Hi, does anyone know about the 35mm Summilux first version? I want to know the following:

1). What is the difference between the E41 types up to 2,166,700 and the "series 7" thereafter? WHAT is a seven series??

2). What is the correct hood for the E41 type? OLLUX/12522 or 12506?

3). Are all these early lense only made out of Canada? None from Germany?

4). Aparently the early ones had 2 aspheric elements (up to what serial number were these), but then they switched to one element later. Anyone know why? cost? therefore cheapening of product and hence imaging quality?

5). Apparently the chrome (M2 ones) are rarer than the black ones, yet in the Hove International price guide the black lenses are valued more than the chrome ones. Anyone know why this is?

Those that have this lense, how do you rate it? (especially for B&W) Is there any pros/cons of this lens I should know about?

I would greatly appreciate any information to clear these discrepancies. Many thanks,

-- sparkie (sparkie@mailcity.com), February 20, 2002

Answers

Dis-regard Q4. I was getting mixed up with the Aspheric version.

-- sparkie (sparkie@mailcity.com), February 20, 2002.

I had a Canadian 35mm Summilux for the M several years ago. It was basically useless wide open--very disappointing. Razor sharp when stopped down but I bought it for the f/1.4 aperture, so... Anyway, it was black, with a focusing tab. Don't recall the serial number. It cost me about $900. My advice: don't buy it.

-- Peter Hughes (ravenart@pacbell.net), February 20, 2002.

What Peter said. My version II pre-ASPH Lux is quite mediocre wide open; sharp otherwise. Better to have any of the various 35mm Summicrons.

-- Bob Fleischman (RFXMAIL@prodigy.net), February 20, 2002.

Just another opinion...I think it's a great lens. I have a black one with eyes for an M3. (1972) The 'quality' of the images is not as razor sharp as some folks like, but it's one of my favorite lenses. One of the reasons it glows a bit at 1.4 is that Leitz figured most low light situations are high contrast situations and therefore a lens with a softer contrast rendering wide open might be useful... they stuck with the basic design of this lens for thirty years or so...certainly somebody else liked it?

-- Carlin (carlinm@abac.com), February 20, 2002.

Hi Sparkie,

1).Series Seven is a filter size. The filters have no screw-in ring, and mount behind a detachable ring on the lens front.

2). The OLLUX/12522 type hood matches lenses with serials up to 2166701. Above that requires the 12504 hood. These serials also apply to the different filter sizes.

3). According to Hasbroeck, all these lenses were made in Canada. He adds that those with serials 2166702 and above are optically better. So, the advice is, if you want one go for a series seven model.

I had a later (c1976) example of this lens before buying the Asph version. I thought it had a quality the newer lens doesn't quite match (a plasticity, or 3 dimensional quality), and am very tempted to buy back into it.

-- Tim Franklin (tim_franklin@mac.com), February 20, 2002.

adding info to posts before, First, there are two versions of 35/1.4 (non-asph and asph); then from this two versions we have another two versions.

* First 35/1.4 show up in the late 50's, two years latter leitz put an updated version from 2,166,700, this until mid 90's that came up with the asph ones, first had two aspherics superficies, second only one and made into a lower budget, still with a fine performace wide open.

I have a 1.4 and to be honest is painfull have to think you'll use the widest aperture, is so soft, and with my lens I never know when direct ligths will make a disaster, a better option is a good 'cron.

-- r watson (al1231234@hotmail.com), February 20, 2002.

Important: my 'lux is a second version FROM the first Version; so if this version doesn't get any versed; we'll need another version from versus leicausers, of whom we have so many versions, all versus.

please could you trow some coins

-- r watson (al1231234@hotmail.com), February 20, 2002.