Leica 50mm Summitar f-2 (1939) with Tri-X samples

[Nikanon]

Some images made with Tri-x 400 at 800 developed in D76 with the Leica Summitar. My copy is very scratched internally and externally.

 

[StoneNYC]

If you would like to share your images, please consider being a subscriber, rather than making a random post about your images.

 

[Nikanon]

If you would like to share your images, please consider being a subscriber, rather than making a random post about your images.

I'm not sure what you mean? I'm not sharing the images for the sake of sharing photographs, but to show how a lens performs. I thought a real world experience would be more useful than a test chart. It's useful to be able to search a subject line when looking for lens performance and get actual images.

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

Looks good. Likely in brighter conditions or shot towards the sun you'll have some flare issues but otherwise quite the performer. I have one with few scratches but some separation on the edges. Probably why it was so cheap. But I like its signature so much I've kept even though I also have a 50/2 Summicron DR.

 

[Nikanon]

Looks good. Likely in brighter conditions or shot towards the sun you'll have some flare issues but otherwise quite the performer. I have one with few scratches but some separation on the edges. Probably why it was so cheap. But I like its signature so much I've kept even though I also have a 50/2 Summicron DR.

Yes, I'm sure it will flare plenty, I like to shoot with the sun at my back mostly. I actually had a 50mm rigid Summicron, a 50mm f1.5 Nokton, and sold both of those because I don't use wider than 28mm on my Ms, but when I got a screwmount, the little Collapsible Summitar became perfect for a pocket camera and performs exceptionally at f-2.

 

[StoneNYC]

I'm not sure what you mean? I'm not sharing the images for the sake of sharing photographs, but to show how a lens performs. I thought a real world experience would be more useful than a test chart. It's useful to be able to search a subject line when looking for lens performance and get actual images.

I'm sorry, that wasn't clear to me, my apologies.

 

[summicron1]

pictures look fine, nothing wrong with a summitar, although Leitz obviously thought there was so they made the Summicron.

I like to tell folks that some of the greatest images in the world, ever, were shot with uncoated optics and lenses that would be considered junk by modern standards -- really, what matters is the shooter, not the lens. And a few scratches won't hurt at all, although a lot can degrade the image. These older lenses have defects that do give them a distinct look, although that look often makes a more pleasing image.

I'd be embarrassed to admit how many of last year's really good shots were taken with a Holga, for example.

 

[StoneNYC]

pictures look fine, nothing wrong with a summitar, although Leitz obviously thought there was so they made the Summicron.

I like to tell folks that some of the greatest images in the world, ever, were shot with uncoated optics and lenses that would be considered junk by modern standards -- really, what matters is the shooter, not the lens. And a few scratches won't hurt at all, although a lot can degrade the image. These older lenses have defects that do give them a distinct look, although that look often makes a more pleasing image.

I'd be embarrassed to admit how many of last year's really good shots were taken with a Holga, for example.

Since I've already bumbled once, I won't say anything about the comparisons of Leica owners and Holga lomographers...

 

[summicron1]

Since I've already bumbled once, I won't say anything about the comparisons of Leica owners and Holga lomographers...

It's all about the tool. I haul leicas around a lot, but one of the best shots i got last year, the one i printed up and gave to my wife for her birthday, was shot with a Holga on Tri=X that expired around 1978.

When you are just goofing, sometimes that's when you capture the moment.

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

In the right hands, a Summitar will not leave one wanting any other lens. That's my opinion anyway.

The flare when shooting into the sun looks lovely, by the way.

Attached picture shot at f/2.8, Kodak TMax 400 in Xtol, printed on Forte Polywarmton, toned in Moersch Carbon.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

pictures look fine, nothing wrong with a summitar, although Leitz obviously thought there was so they made the Summicron.

I like to tell folks that some of the greatest images in the world, ever, were shot with uncoated optics and lenses that would be considered junk by modern standards -- really, what matters is the shooter, not the lens..

I agree but,why isit that the folks who say equipment doesn't matter always have the best money can buy?:confused:

 

[erikg]

I agree but,why isit that the folks who say equipment doesn't matter always have the best money can buy?:confused:

Because they bought until they couldn't go any further and found the pictures weren't any better, so now they know!

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

It's all about the tool. I haul leicas around a lot, but one of the best shots i got last year, the one i printed up and gave to my wife for her birthday, was shot with a Holga on Tri=X that expired around 1978.

When you are just goofing, sometimes that's when you capture the moment.

View attachment 80542

Wonderful image.

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

In the right hands, a Summitar will not leave one wanting any other lens. That's my opinion anyway.

The flare when shooting into the sun looks lovely, by the way.

Attached picture shot at f/2.8, Kodak TMax 400 in Xtol, printed on Forte Polywarmton, toned in Moersch Carbon.

Beautiful, beautiful image Thomas!

 

[summicron1]

I agree but,why isit that the folks who say equipment doesn't matter always have the best money can buy?:confused:

In my case I had the chance to buy a leica early on, bought an Exakta instead because it had more bells and whistles, and learned something about bells and whistles and so said "nothing but the best from here on out."

Leica images aren't really all THAT much better, but as tools the cameras are amazingly lovely to handle.

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

Ok, it's been too long since I've used this lens. I just mounted my Summitar to my M2 to take on a family hike today. Going shoot the last few rolls of bulk-loaded APX400 I have left.

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

By the way, no connection to the seller but if you're looking to mount more common hoods to your Summitar these work great:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/360817729833

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

By the way, no connection to the seller but if you're looking to mount more common hoods to your Summitar these work great:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/360817729833

Yes, I have one for mine, and it works a treat. That little extra ring provides enough 'hood' for most applications by itself. But of course a real hood is unbeatable.

 

[StoneNYC]

I agree but,why isit that the folks who say equipment doesn't matter always have the best money can buy?:confused:

Because many of the people who can afford something like a brand new Leica, don't actually know what a good image is or how to make one... Except ny accident, Hehe

 

[andrew plume]

Some images made with Tri-x 400 at 800 developed in D76 with the Leica Summitar. My copy is very scratched internally and externally.

btw, I really like your first image

regards

andrew

 

[andrew plume]

Since I've already bumbled once, I won't say anything about the comparisons of Leica owners and Holga lomographers...

Stone Hi

btw, how do you find the time to post what you do, not only on here but also on the LFPF, and other sites too I'm sure.........?

.............ok, I have both a Leica M3 and a Holga (not to mention many others), it's all about your mood at the time, isn't it.............I've just loaded some expired HP4 and Fuji 160 into 6x7 and 6x9 Ensign folders plus some Agfa 100 into a previously unused Zeiss Contessa Prontor SLK Spezial, for some hopefully candid/street stuff at the weekend - maybe I'll also go with the Holga, maybe not

regards

andrew

 

[benjiboy]

To be honest these pictures could have been made with any decent 50mm lens.

 

[David Lyga]

Gee, Nikanon, I did not think I would ever see pictures from Philadelphia (where I live). You seem to have captured its essence (although I do not know if that is a positive or pejorative statement). I have stood in that Megabus line many times: It is almost a subway stop to New York. - David Lyga

 

[agmazza]

pictures look fine, nothing wrong with a summitar, although Leitz obviously thought there was so they made the Summicron.

I like to tell folks that some of the greatest images in the world, ever, were shot with uncoated optics and lenses that would be considered junk by modern standards -- really, what matters is the shooter, not the lens. And a few scratches won't hurt at all, although a lot can degrade the image. These older lenses have defects that do give them a distinct look, although that look often makes a more pleasing image.

I'd be embarrassed to admit how many of last year's really good shots were taken with a Holga, for example.

+1!

 

[Dali]

Because many of the people who can afford something like a brand new Leica, don't actually know what a good image is or how to make one... Except ny accident, Hehe

Stone, I find your comment borderline. Having money to afford a Leica has very little to do with photographic skills. If you disagree, feel free to elaborate.