It’s not as if I wasn’t expecting this either.
What this translates into is that whilst it is of typical-for-a-Summicron remarkable quality, it does still demonstrate traits that are commensurate with the era from which it originates.
What I hadn’t really counted on when I bought my 35mm Summicron v3 was that outside of it being a Summicron, it’s still a 1970’s lens. Because of this reputation, it’s quite easy to make the assumption that buying any Summicron is a safe bet, it’s certainly the assumption I made – and to be fair, despite what I’m about to tell you about the one I own, I’d probably say the same even now, though I’d say it with a caveat or two attached. The reputation that precedes the Summicron is one of an excellent lens. Despite there being 5 or 6 versions of the 35mm, they are often referred to as all being excellent, with relatively minor differences between them. Many would even argue that 35mm is the first choice over 50mm as a standard lens for a rangefinder. It’s pretty much the standard Leica lens with the 35mm for those who like something a little wider, the 50mm for those who prefer something closer to a normal focal length. I think it’s quite widely accepted that if you’re looking for high quality lens for a Leica m-mount camera, the Summicron is the first place to start your search.
4.1.2 Forcing it to work, or letting it be what it is.4.1.1 A positive character trait/Unrealistic expectations.4 The Leica 35mm Summicron v3 character.