summaron- Good enough?

[ernstk]

Every year or so, I consider supplementing my 2.8 Summaron with a 35/2 Summicron. Then I look at some of the results that I'm getting with the Summaron and I wonder if it's worth it.

How much would I gain from the newer lens?

Ernst

35/2.8 Summaron, M2, Ilford XP2

[like2fiddle]

The 35/2.8 Summaron was my first 35 lens. I have owned, and sold/traded away a 35 Summicron since I liked the images from the Summaron better. The extra stop was nice but the results with the Summaron, at least the one I own vs. the Summicron I owned, are better, particularly in B & W.

[maddoc]

You would gain one stop .... The Summaron f/2.8 is said to be better than the first 35/2.0 (8 elements) at f/2.8.

The newer Summicron lenses should be less prone to flare and give more saturated colors but for BW the old 2.8 Summaron is not easy to beat. I had one (M3 version) and only sold it because I already had the 35mm Summilux pre-ASPH and need the two extra-stops.

[Oh Two]

I have both, and my 2.8 I bought new in the 60's. Without a doubt it is one of the finest 35's ever made, and early Summicrons can't touch it. It is fantastic for B&W and color. It is the main reason I would spring for an M9.

The 3.5 is another story, I bought a very wonderful mint 3.5 for my IIIf. The
3.5 image looks a tad dated, like an older Elmar. It's sharp enough for 8x10's, it's contrasty enough to get a kick in Photoshop, but with color it doesn't have the sparkle and saturation of the newer version. Don't get me wrong, it's not that the old design is compromising, because it it is very small, but a Summitar (which is as old) has wonderful color saturation and sharpness that competes with the best of the new lenses, and has the look that is pure artistry. The 2.8 exceeds at this as well.

[Brian Sweeney]

I have the 35/2.8 Summicron with eyes for the M3, and it has never disappointed. I just do not feel the need to buy the Summicron, and if I need the extra speed I use a Canon 35/2 picked up for under $200. I suspect its like comparing the Nikkor 35/2.5 to the Nikkor 35/1.8. I have both, one is faster than the other, both are equally sharp. The F2.5 is the "I don't get no respect lens" as it is slower.

[Rico]

I bought the 'cron v4 - my first M lens. Then, on a whim, I added the v3. I liked it so much that I got another for backup. All these now live on a shelf because my favorite WA turned out to be... the Summaron 35/2.8!

[David Murphy]

It's a first rate lens by any measure, old or new. I'd not sell it.

[fotomeow]

Wow, Ernst, if the pic posted at the beginning is a typical result of the Summaron, I would say the search is over unless you really need an extra stop or two. The pic atop seems to have really nice spatial depth, contrast, and overrall natural feel to it. Thanks, maybe I'll start looking for a Summaron. I have a fast CV 35/1.4 if ya want to trade!

[Nokton48]

I bought an M-Mount 35mm F2.8 Summaron last year, and I love it. Twenty years ago I owned the V1 35mm F2 Summicron, I think I prefer the Summaron. I also have the 35mm F2 Canon, I like to alternate between the two lenses.

Keeping both.

[John Lawrence]

The Summaron 2.8 is an outstanding little lens, and the only real differences between it and my Summicron Asph are the extra stop and more "modern" look to the pictures the Asph gives.

I've had no problems with flare with my Summaron (never use a lens hood) and can't really see any difference in colour saturation between images taken with it and with my Asph - although as I use the Summaron on an early M this could be down to using a handheld meter.

The Summaron 2.8 really is a gem of a lens and a bit of a sleeper too - although recently prices are starting to creep up.

John

[ernstk]

Thanks to everyone for the feedback.

I guess my rationale for wanting a Summicron was that since it is a much newer lens, it must be 'better' than my 40 year old Summaron. Also, I think much of the desire might be based on GAS, rather than logic.

The photo posted at the top of this thread is representative of the quality that I get from my Summaron and what I'm hearing seems to suggest that I should hang on to this lens.

Regards
Ernst

[helenhill]

can't go wrong with a 3.5 OR 2.8 summaron

[helenhill]

hers the 2.8, neopan 1600. Moi covered in mucho grain....

[helenhill]

btw, ERNST
i ADORE your shot w/ the summaron
Beautifully CRISP , love the Detail

[ernstk]

Originally Posted by helenhill

btw, ERNST
i ADORE your shot w/ the summaron
Beautifully CRISP , love the Detail

Thanks Helen. It's one of my favourites too. It was a group of people watching some street artists at Edinburgh Festival a couple of years ago. I hadn't anticipated capturing such a range of facial expressions.
Your photo of the guy in the hat and sunglasses is excellent; very atmospheric.

Ernst