Okay. I ended up with another 75 Summilux as part of another batch of Leica gear I purchased. I was beginning to think that the Leica gods really wanted me to use one of these, so I tried it out one more time. I still think it is big, but at least now I don't hate it! I cannot see hanging on to it as I still prefer the tighter view of my 90APO, and if I need f1.4 I have it on my 50 and 35 -- in a lot less space.

This one is in near-mint condition, with just the slightest signs of use on the barrel. The glass is pristine, clearly better than what James has been getting as new from B&H! There is no oil, no haze, and about two miniscule specks of internal dust. I am going to put it up on eBay in a few days, but thought I would offer it ot this group first, as it is so clean. I think a very good price at $1325, AND I will also include a Leica E60 UV filter (also mint)! Satisfaction guaranteed, buyer pays shipping. Payment by PayPal is preferred

Here is a shot:

Rear view...

Top view...

Please email me offline if you are interested.

Thanks!

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), March 04, 2002

Answers

Nice...hmn, 2500 bucks for a B&H 75 lux or $1325 for this nice example. Sounds like a good deal. *ponder* I do know that kbcamera.com has the gray market ones for 1800 bucks. But a nice example can be hard to come by sometimes. What year is this 75mm? Was the previous owner careful with it? I guess the optical formula hasn't changed since 1st production, only the mechanical to some degree.

-- James (snodoggydogg@hotmail.com), March 04, 2002.

James asked:

What year is this 75mm? I'm not sure, but it appears to be a second version according to the Cameraquest site. FWIW, focus is buttery smooth, and aperture operates smoothly with positive clicks.

Was the previous owner careful with it? Again, it sure appears so! By looking at it, I can't imagine it has seen more than a few rolls of film behind it.

Again, satisfaction guaranteed -- 7 day return in same condition.

:-),

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), March 04, 2002.

Your direct email didn't work.

I am interested, but understand there is a Canada version then the later German one. Supposedly the German is a better design (new design) and sharper. Which is this. If it is the German, we need to talk.

-- charles mason (c.mason@uaf.edu), March 04, 2002.

I tried your email right after posting a response, but haven't heard from you yet. I am curious if it's made in Germany as well. Thanks.

-- James (snodoggydogg@hotmail.com), March 04, 2002.

MY EMAIL IS DOWN. Sorry guys, I just found out MSN is having a HUGE server problem and they have no idea when they'll have it fixed.

Re the version this is, here is the quote off of Gandy's site:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 75/1.4 Summilux introduced in 1980. Superb reputation. Personally, it's just too short for my tastes to be a viable portrait lens. All 75/1.4 Summilux are low production future collectibles. The extra 25% focusing accuracy of the M3 or new 1998 M6 .85 will make a difference with this lens. A big heavy lens with a great reputation and many enthusiastic fans.

First version with detachable hood. Relatively rare, E58 filters Second version from number 3223300 with built in hood, E60 filters All versions to this point made in Canada.

Third version. German made after Hughes sold the Midland Ontario Canadian Elcan plant to Raytheon and production moved back to Germany in 1998. Though not announced yet, this version is said to be smaller than it's predecessor. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Mine must be a second version, but it looks identical to the new ones at my local camera store. Maybe the "new" version is still "not announced yet"??? I did not test the lens, but the the images I got with it were very sharp, with crisp contrast.

It is what you see...

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), March 04, 2002.

James: Now I'm really curious... You've had three of these lenses, all new, so ostensibly all German. According to Gandy this version is supposed to be smaller and have a revised optical forula. Do your new ones look smaller or different than this lens? This definately takes E60 filters and has a built-in hood, so do the new "smaller" ones take smaller filters? Can anybody definitively provide information on the third version differences? John Collier???

Thanks!

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), March 04, 2002.

Sorry I can't tell fully from the photos, but yours looks the same as the ones I've had (new version). Mine's made in Germany, and takes the 60mm filter size. I don't know though, would hafta put both in my hands.

:)

-- James (snodoggydogg@hotmail.com), March 04, 2002.

Yes, I suspect that the "improvements" in the newer German version of this lens are the same "improvements" that went into the new German version of the Noctilux... (Which were essentially "none")

:-),

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), March 04, 2002.

I went home for lunch and looked at the lens -- It says "made in Canada" on it. I also checked Erwin's book for information on it -- he makes reference to only one 75 Summilux, not three, and shows only one optical formula... Basically he says that the 75 performs better than the 90 pre-APO Summicron, and not as well as the 90 APO Summicron; which matches with my experiences. FWIW...

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), March 04, 2002.

-- SALE PENDING --

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), March 04, 2002.

A lot of misinformation on this link. There is only one optical formula for this lens (7-elements), orginally designed and produced in Canada. Later German lenses have the SAME optics. The most recent lenses have a slight reduction in weight (?20-30 g at most) due to the use of a lighter alloy for the barrel. The best made 75/1.4 Summilux M lenses in my opinion are the earlier ones made by Leitz Canada. All lenses should perform the same. This lens was never redesigned.

-- Eliot (erosen@lij.edu), March 04, 2002.

Elliot: Thank you for the clarification!!!

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), March 04, 2002.

That's what I read as well somewhere, that the optical formula has been unaltered since the beginning, except the fact that the mechanical formula has changed. Who's the sale pending to? Me? I'll go check my hotmail account.

-- James (snodoggydogg@hotmail.com), March 04, 2002.

A pity your email was down, on the day you solicit a sale, so those who contacted you earlier couldn't get all the information you provided. I'd like to have had an even shot at buying this...

-- charles mason (c.mason@uaf.edu), March 04, 2002.

Guys i think that if there is anyone we can trust on this forum, it is Jack. Don't be hesitant on purchasing from him. He seems to be very trustworthy.

James, didn't you just get a 75 Lux? Wanting to buy Jack's and return yours to B&H? Sneaky, but financially tactful. Good luck my friend.

-- Kristian (leicashot@hotmail.com), March 04, 2002.

322 serial numbers were ISSUED in 1983 - Jack's was probably built then or with 1-2 years after.

The very first 75's did not have built-in lens hoods - they had the Frankenstein pins for a bayonet hood. Which may confuse people about optical designs since they look really weird and different - but it IS the same glass.

Leica must have been going through some kind of design turmoil around 1980, since the small 90 f/2 and the original 21 f/2.8 (both introduced then) also both had substantially cosmetic redesigns during or soon after their introductions.

Ohh, Jack! This lens falls right in the middle of my 'all-Canadian collection' - and a good price, too. But like you, I just like that little extra reach - plus of course, the size of the Tele-Elmarit.

-- Andy Piper (apidens@denver.infi.net), March 04, 2002.

Oh well! I haven't gotten a response from Jack either from his msn account. So Mr. Mason, twasn't me who clenched the deal. Early bird gets the worm? Who knows...

-- James (snodoggydogg@hotmail.com), March 04, 2002.

Charles: My appologies, I had no way of knowing MSN was going to have server issues when I posted... I did post that fact here as soon as I found out. But in all fairness to me, you did imply in your first response that you were only interested if it were a German version.

James: You did not sound particularly interested either as it was a Canadian version, not a German version. My appologies to you as well if you were in fact interested. Again, in my defense James, since you had so many problems with getting a good new version, you should remeber that I DID offer this lens to you BEFORE I listed it openly -- and you declined!

Everyone else who is curious: I will not reveal the name of the individual who bought it, but suffice it to say that they are a regular contributer to this forum. If they wish to identify themselves, they can certainly do so. FWIW, this person was particularly resourceful in locating me... They took the initiative to track me down via the internet, got hold of my phone number (I am listed), and called me directly to seal the deal. IMO, they got a prince of a lens at a superb price. There is the off possibility they will not be satisfied upon inspection, and if so, upon its return I promise to offer this to you first Charles!

Regards,

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), March 04, 2002.

Wasn't Dixon again, was it?

-- Ken Shipman (kennyshipman@aol.com), March 04, 2002.

It's all good! Have fun with your new lens buyer...

:)

-- James (snodoggydogg@hotmail.com), March 04, 2002.

Ken: I will state for the record that it was NOT Mike Dixon!

;-),

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), March 04, 2002.

For a second I thought he was returning the first lens and $200 for the 2nd lens. [;-)]

-- Ken Shipman (kennyshipman@aol.com), March 04, 2002.

Jack, if I guess correctly who the buyer was, how much rebate do I get when I buy your next lens?

-- Michael Kastner (kastner@zedat.fu-berlin.de), March 05, 2002.

Mike K: Everybody here gets the rebate anyway, as I build it into the price at the start :-)

Cheers,

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), March 05, 2002.