Doc Hays , Jan 09, 2012; 10:31 p.m.
Hi folks, a quick question that I'm hoping you all can help me with. I'm looking at buying a Summaron 35/2.8 for my M2. I've found a copy that's in tip-top condition except for a small bubble in the front element. The bubble is < 1 mm in diameter and located paracentrically, about a third of the way from the lens center to the periphery. I know it's been said that bubbles in the glass are a mark of quality in lenses of this age, but I'm not sure how much of that came from those trying to sell lenses with bubbles in them! I have another copy of this same lens and also a Summicron of similar vintage, neither of which have bubbles in them.
I wouldn't fret it as the lens is in otherwise pristine condition -- near mint, I'd say -- but the shop is asking top dollar. Is there any reason to avoid the purchase?
Mukul Dube 
, Jan 09, 2012; 11:02 p.m.
So far as I know, a bubble is no reason not to buy the lens.
Robert Lai , Jan 09, 2012; 11:13 p.m.
Bubble means nothing. I've got them on my older Leitz lenses, and older Nikkors. Leitz is so particular, that if the bubble was going to affect optical quality, they would have ditched that element and put another one in at the time of assembly.
Does this Summaron have goggles? If they do, you need to be sure that the goggles are not going to throw the rangefinder off vertically. Check with the lens mounted on your camera. If the goggles affect your RF, then haggle the price down for a CLA on the lens and goggles.
Prices on these Summaron 35 / 2.8 lenses have gone up a lot. I have a nearly mint one, CLA'd in Japan. I bought it in the summertime for about $1100. Mine was in LTM, so I had to pay a premium for it.
Bernard Miller , Jan 10, 2012; 04:55 a.m.
Well, if it's any comfort, this guy isn't flogging lenses but still says the bubbles aren't a problem:
http://www.zeisscamera.com/services_overhaul-cIIa-lenses.shtml#bubbles
I've got the goggled version of the 2.8 Summaron on my M3, and it really is a wonderful performer. Still, tread carefully--I wouldn't pay some crazy price for it, when you can get a new Zeiss lens which is very probably even better for much less (and faster, if you want--the 2.0 version is probably much cheaper new than some Summarons nowadays).
Make sure to shine a flashlight through the lens, if you didn't already. Leica lenses of that era tend to develop a bit of haze (mine's fortunately pretty pristine). While the lenses of that period also had soft coatings on the front element the Summaron is in that the lens surface is recessed far enough it may not have taken as much abuse as the typical 50 Summicron of that time.
I was lucky to find a Summaron for a very cheap price (it needed a bit of work, which helped), before they went all astronomical. At today's prices, I'd probably not have done that--I'd most likely have had a look at the Zeiss offerings at 35 mm, or even the Leitz/Minolta 40/2.0s in their various incarnations for the CL/CLE.
They (and the Voigtlanders) may not be as nice cosmetically on the front of your M2 (although the chrome Zeiss lenses certainly don't look out of place on older Leicas!), but image quality should be as good or better. It just comes down to what makes sense for you in terms of price/performance ratio.
Bernard Miller , Jan 10, 2012; 05:01 a.m.
Of course, all the above being said, I re-read your post and realised you already have a Summaron. So you know that stuff already. You planning on selling your old lens when you get the new one, or you gonna keep both of them?
Frank Skomial 
, Jan 10, 2012; 05:23 a.m.
anyway you want to twist the facts... a bubble in a lens is an example of poor production process.
I would not expect this from Leica, not for the price they ask for.
John Boyle , Jan 10, 2012; 07:24 a.m.
I have a 90mm Tele Elmarit (fat chrome) with a small bubble in a rear element. The lens has always produced excellent results. The bubble has caused no adverse effects. Leitz would not have used a lens element that did not meet their high standards. This is a non-issue.
Paul Neuthaler , Jan 10, 2012; 10:11 a.m.
Summaron 2.8/35 is one of the best -- but buy one that's bubbless!
Floyd Waller , Jan 10, 2012; 04:20 p.m.
DO NOT worry about bubbles! The technology of cooling high quality glass at that time did not exist and many very fine Leica and Nikon(and others) lenses had bubbles. I had a Kowa 66 medium format normal lens that had so many bubbles that it looked freckled and I would have stood that lens against any Hasselblad or Rollei. I still have a much more recent Leica-R 60mm f2.8 macro with a bubble in one of the rear elements and you certainly would never know it as regards images.
Doc Hays , Jan 10, 2012; 10:38 p.m.
Thanks for the input, everyone. After a bit of deliberation, I've decided to go ahead and buy the lens. My main concern was that the bubble is more central than peripheral, but I really don't imagine it will have even the slightest impact on my photographs. I don't want to pass up the opportunity to buy in a shop where I can see the lens firsthand. I don't like to take chances on an eBay transaction with high-value items.
Bernard -- Thanks for your advice! Yes, this one is quite free of haze and passes the flashlight test with flying colors. Haven't decided about selling my other copy yet. Don't have a pressing need for the money, so I will probably hang on to it for a little while, at least. I expect I'll eventually end up selling it to buy a Biogon.
