Here in New York City I saw recently a 50mm Summarit f/1.5 chrome, M mount, near mint s/n 139xxxxx around $500.00 I am now having second thoughts whether to buy a new Cron or this one. For you guys outhere who have used this lens is it good enough for low light photography or at par at least to the new generation of summilux. Thanks for your input.

-- Ed Gaddi (edgaddi@yahoo.com), October 01, 2001

Answers

Ed:

I think you'll be a lot happier with the newer 'Cron, unless you are looking for a classic old-style Leica lens look....

I copied the following from the cameraquest site for you...

>50/1.5 Summarit Chrome: This is an early 50's version of a "super" speed lens. While good examples have their fans they are far a few between. Basically it is a coated pre-war Xenon. Noticeably softer than the Summilux that followed it, it can still give wonderful but not super sharp results. Again, very prone to front lens scratches. Likely to be encountered fogged from original owner, see Fogging.

1st version, fixed aperture scale and movable aperture ring 2nd version, fixed aperture index and movable aperture scale<

Click here for a link to that site, and more information on Leica and Leica-mount lenses...

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), October 01, 2001.

My first Leica after lusting for so long was a nice M3 and a Summarit. I should have done my homework better. The results with the Summarit were not what I was expecting from a Leica, so I upgraded to a Summicron. After I got the newer lens, I never used the Summarit again, and eventually sold it. The lens is soft wide open and flares if light hits it. After about f2.8 it is respectful, and by 5.6-11 really very good. A couple of years after I sold it I was looking at some portraits I shot with it... wide open window light. There is a unique quality that I can't replicate with any of my modern lenses. Now I sometimes wish I still had it. It is flattering to someone who...er...uh... has a less than perfect face.

When I shot wide open with black and white, I under exposed the film and over developed the negatives. This built up the contrast, which on a normal lens might look bad, but on the Summarit, put it right where it should be.

Overall, it is a so-so lens with a overly optimistic promise of f1.5. In the mid range f-stops it is OK, but any vintage Summicron will beat it hands down for contrast and sharpness.

BTW... My Summarit was a 1957 sn. 15XXXXX, and came on a very good M3 for a total price of 800 Dollars in the 1980's. I would think that you should be able to find a black 1969 or later Summicron for the price quoted for the Summarit. The Summicron will perform better at f/2.0 than the Summarit at f/2.8 or f/4.0, so as far as "real" lens speed, an aperture that you can really use, the Summicron will offer more to you in my opinion.

-- Al Smith (smith58@msn.com), October 01, 2001.

I never shot with the Summarit. I owned a 50mm Summitar for a while but I soon abandoned it in favor of a Summicron-M. It wasn't that it was unsharp--and that isn't of primary importance to me anyway--but the results were just, well, for lack of a better word, muddy. I suppose, to put it in modern terms, the microcontrast was lacking. Everything had a tendency to go to either 'soot & chalk' or to a poorly differentiated muddle of mid tones. I did get some nice results with it, but, overall, I much prefer the Summicron.

Peter Hughes Photography

-- Peter Hughes (ravenart@pacbell.net), October 01, 2001.

The Summarit 50/1.5 lens was produced from 1949-1960 in screw mount and later (starting 1953-54) also in bayonet mount, for use on the newly introduced M3. The early ones have a very bluish coating, later improved. The is not any kind of a Xenon (that notion is a mistake): its design, although still 7 elements, is very different. [The latter is a pre-war lens developed by Leitz and introduced in 1935-36, but utilizing the Schneider name because of pattent problems. It featured high speed and not very good optics.]

The Summarits have many problems. First, they used a soft coating and almost always have cleaning marks on front and rear glass (sometimes severe). Secondly, they often have fogging: the explanation is debatable, but the glass is rarely clear. Third, even if the glass were perfect (which I can almost guarantee it is not), this is not a very good lens - by modern standards, not even close.

It is quite soft wide open, and does not improve to the anything approaching the quality of the 50/2.0 Summicron of any period. The first version of the 50/1.4 Summilux introduced in 1958 was a far better lens and hard coated. The second version of the Summilux (intriduced in the mid 1960s) was even better. As a user, any Summicron or Summilux is a significantly better lens.

Leave the Summarits to collectors (like me). They are not bad for a lens designed by 1949, but you can do much better in terms of the optics.

-- Eliot (erosen@lij.edu), October 01, 2001.

Ed:

Any modern Summicron or Summilux lens will blow the Summarit away in terms of optical performance. Even the modern Cosina Voigtlander 50mm lens will be significantly better at a price much lower than $500! IMHO do NOT buy this lens!..............

-- Muhammad Chishty (applemac97@aol.com), October 01, 2001.

While on the Summarit subject, I've got an old Summarit, and the iris diaphram doesn't have click stops. Is this typical, or a defect? Thanks, Phil

-- Phil Stiles (Stiles@metrocast.net), October 01, 2001.

Is the lens 'worth' 500.00? Check these images out and decide. http://www.deepturtle.com/steve/photos/pod/16apr00.html

-- Doug Ford (dford@san.rr.com), October 01, 2001.

Steve Holloway's images on the site above really sparkle. Old lenses can be great, but even so the image is certain to be softer at f1.5. Even the beautiful old pre-asph f/1.4 35mm Summilux which I have used is soft wide open. Do you want a soft image or an ultra sharp one? Do you want the lens to perform similarly at all apertures? Sometimes it is just a matter of taste. I understand a lot of Leica's subsequent investment has gone into improving lens performance at full aperture. The old Summicron f/2 is fine wide open, the new one would be even better. Do you need the extra speed? If so, and if you can afford it, I reckon the f1.4 Summilux would be your best bet. Another question: do you need 50mm or would you be better off with a 50mm 'cron and a fast 35?

-- David Killick (Dalex@inet.net.nz), October 02, 2001.

As per your views and comments I am now more inclined to get a cron, and as you've said this lens is soft wide open, not in my 50mm. If I want softness in my pictures I would prefer my 90mm T/E for portraiture. If my pocket is deep enough I would get the Summilux aahh but this is another story. Thanks I appreciate the help.

-- Ed Gaddi (edgaddi@yahoo.com), October 02, 2001.