Because I am looking to buy a used 35mm summicron f2.0, I wanted to know if there were any Web sites that might distinguish the different versions and pro/cons... or opinions?

Thanks in advance

-- Hyatt Lee (shahmat@ms63.hinet.net), April 21, 2002

Answers

Try Stephen Gandy's CameraQuest site: Here is a link to the Leica M mount lens page:

http://www.cameraquest.com/mlenses.htm

Good luck!

Steve www.stevehoffman.tv

-- Steve Hoffman (shoffman2@socal.rr.com), April 21, 2002.

This may also give you an insight http://www.imx.nl/photosite/leica/mseries/testm/m2-35.html

-- Steve Barnett (barnet@globalnet.co.uk), April 21, 2002.

If you want want a S'cron 35mm there's only one real choice. Go for the pre-ASPH version (see picture). Should not be difficult to find used. Outstanding lens.

-- Bert Keuken (bkkn@wanadoo.nl), April 21, 2002.

Ben, why do you say that the pre-ASPH is better than the current version?

-- Jack Belen (jbelen@aol.com), April 21, 2002.

Try too.

The pix don't show it, but either the '69 or '75 version had a little semaphore arm sticking out from the aperture ring - which I wouldn't like, but others may.

At least you'll know what you're looking at.

I think there are relatively small jumps in quality with each new generation in the 35 f/2s. Personally I like my v.4 lens - but I can see the softness and coma (smearing) in the corners at f/2 - f/4.5. OTOH it was good enough that it took 20 years for Leica to replace it.

-- Andy Piper (apidens@denver.infi.net), April 21, 2002.

Well, I butchered THAT html - but it still seems to work. 8^)

-- Andy Piper (apidens@denver.infi.net), April 21, 2002.

Even with softness on the edges at f/2, I still like my 8 element 1965 Wetzlar Summicron.

-- chris a williams (LeicaChris@worldnet.att.net), April 21, 2002.

I'm with bert on this one, Thats my version...great value for money and a lens with a punch like mike tyson!

john

-- John Tobias (johntobias@hotmail.com), April 22, 2002.

"why do you say that the pre-ASPH is better than the current version?"

"Better" is too absolute a term - but here's why I PREFER mine.

1) Lighter and more compact

2) I prefer the color rendition - the 1997 ASPHs (like most new Leica designs) run a little Nikon/Zeiss pink.

3) The v.4 lens is plenty sharp in the center wide-open - it's the contrast and corner sharpness that suffer - a little and a lot, respectively (and are improved in the ASPH - which no doubt really IS the 'better' lens in that regard.)

-- Andy Piper (apidens@denver.infi.net), April 22, 2002.

yes, the 4th version is an excellent lens given its compact dimensions and slightly enlarged aperture ring. The ASPH version is better but the lens is also bigger. Have to judge for yourself what you value most.

-- Karl Yik (karl.yik@dk.com), April 22, 2002.

The fact of the matter is that I never met a Leica 35 summicron I didn't like. I used an original 8 element chrome version from Wetzlar for almost 30 years. Beautiful lens, I sold it this year to finance a used 35 asph lux which is fantastic. I bought a 4th version pre aspheric late model from Germany, another beautiful lens, light, sharp, great bokeh and contrast. I traded that one for a 35 asph cron which I usually carry if I go out of the house with only one camera and lens. I wish I had both of those other lenses back for their individual image qualities and elegance of use but I wouldn't give up either of my current 35s either, and how many can you use. I also have the 35 R cron. This is a very nice lens that I believe is more like the 2nd or 3rd M cron in lens configuration and real Leica look (clear, sharp, contrasty very pleasant picture that isn't harsh). It takes beautiful pictures. I don't think you can go too far wrong with any of the cron 35s. It somes down to what you want in the way of weight and handling and type of image you want to produce. Cheers!

-- Don (wgpinc@yahoo.com), April 22, 2002.