I have a 1970 50mm Summicron-M (2nd generation?) as my only lens, and I like it very much.
Out of curriosity, I would like to know a little more about its performance compared to the other generations of Summicrons, but haven't found any on the web.
Stephen Gandy briefly mentions that it is regarded slightly lower than both the Rigid/DR, and the newer designs.
Erwin Puts's report (http://www.imx.nl/photosite/leica/mseries/testm/scronhist.html) on his homepage only compares the collapsible, the rigid, the DR and the current version, and does not include the '69-'79 model.
I would love to hear about any personal experiences may have, or if you have encountered some comparative tests you could quote.

Thanks


-- Niels H. S. Nielsen (nhsn@ruc.dk), September 24, 2001

Answers

Niels: I have a Summicron 50mm of the same generation as yours and enjoy it very much. I recently had it cleaned and adjusted by Leica and find the lens a joy to use. I also have a 50mm collapsible Summicron from the 50's which I bought with my M-3. This lens is also an excellent performer but produces different results. The collapsible lens is "softer" and works especially well with colour print films. I usually use the 70's vintage Summicron with black and white print film and transparency film. Both lenses are excellent performers but in different ways. In my opinion, no one Leica lens is any better or worse that any other, they are just different and product different results. I hope this helps you.Keep in touch.

-- John Alfred Tropiano (jat18@psu.edu), September 24, 2001.

I have this lens, a 1969 black Summicron serial number 2339XXX, which came on an M4 I bought in the '80's. I also have the last version of the current Summicron, right before they removed the focusing tab and added a collapsible hood. While I read with interest the many reviews out there, I mostly put stock in my own photos made with my own lenses.

One day I was bored so I shot a roll of slide film and tested both of these lenses back to back in real life situations, not test charts. When I lay the slides on the light table, I would be hard pressed to choose one lens over the other as "better", and I feel I could freely use either without prejudice. I'm sure someone can show me on paper where I am wrong, but I don't take pictures of paper, just real three dimensional subjects. In many of the shots, I had my subject hold the second lens in their hand, which was a good thing to do, since without seeing the unused lens in the photo it would have been impossible to tell which lens was on the camera.

Even though I have both of these lenses, I use the current version 99% of the time simply because of the fact that I can shoot faster and more certain with the focusing tab. When I do use the older lens, every once in awhile, I am shocked at how much I miss the tab. If hypothetically the current lens was not as good optically, I would still use it due to the ergonomics.

-- Al Smith (smith58@msn.com), September 24, 2001.

I own the 1969 version as well as a current version (without tab, I dislike tabs immensely). At f/2 (and f/2.8 to a lesser extent) the newer lens is contrastier, but not by much. From f/4 they are identical to my eyes. The older lens is thinner in diameter and lighter, and shares a shade with my older 35/2. Together with the thin 90 T-E, 21/3.4S/A and 135 T-E they are what I used for about 2 decades until I started believing all the hype and accumulated a set of the latest lenses. Two things increased noticeably and significantly with the new set: my credit-card balance and the weight of my camera bag. Seeing other gains requires a substantial amount of my imagination.

-- Jay (infinitydt@aol.com), September 24, 2001.

Here is an article about the many versions of the Summicron for M Leicas. The author seems to have his own agenda about the superiority of the older dual range lenses, but it might be of some interest in your quest for information.

So you will know, the black 1969-1979 Summicron is referenced as catalog number 11817, and the current model is 11819. Having these numbers in front of you will make the article more readable when comparisons are made.

click here

-- Al Smith (smith58@msn.com), September 24, 2001.