Leica W. 50 mm Col. Elmar f/2.8 silver

[jbstitt]

Ladies and Gentlemen:

While traveling in Germany I found and bought a silver 50 mm collapsible Elmar f/2.8 , M mount,complete with metal lens cap. It does not appear to be coated. By the price I paid and the lack of coating it cannot seem to be the current version of this lens. I assume it is fairly old. The glass is pristine as are the cosmetics but no box or papers. Frankly, I have not shot a single picture with this lens as I soon moved to a D2 for my travel camera and the M6 sits. I do not have a M8 so cannot try it on that although it sure would make a good lens for pocketing an M.

.

What can you tell me about this lens? Is it in fact old, and is it in fact fairly good, especially for B&W.

[engelfangen]

Hello,
it's from 1966. Why shouldn't it be coated?
best regards Marc

[jbstitt]

Maybe it is single coated. It does not have that blue reflective look when looking at the front element. Any idea of the value of this lens?

[jbstitt]

I forgot to thank you for the reply. Thank you. I'll add, part of the reason I bought this is that I had a collapisable 50 Summicron M and it was a fantastic lens for the B&W shooting I do mostly. Very smooth tonality and beautiful prints. Most of that shooting is at 5.6 or so and I didn't figure the one stop would make much difference.

John Stitt

[gyoung]

Originally Posted by jbstitt

Maybe it is single coated. It does not have that blue reflective look when looking at the front element. Any idea of the value of this lens?

Coating is not always blue, Minolta even had green at one time! I have had two 50/2.8 Elmars, one very close to this one in age, and the one I have now is earlier. The coating looks just the same as this one.

Gerry

[doubice]

John,

The lens is definitely coated. As a matter of fact, Leitz used multicoating even before Asahi Pentax brought it into the mainstream and started using it as a marketing tool during the early 1970's.

The original 2.8/50mm Elmar used to come with blueish coating, later with the coating that is on your lens. If you examine the lens carefully, you will see more than one colour in the coating - that is an example of early multicoating.

It is an excellent lens, probably not up to par with the current 2.8/50mm Elmar; after all, there is close to 50 years between the two designs. The differences in performance, if any, would be negligible.

Best,

Jan

[jbstitt]

Thanks to all for the information. I think you have inspired me to take the M6 with this lens out shooting and see what it will do. I do still have a wet darkroom!!! Now if the chemicals are any good.

John

[earleygallery]

Just to add to the answers above this is the M mount 2.8 Elmar. I have the same lens in screw mount along with the 3.5 Red Scale Elmar. There was also a 3.5 Version which looked similar to the later 2.8.

According to my pocket book the 2.8 was produced from '57 thru to '74 (the 3.5 being introduced in '24 thru to '61).

Both versions are excellent lenses and you will not find the performance wanting in any respects (albeit latest lenses will show more contrast and slightly more sharpness at wider apertures).

Here is a comparison I made between 3 different Elmar lenses;

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-...-4-images.html

Its a very common lens being one of the main Leica standard lens. It is definately coated as others have said and value is typcially in the region of £150-£300 depending on condition.

[liesevolvo]

Congrats! Very fine lens! It's easy to find the lens on the market - but it's not easy to find a good one (as Your's seems), because this was a "shooter's lens", so often in rough use.

I still use an elder 'red scale' Elmar 3.5, because it's even more compact, but in daily use Your lens is much more comfortable (in setting the stops). Enjoy!

Leonard Liese

[plasticman]

I was recently lucky enough to find a mint version of this lens - and I really love the look I've got from the first few shots back from processing.

I'm no expert, but the lens seems to me to be quite low-contrast, and while not soft, it doesn't have that glaring sharpness that I find a lot of modern lenses strive for (recording a scene rather than 'painting' it in the way I feel some of these older lenses do).

It was the only lens I took with me on a recent short holiday, and while it's small and 'pocketable' as you say, I did find it slightly annoying to be constantly opening and closing it, and also because it must be reset to infinity to collapse, there's no way you can set a hyperfocal distance and then carry the camera around ready for any shot, as you might with a normal lens.

As i understand it, the lens isn't suitable for the M8 (because of the sensor/collapsible lens incompatibility).

Here's an image (which my partner hates, so I hope she doesn't catch me posting this), which I took as one of the first test shots with the lens - I like the rather flat way the lens draws the scene:

[lars_bergquist]

Once my favourite 'walkabout lens' (now, with the M8, it is the V. 4 35mm Summicron). The contrast wide open is fairly low, but definition is very even all the way out to the corners. Stopping down to 4 increases contrast visibly, and at 5.6 it competes with the beloved old rigid Summicron, V. 2.

The lens works fine on the M8, but a careful person does mount and dismount it extended only. It is OK to collapse it while on the camera. While you can, get the silver screw-in hood for the current 50mm Elmar. With clip-on hoods, you will have difficulty adjusting the aperture while the camera is at eye level. Also, adjusting aperture when the lens is on a TTL-metering camera must be done with the lens locked at infinity, or it will just rotate. Exposure first, focusing later (which is the correct sequence in any case).

The old man from the Age of the Elmar

[earleygallery]

Originally Posted by plasticman

It was the only lens I took with me on a recent short holiday, and while it's small and 'pocketable' as you say, I did find it slightly annoying to be constantly opening and closing it, and also because it must be reset to infinity to collapse, there's no way you can set a hyperfocal distance and then carry the camera around ready for any shot, as you might with a normal lens.

Why not? You don't have to collapse it, just leave it extended, aperture of f8 or so and shutter speed set accordingly. Nice shot

[plasticman]

Thanks James - I also like the shot - but not the composition including the tree just beginning to establish itself on the left, but it was meant as a candid snap.

I guess I'm a bit special - when I'm not immediately using the camera I tend to bundle it back into my shoulder bag. For some reason I hadn't considered that this is unusual behavior.

[wizard]

John,

don't worry, this is still a good lens, as others have already pointed out. It may be a tad soft at F2.8, but from f4 onwards you will find it tack sharp. Your lens dates from around 1966, and a good sample should be in the order of 200 Euro, maybe slightly more if bought from a dealer.

Enjoy your 'new' lens!

Andy