Collectors of Visoflex lenses

[luigi bertolotti]

Hi to all in the collector community:

I would be happy to share informations particularly on lenses for the various reflex devices for LTMs and LBMs (the Visoflexes, but people with good expertise knows well that that first "Visoflex" did not bear this name...)

Just to start with an argument: does some of You have the Elmarit 180 2,8 for Viso ? I have one, and like to know impressions on this.
Thanks to all

[tobey bilek]

The 180 2.8 was a good lens for it`s time, bettered by current lenses. I think it has Leica glass in a Novoflex mount or maybe it is all Novoflex. For sure Leitz did not make it totally. It is big, heavy, and expensive.

Originally Posted by luigi bertolotti

Just to start with an argument: does some of You have the Elmarit 180 2,8 for Viso ? I have one, and like to know impressions on this.
Thanks to all

I had this objektive with R-Mount and used it only once - 30 years ago.
I sold it.I didnt like it
- the Telyt 3,4/180 is very muxh better - its an other world.
The Telyt 4/200 I used in 1964 seemed to me better than the 2,8/180

[luigi bertolotti]

Originally Posted by Leicas Freund

I had this objektive with R-Mount and used it only once - 30 years ago.
I sold it.I didnt like it
- the Telyt 3,4/180 is very muxh better - its an other world.
The Telyt 4/200 I used in 1964 seemed to me better than the 2,8/180

No doubt 3,4 180 is better (I have not Leica SLR but 3,4 is well known as an excellent lens); but the 180 2,8 for Visoflex was of a different design from the similar lens for R Mount (5 lens - 3 groups vs. 5 lens - 4 groups) ; it is one of the strange things about the 180 2,8 for Visoflex : in fact, the two lenses were put on sale only 1 year one after the other; the other oddities are that the 180 for Viso was formally announced and made available in the US only (and it was not a Canda lens, but a "Wetzlar" one) and that even if it was normally coded (11910), a single batch of 250 or 300 was produced and delivered in US, then it disappeared... this is the reason for it intrigues me. If someone has THIS lens I am curious to share news about.

[k_g_wolf]

Have a look at James L. Lager, <<LEICA , An Illustrated History >> the lensbook, vol. II of III, shows the lens on p. 110.


Best

[luigi bertolotti]

Originally Posted by k_g_wolf

Have a look at James L. Lager, <<LEICA , An Illustrated History >> the lensbook, vol. II of III, shows the lens on p. 110.


Best

Yep! And the s/n of Lager's pict is only 20 far from mine...Time ago I wrote him a mail (his adress now is unreachable) on this lens, and with a something mysterious mood he answered me "...this lens may come out from Schneider...I am investigating on this..."
No other infos: these superexperts of Leitz history sometimes recall kind of professors that spend their lives studying in deep Leonardo manuscripts... Another time I wrote him about my Telyt 40 f5 1st type... it has a s/n "wartime" (567.044 - "bibles" say 1941)...but is clearly coated and with international stop scale (i.e. to f32, not f36) : two signs of "afterwar" production: no more than two or three days later Lager answered me with a mail so starting : "number 567.044 was delivered to Cattaneo, Italian agent, on 25th July 1948..." ; I admit that felt very impressed. (BTW, don't remember the exact date, it is in my files but not sculpted in my mind...)

[John E Robertson]

The Viso lenses don't seem to attract much attention. I bought my near mint and boxed Telyt 280 for £65 two years ago. Big heavy and cumbersom, it takes good shots. I use it with a Viso111 on a Bessa T, gives me (slightly awkward !) TTL metering. I use the Viso more for Macro work though, I'm not a tele man!!
Shot this with the Elmar-C on the Visoflex.

[luigi bertolotti]

Compliments for the picture ! I too use often the Viso as a sort of extension tube: to me, is the simplest way to have Macro on a Leica M: and a 90 is often the right lens (I often use in such a way the Tele 90 2,8, but tried also the 135 4...too heavy the complex...).
Tell me: in your pict I have understood you made use of the Elmar C 90 for Leica CL: correct? I have this lens, You gave me a good idea... never thought to use it as a macro, but has always appreciated it a lot. I have also the 280 You quote: my one is a "2nd type" and ...well... is anyway the most "so-so-portable" tele for a Leica user. Years and years ago, I bought a hand made 2x converter for Leica M, made by an expert italian Leica repair shop, using a Kenko optical set: it is well done, rightly coupled to RF, but, besides the obvious problem of framing, it is anyway not so usable: I get a 270 f8 with my Tele Elmar 135, and sharpness is less than good even if You stops to 16...

[John E Robertson]

Originally Posted by luigi bertolotti

Compliments for the picture ! I too use often the Viso as a sort of extension tube: to me, is the simplest way to have Macro on a Leica M: and a 90 is often the right lens (I often use in such a way the Tele 90 2,8, but tried also the 135 4...too heavy the complex...).
Tell me: in your pict I have understood you made use of the Elmar C 90 for Leica CL: correct? I have this lens, You gave me a good idea... never thought to use it as a macro, but has always appreciated it a lot. I have also the 280 You quote: my one is a "2nd type" and ...well... is anyway the most "so-so-portable" tele for a Leica user. Years and years ago, I bought a hand made 2x converter for Leica M, made by an expert italian Leica repair shop, using a Kenko optical set: it is well done, rightly coupled to RF, but, besides the obvious problem of framing, it is anyway not so usable: I get a 270 f8 with my Tele Elmar 135, and sharpness is less than good even if You stops to 16...

Thank you Luigi
I find the Elmar-C has a very nice "flat field" for macro used this way, another way I get macro is to use a high quality enlarging lens on the Viso 111 using either bellows or just on its own with a bayonet adabter. I bought an almost unused 75mm Apo-Rodenstock for very little money recently and this works well.
The Viso with the cable release, gives a vibrationless mirror action which is good in close -up.
I had the Komura Teleconverter, terrible thing!!! I got poor results with it, and as for its finder!!! The worst I ever saw. I bought it new, but it seems to be "collectable" God knows why, so I more than got my money back on selling it!!
Thank you again Luigi,
Greetings from Scotland.
John.

[Philippe D.]

The now old Visoflex find use with the new digital M8

M8_BellowsIIbw.JPG
Here a Visoflex III with Bellows II and an Elmar 65mm f/3.5 for macro photography

[luigi bertolotti]

Originally Posted by Philippe D.

The now old Visoflex find use with the new digital M8

Attachment 25648
Here a Visoflex III with Bellows II and an Elmar 65mm f/3.5 for macro photography

Damn, You posted one of the pictures I planned to post when my M8 will arrive: oh, please, let to me almost the chance to be the first to post a pict of a M8 with the Elmar 10,5 cm f 6,3....

[waterlenz]

Originally Posted by luigi bertolotti

Hi to all in the collector community:

I would be happy to share informations particularly on lenses for the various reflex devices for LTMs and LBMs (the Visoflexes, but people with good expertise knows well that that first "Visoflex" did not bear this name...)

Just to start with an argument: does some of You have the Elmarit 180 2,8 for Viso ? I have one, and like to know impressions on this.
Thanks to all

Here is a snap taken with the 180 V lens at f/5.6 on a VIII and an M8. I have just started working with LR 1.0, so it may not be perfect.
Tom

[waterlenz]

I did a crop while at 100% in LR and saved a virtual copy - cool feature - of the image in the previous post.
Tom

[waterlenz]

Originally Posted by Leicas Freund

I had this objektive with R-Mount and used it only once - 30 years ago.
I sold it.I didnt like it
- the Telyt 3,4/180 is very muxh better - its an other world.
The Telyt 4/200 I used in 1964 seemed to me better than the 2,8/180

The R and V versions of the 180 are not the same optical formula.
Tom

[luigi bertolotti]

Originally Posted by waterlenz

Here is a snap taken with the 180 V lens at f/5.6 on a VIII and an M8. I have just started working with LR 1.0, so it may not be perfect.
Tom

I am happy to know of another person who owns this lens : what is the s/n of yours ? I am an avid mountaineer: which mountain is is the one in your shot ?
Thanks in advance