Leica Summarit-M Series Lenses Discontinued: Leica has discontinued the Summarit-M series lenses, (35mm, 50mm, 75mm, 90mm) for some reason. I looked around on line, but I couldn't...

Mac Loc: Pittsburgh, Philadelphia now Hernando Co. Fl.

Leica has discontinued the Summarit-M series lenses, (35mm, 50mm, 75mm, 90mm) for some reason. I looked around on line, but I couldn't find a reason for it.

rook2c4 Loc: Philadelphia, PA USA

Maybe there just wasn't enough demand to keep those lenses in production. Usually when a company isn't making enough money (or is losing money) on a product, it ceases production for that item.

Bill P

Mac wrote:

Leica has discontinued the Summarit-M series lenses, (35mm, 50mm, 75mm, 90mm) for some reason. I looked around on line, but I couldn't find a reason for it.

Reason could be oddly simple. When I owned an M9 one of the lenses I had was a Summarit, either the 28 or the 90. most of the Summarits are f2.5 lenses. I suspect these were introduced to offer the option of a "budget" lens, if budget and Leica can be used in the same sentence. Mine was a fine lens, but not special enough to keep the camera.

Unfortunately, a budget lens offsets a leica's power to make one's privates look larger. So I suspect they didn't sell well over competing f2 and 1.4 lenses.

jwreed50 Loc: Manassas, VA

I think it's long been the case that Leica has sold more of the Summicron and Summilux versions of their lenses than the Summarits. I've never understood why someone would spend money on an expensive Leica but then pair it with a lens that didn't match the quality of the camera.

User ID

jwreed50 wrote:

I think it's long been the case that Leica has sold more of the Summicron and Summilux versions of their lenses than the Summarits. I've never understood why someone would spend money on an expensive Leica but then pair it with a lens that didn't match the quality of the camera.

Soooooo true. Even my dog knew that Summarits sukt asz.

Bill P

jwreed50 wrote:

I think it's long been the case that Leica has sold more of the Summicron and Summilux versions of their lenses than the Summarits. I've never understood why someone would spend money on an expensive Leica but then pair it with a lens that didn't match the quality of the camera.

So you're saying Leica makes crap lenses?

It's interesting that the quality of a body is as essential to some as the quality of a lens. A well designed body has only a very little bit to do with the imaqe, does it hold the film flat, does the shutter work reliably, or is the sensor not stifled by a thick anti aliasing filter and is the in camera processing competent? The lens, on the other hand, does but one thing, well or not so, make pretty pictures. If it doesn't get that done all is lost, and the name on the front has nothing to do with the result. Many of the lenses I had for a leica were exceeded in good results by lenses for my Olympus OM and Contax G2.

When I was shooting for a living, no one paid me more or even noticed what was shot using the Leica.

jwreed50 Loc: Manassas, VA

Bill P wrote:

So you're saying Leica makes crap lenses?
. . .
Many of the lenses I had for a leica were exceeded in good results by lenses for my Olympus OM and Contax G2.

No, of course not — not sure how you got that point from my note above. Leica has been known as much or more for the quality of their lenses than for their M bodies. But, like other manufacturers, they make lenses at different price/quality points — and Summarits have long been at the low end of that spectrum. If you can afford the $8,000 for an M10, why not pair it with one of their legendary lenses, i.e. a Summicron or a Summilux? I certainly don’t know anyone who would say that any Leica Summicron or Summilux — in any focal length — is a “crap lens.”

Bill P

Misinterpretation. Sorry.

But what is there intrinsically about a Leica that demands the latest, greatest f1.4 lens other than bragging rights?

My first camera, a Pentax Spotmatic, had an f1.4 lens, the "kit lens' which is a new way of saying standard lens. I believe it was a good as anything from Leica.

BebuLamar

If I buy a Leica I think I would go for the Summicron lenses. I hate the f/2.5 number. Makes the aperture ring looks funny with the 2.5 too close to 2.8.

jwreed50 Loc: Manassas, VA

Bill P wrote:

But what is there intrinsically about a Leica that demands the latest, greatest f1.4 lens other than bragging rights?

My first camera, a Pentax Spotmatic, had an f1.4 lens, the "kit lens' which is a new way of saying standard lens. I believe it was a good as anything from Leica.

Leica M bodies are really in their element when used as an "available light" camera, and in those settings that extra stop can really make a difference.

And I agree . . . if you think your Pentax Spotmatic with a kit lens produced images that were the equal of Leica lenses, you probably don't want to invest in a Leica! ;-)

Bill P

I have know many Leica owners, and when they were pointing out the advantages, they most often seemed deluded.

I''m more impressed with someone that can take an average camera and make great images. That's an artist.

rpavich Loc: West Virginia

Mac wrote:

Leica has discontinued the Summarit-M series lenses, (35mm, 50mm, 75mm, 90mm) for some reason. I looked around on line, but I couldn't find a reason for it.

It seems that the best reason is that they were having a hard time competing with the second-hand summicrons and summilux's. The prices weren't that far apart from a new summarit lens.

Pablo8 Loc: Nottingham UK.

They also stopped the production-line for the Elmar and Hektor 39 screw mount lenses. We just have to live with 'Progress' or still embrace the 'Oldies'.