Preference for Barnack 50mm lens

[cliveh]

If you were buying a 50mm lens for a Barnack Leica, which would you choose? I can't decide between a 3.5 Elmar or a F2 Summicron.

 

[mshchem]

Summicron. If you want to get a great lens cheap look at the Nikon 5cm f2.

 

[Moose22]

Summicron. I haven't used the elmar, I'm sure it's fine, but I'm really happy with the summicron. It's hard to describe, not technically absolutely perfect, but the images are just... pleasing. And it's reasonably good wide open, too, so the extra speed is useful.

 

[250swb]

A Summicron. But if the price is too big a rise over an Elmar go for a Summitar the 'prototype' Summicron. It's available both coated and not coated and in ten blade iris or six blade iris. Go for a ten blade coated.

 

[JerseyDoug]

You will eventually want both. I'd start with the Elmar.

 

[awty]

A clean one.

 

[RDW]

The Elmar is small and light and doesn't extend far when collapsed, almost like a body cap, making the camera a very (jacket) pocketable package. They are also relatively easy to find in nice condition. You can use A36 push-on accessories, with vintage filters easy enough to find (though of course they won't have modern coatings). The SOOGZ adapter (now rather overpriced) lets you use E39 filters. But the aperture is fiddly to adjust and awkward to use with A36 filters or the SOOGZ (you can get 19mm filters that fit the thread around the front element, but these are uncommon and the range is limited). The 2.8 Elmar is an improvement in this respect - it has a proper aperture ring and a standard 39mm filter thread. Optically the Elmar is very good - the Leica reputation was built on cameras that were most commonly fitted with this lens.

The collapsible Summicron is becoming increasingly hard to find in nice condition, as the front element is pretty soft. A clean Summitar seems easier to get hold of, and according to Erwin Puts it's a little sharper in the centre wide open than the Summicron, though the Summicron is better across the field and improves more when stopped down. The Summitar also has rather swirly bokeh in some situations, which you may or may not like, but its rendering is otherwise surprisingly 'modern'. It does have a unique conical filter thread, but modern adapters to E39, copies of the original Leitz SNHOO, are readily available. Both these lenses are of course heavier than the Elmar and stick out further even when collapsed. A luxury alternative is the very rare version of the current Summicron made in screwmount as a special edition around the turn of the century.

 

[GregY]

Whatever your choice, the perfect match is a collapsible lens. .....or the 35mm Elmar which is about the size of the retracted 50mm. Alternately if you want a new lens, the VC 50mm f.28 is a very fine lens....or the absolutely tiny black paint VC 40mm Heliar....also a great performer.

 

[guangong]

The Elmar is small and light and doesn't extend far when collapsed, almost like a body cap, making the camera a very (jacket) pocketable package. They are also relatively easy to find in nice condition. You can use A36 push-on accessories, with vintage filters easy enough to find (though of course they won't have modern coatings). The SOOGZ adapter (now rather overpriced) lets you use E39 filters. But the aperture is fiddly to adjust and awkward to use with A36 filters or the SOOGZ (you can get 19mm filters that fit the thread around the front element, but these are uncommon and the range is limited). The 2.8 Elmar is an improvement in this respect - it has a proper aperture ring and a standard 39mm filter thread. Optically the Elmar is very good - the Leica reputation was built on cameras that were most commonly fitted with this lens.

The collapsible Summicron is becoming increasingly hard to find in nice condition, as the front element is pretty soft. A clean Summitar seems easier to get hold of, and according to Erwin Puts it's a little sharper in the centre wide open than the Summicron, though the Summicron is better across the field and improves more when stopped down. The Summitar also has rather swirly bokeh in some situations, which you may or may not like, but its rendering is otherwise surprisingly 'modern'. It does have a unique conical filter thread, but modern adapters to E39, copies of the original Leitz SNHOO, are readily available. Both these lenses are of course heavier than the Elmar and stick out further even when collapsed. A luxury alternative is the very rare version of the current Summicron made in screwmount as a special edition around the turn of the century.

Ditto!
However, I have small items (can’t look up Leitz name right now) that fit onto aperture ring, making changes in f stops rather easy with filter attached on my Elmars. Saves fingernails.
My Elmar with the cleanest, clearest, and coated glass is also the ugliest...chrome peeling of barrel along with discolored brass nose.

 

[Ballinderry-Michael]

I have a 1934 Summar (coated at some point) and a 1952 Summitar, both very clean indeed. There is little to choose between them; but I take on board what people are saying about the Summicron.

 

[BMbikerider]

Summicron. If you want to get a great lens cheap look at the Nikon 5cm f2.

I would go with the Nikon screw F2/50mm it is/was a phenomenal optic. I had one on a Leica 3f and I have only seen a similar one since the 1970s and that too was on a Leica 3F. The Nikon lens equipped with a 39mm screw thread is a very rare lens indeed.
To indicate how good it was, I took a picture over the River Thames of the buildings on the north bank. About 200 yards beyond the front of the buildings was a very tall monument with a statue on top surrounded by iron railings. each of the railings was clearly defined. The film was Ilford Pan F developed in ID11. The distance from where I was standing was very close to being 600 yards.

 

[RDW]

Ditto!
However, I have small items (can’t look up Leitz name right now) that fit onto aperture ring, making changes in f stops rather easy with filter attached on my Elmars. Saves fingernails.
My Elmar with the cleanest, clearest, and coated glass is also the ugliest...chrome peeling of barrel along with discolored brass nose.

More of these fascinating Leitz gadgets! I've come across, but don't own, the VOOLA aperture setting ring, which I think you can turn by unscrewing and rotating a compatible filter or hood like the FISON, and the VALOO, which is a sort of hood with a setting device built in, originally intended for using the Elmar with an enlarger. Both a bit pricey today, like most of the useful Leitz gizmos. One of the few reasonably priced accessories is the clever adjustable FIKUS A36 hood, which 'zooms' for different focal lengths. It fits the Elmar, though it's a bit on the heavy side.

 

[mshchem]

I would go with the Nikon screw F2/50mm it is/was a phenomenal optic. I had one on a Leica 3f and I have only seen a similar one since the 1970s and that too was on a Leica 3F. The Nikon lens equipped with a 39mm screw thread is a very rare lens indeed.
To indicate how good it was, I took a picture over the River Thames of the buildings on the north bank. About 200 yards beyond the front of the buildings was a very tall monument with a statue on top surrounded by iron railings. each of the railings was clearly defined. The film was Ilford Pan F developed in ID11. The distance from where I was standing was very close to being 600 yards.

There's plenty of these lenses available from Japan based sellers on Ebay. These were standard equipment on Nicca cameras, Tower brand in USA. Canon glass is amazing too.

 

[Nitroplait]

The coated Summitar's I have seen have generally had far less cleaning mark problems, and have been cheaper than the LTM Summicron's.

I would personally prefer a lens with a non-rotating front which makes exposure adjustments easier without the need for refocusing - which would make me point towards the Summitar or Summicron.

If going for an Elmar, the 50/2.8 is more ergonomic, but perhaps less charming than the 50/3.5.
As have been said: go for the one in the better condition.

 

[mshchem]

The coated Summitar's I have seen have generally had far less cleaning mark problems, and have been cheaper than the LTM Summicron's.

I would personally prefer a lens with a non-rotating front which makes exposure adjustments easier without the need for refocusing - which would make me point towards the Summitar or Summicron.

If going for an Elmar, the 50/2.8 is more ergonomic, but perhaps less charming than the 50/3.5.
As have been said: go for the one in the better condition.

Yep, I have a Summicron that shows some coating damage from a less than perfect CLA. Still performs fine, inspect carefully.

 

[Patrick Robert James]

I'd get the Japanese Summilux (I have one already) but that isn't probably what you want on a Barnack. The Summicron is hard to go wrong with but if you are more interested in focusing closer for images of people and such the Nikon lens is optimized for that. It would be a hell of a lot less expensive than a Summicron too. There are also more modern lenses if you aren't into vintage glass. The Konica Hexanon 50 f/2.4 for example. Or a bunch from Voiglander. They made a collapsible f/3.5 IIRC, a collapsible f/2 Heliar, and a small 50/2.5.

The downside of the old Elmars is the aperture mechanism. Super fiddly. That said, if I wanted to put it in my pocket I'd probably get the Elmar or the Voigtlander. The later Elmars have a modern aperture mechanism but they are larger.

It really is hard to make a wrong choice unless you buy a beat up lens.

 

[cliveh]

I have always thought the Summitars too soft in image rendition. I am leaning towards a 3.5 Elmar.

 

[Marcelo Paniagua]

If you like a more modern look, I would suggert Heliar 50 3.5 in LTM. Wonderful sharp lens, even wide open. Normally use it along the Summicron F2 (collapsible), when light is not a problem.

 

[Kodachromeguy]

You have many Leitz options for your Barnack Leica:

1. ƒ/3.5 Elmar pre-war not coated, compact body. Some late examples may be coated. Stops to ƒ/18.
2. ƒ/3.5 Elmar coated with modern aperture scale, compact body, stops down to ƒ/16 or ƒ/22.
3. ƒ/3.5 Elmar modern collapsible body with 39mm filters. Also available in M mount.

4. ƒ/2.8 Elmar modern collapsible body with 39mm filters. Also available in M.

5. ƒ/2 Summicron Type1 collapsible
6. ƒ/2 Summicron Type 2 rigid body (quite rare, item SOSTA). The M version was available in the famous dual-range mount (superb lens!).
7. ƒ/2 Summicron reissue (11 619 - special edition 1999). This is a big lens.

Some background information:
https://worldofdecay.blogspot.com/2014/08/photographing-decay-with-leica-camera.html

 

[cliveh]

You have many Leitz options for your Barnack Leica:

1. ƒ/3.5 Elmar pre-war not coated
2. ƒ/3.5 Elmar coated with modern aperture scale, compact body
3.ƒ/3.5 Elmar modern body with 39mm filters
4. ƒ/2.8 Elmar modern body with 39mm filters
5. Summicron Type1 collapsible
6. Summicron Type 2 rigid body (quite rare, item SOSTA)
7. Summicron reissue (11 619 - special edition 1999). This is a big lens.

Thanks for that. Is number 2 collapsible and how do I identify it?

 

[Kodachromeguy]

Lenses 1-5 on the list above are collapsible. 1 and 2 have the same compact body. Many of the pre-war Elmars stopped down to ƒ/18. Some late examples may have been coated. The Type 2 had the same body but stopped down to ƒ/16 or ƒ/22. The late model so-called Red Scale is said to be slightly reformulated and better optically (is there any proof?).

The 3 and 4 above used a collapsible modern body with an easy to adjust aperture ring and 39mm filter mount. The ƒ/2.8 version is an optical gem. 3 and 4 were also made in M mount.

I'll edit my list for clarity.

Nice 3.5 Elmars are not cheap any more in the USA market! I'm surprised considering how many were made over the decades.

 

[dourbalistar]

I'd get the Japanese Summilux (I have one already) but that isn't probably what you want on a Barnack.

In terms of balance and ergonomics, the Canon 50/1.4 LTM is probably not well suited for a smaller body like Patrick noted. It's a wonderful lens, but mounted on a Barnack it is very front heavy and partially obscures the viewfinder.



The Nikkor-H.C 5cm f/2 recommended a few times above is a much better balance. While heavier and less compact compared to a collapsible Elmar, the aperture is less fiddly and its smaller size does not obstruct the viewfinder (40.5mm filter thread compared to the Canon's 48mm). If aesthetics matters to you, the chrome finish is a good match for a Barnack.

 

[awty]

I have always thought the Summitars too soft in image rendition. I am leaning towards a 3.5 Elmar.

3.5 Elmar is good. This is with a 1938 IIIB.

 

[guangong]

More of these fascinating Leitz gadgets! I've come across, but don't own, the VOOLA aperture setting ring, which I think you can turn by unscrewing and rotating a compatible filter or hood like the FISON, and the VALOO, which is a sort of hood with a setting device built in, originally intended for using the Elmar with an enlarger. Both a bit pricey today, like most of the useful Leitz gizmos. One of the few reasonably priced accessories is the clever adjustable FIKUS A36 hood, which 'zooms' for different focal lengths. It fits the Elmar, though it's a bit on the heavy side.

That’s it! Thanks for reminder. I’ve had a couple at least for about 4 decades.
The main reason for the rarity of many useful items is the ignorance of many second hand dealers who would either throw such things into a box with other stuff, or just throw them into trash.
Another nifty item is the Leitz 50mm bright-line finder that would sit in accessory shoe of screw mount cameras. Makes camera much easier to use.
The raised shutter release attachment also makes a screw mount camera more ergonomic.

 

[Arthurwg]

I'm amazed by my 50mm F3.5 Elmar.