Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'elmar'.
-
Hi I've done some searching (both in the forum and online in general) and still can't seem to figure out how to make this all work cohesively. I'm hoping someone can give me some simple instructions - I'm sure I'm just overlooking something. A few months ago, I bought the M Macro Adapter, thinking it would enable macro photography on all of my lenses. I honestly can't tell if it does - it's not at all like the macro experience I'm used to with my Nikon gear (where I can get a fly ball to fill up an entire frame). I play around with it every now and then and can get visibly closer than I can with anything else... but it's not very macro. So I was traveling recently and got an amazing deal on the collapsible Elmar 90 Macro kit - add in the tax refund and I felt morally obligated to buy it (that's the GAS speaking). It comes with the lens, the goggles, and a variable finder. Nice. So... to shoot macro - what pieces arm I supposed to be using ? Any basic guidance anyone could provide will be super appreciated ! Thanks
-
Hey everyone, Looking for a bit of friendly advice and opinion. I currently have a Leica M-A and like to stick to the "One Camera, One Lens" method of keeping my work consistent and always improving. When people talk about this, one lens usually refers to focal length, not exactly one lens. After lots of trial and error I learned that I see in 50mm, so I prefer using that focal length for all of my shooting. However, I currently own a 50mm Summicron-M and a 50mm Elmar-M (both newest versions, both brass chrome). I can't decide if I should sell one, and if so which one, or keep both. The summicron is quite a bit heavier than the Elmar, although I wouldn't classify either as light since they are both the chrome versions. The Elmar obviously have a size advantage, but the annoyance of uneven aperture settings and the collapsible function can sometimes get annoying as it doesn't lock collapsed and can just slide out if positioned in such a way. I'm having a hard time deciding if it makes sense to keep both, and if not, which one to keep. I currently justify ownership of both by saying the Elmar, while limited, is more suitable for when I'm not out specifically to be shooting, but walking to work or just running errands. The smaller size is nice when I'm not focused specifically on shooting. I'll use the Summicron when I'm going out to shoot, as its usability is substantially better, at the cost of its size and weight, but when I'm shooting the camera is in my hand and not really packed away or even hanging from my neck. Let me know your thoughts everyone, interested to hear some opinions on the subject of owning multiple lenses of the same focal length. Thank you!
-
This is going to be a bit of a newbie question as I am sure that folks on this forum probably hate the idea of mating a zoom to a rangefinder. I use a number of primes with my M and love them all but for the sake of occasional convenience and longer focal lengths I am considering an M-R adapter with possibly a Vario Elmar 70-210 or preferably the 80-200 (assuming I can find either). Does anyone have any experience of either of these two lenses on an M and are they any good? Is one better than the other because I notice that the 80-200 f/4 is a heck of a lot more money - if you can find one. Thanks for any advice.
-
I am a new Leica M9 user and I bought my camera with a 50mm Summicron f/2. Doing a lot of travelling I felt last week in Chicago that I really need to go wide when shooting skylines, architecture and interiors (it was the art museum). In two weeks I will go to India and I really want something before that trip. I have been thinking of both the Super Elmar M 21mm and the Elmarit M 28mm ASPH and I am going back and forth between them. I am quite well aware of the positives and negatives of them but cannot make up my mind! What would be the recommendation from you using these lenses today in your daily photography and when traveling?
-
I recently acquired a Leica II screw mount camera with a collapsible Leitz Elmar 50mm f/3,5 lens. The 81587 serial number on the camera body seems to date it to 1932. But I am really curious about the lens. The rotating barrel with the depth of field markings has a three digit serial number… “420” – not the six-digit number that seems to have started around 1933. There is no “o” engraved near the lens focus lever although there is an “o” engraved in the 12 o’clock position of the lens mount on the camera. I assume that this is the original lens that came with the camera. My questions are: 1) When was this Elmar lens made? 2) Was it designed to specifically match my Leica II camera body? 3) Will it work correctly on other Leica screw mount cameras? Thanks for any information you can provide.
-
Hi everybody! First of all, if this is the wrong forum for a repair-type question, please forgive a newbie and point me in the right direction... So: I just got my first Leica this past weekend - a 1956 M3, DS converted to SS. Seems to work fine so far. Anyway, the seller included an extra lens for free because it's not fully functional... It's a screw-mount Elmar 9cm 1:4 (90mm f/4), non-collapsable. It seems to be in mostly decent shape except that the aperture ring doesn't adjust the aperture. It's stuck most of the way open, and the ring just rotates without changing the opening. I see two screw holes on the aperture ring, but no screws. I'm guessing there are supposed to be set screws that make the ring adjust the aperture. My question: Are the screws tough to find for this? If so, I'm hoping that's all it takes to fix the aperture. It would be nice to turn a freebie into a usable portrait lens. I don't think it would be worth the money to send it in for repair based on what these go for on eBay or KEH. Any thoughts?
-
As if anyone could have doubts about the M9 being a great landscape camera...! (M9-P + Elmar 24mm f/3.8) Cheers! Photography by Baldomero Coelho
- 7 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- 24mm elmar
- elmar
- (and 2 more)
-
I can't choose between Elmar 24 3.8 or Elmarit 28mm 2.8 Who has used both and know what lens is better, I know this is a dull question since it depends on what I'll be doing with it... but just in regular which do you think is a better companion for my M8?
-
friendly female runner [ATTACH]320586[/ATTACH] M8.2, Elmar 2.8 - 50mm 2. Vers., ISO 160, 0.022 sec., Aperture 3, 15. June 2012.
-
Can someone tell me if this is truly a triplet? From what I know the knurled focus ring and 39mm thread suggest this is of Walter Mandler designed triplet. It is also bayonet mount But all Serial number lists suggest its made in 1962: 1 913 001-1 967 100: 1962 According to Erwin Puts it is made in 1964: 4/90mm, Elmar , 3-element lens, 1964. This lens is a Canadian design and with only three single elements, a case-study of optical simplicity. Its full aperture performance is better than that of the predecessor with the classical 3 group/4 element construction. Overall contrast is a bit higher, the definition of fine detail has improved edge contrast and especially the performance in the field is much better. Vignetting is .7 stops. At 1:4 the contrast gets visibly higher and now very fine detail is recorded over the whole image area with good clarity. The Elmarit 1:2.8/90mm at 1: 4 cannot equal the 3-element Elmar here. Stopping down further brings in finer detail and at 1:11 we find image quality of a thoroughly modern level. This lens has been introduced at the same time as the Tele-Elmarit 1:2.8/90mm, which replaced the Elmarit 1:2.8/90mm. As the Tele-Elmarit could not be used with the bellows attachment and had not the best performance at closer distances, Leitz offered the Elmar as a lens for these applications. Close up performance is quite good. Distortion is negligible. It does show the intriguing strategy of fine tuning the lens performance for a specified set of tasks. It was not possible in those days to create one general purpose lens and so Leitz optimised the designs in different directions. A luxury that could not be extended indefinitely as it was a costly strategy. With modern glasses, this lens would deliver a very interesting performance. Any insight would be appreciated? I hope I am not violating any rules by quoting Puts? If it truly is, What is the value of this lens in decent condition, not mint but pretty nice? Thanks in advance.
-
Leica IIIf Elmar 5.0 f2.8 Kodak Ektar 100 Straight from scan, No PP, just resized Angel at the Cebu Cathedral 1/200 f8 Praying at the Basilica del Sto. Niño 1/25 f4 A wedding at the Cebu Cathedral 1/15 f4
-
I've compared a few classical Leitz/Zeiss lenses at the NEX-5N - maybe someone ist interested: NEX-5N and classical 50mm Zeiss / Leitz lenses 1) Leitz Elmar 5cm 1:3.5, uncoated (1936) 2) Zeiss Jena Sonnar LTM 5 cm 1:1.5, coated (1941) 3) Leitz Summarit 5cm 1:2, coated (1952) 4) Zeiss Jena Biotar 5.8cm 1:2, cooated (1953) 5) Zeiss Jena Tessar 5cm 1:2.8, coated (1956) 6) Zeiss Planar ZM 2/50mm (2005) 7) Zeiss C-Sonnar ZM 1.5/50mm (2005) I'ts just a small comparison - but better than nothing. If someone of the native english speaking could correct my terrible English i would be more than glad - just send me a message via "contact" at artaphot.ch, including the corrected text. I will insert it as soon as possible. Stephan -
The person I bought it from said they bought it from a seller in Japan a few years ago. And they got the lens CLA'd (Clean, Lubricate, Adjust) this year. Serial Number: 125167 It weighs 111 grams when there's no caps on it. It has "50mm" instead of "5cm" written on the front of the lens, which it would indicate that it's an earlier model I believe. There's an "o" on the barrel by the focus lever, which would indicate that this is a standardized lens mount. Underneath the focus leaver there's the number 5 (as shown in the picture), I don't know what this means. I think the focus lever is at the 11 o'clock position? I'm not sure how to tell. I tested it and found: 105 cm / 41 inch closest focusing distance. The rear plate has distances in feet. I don't know if Leica sent certain countries a different plate, or if it was replaced by a distributor, or if it was replaced in the decades after it was first sold. Interestingly enough there's no "Germany" or "Made in Germany" that I see on other exported lenses. Full album with more more picture and in higher quality: https://imgur.com/a/bhQcwHI Is this lens legit? Was the rear plate with "feet" replaced by a 3rd party? And is this really 1931 or 1932?
-
Cleaning my archives & found the legendary FoMag Second Hand Guide (distributed by the popular German magazine Foto Magazin) from exactly 20 years ago (August 2002). Adding the facsimile of the relevant pages 😉 that will surely be of interest in comparison to 2022. All prices are in euros.
-
Hallo liebe Forumsmitglieder, ich habe eine Frage zu den abgebildeten Objektiven, 1x Vario-Elmar-R 1:4.5/75-200, Nr. 3005278 und Vario-Elmar-R 1:3.5/35-70 E60 Nr.3286640. Obwohl ich reichlich recherchiert habe weiß ich nicht ob diese bei Nutzung der Leica R3 und R4 Einschränkungen unterworfen sind. Ich sehe auch nicht ob das nun 1,2 oder 3-cam-Objektive sind, alle Bilder die ich mir angesehen habe verwirren mich. Kann ich damit normal auch im Automatic-Modus (Leica 3) fotografieren? Messe ich die Belichtung bei Arbeitsblende und stelle diese dann ein? Halte ich dann den Schalter und drücke dann auf den Auslöser oder bleibt die Einstellung drinnen? Oder verlasse ich mich einfach auf die Anzeige im Sucher? Ich möchte ungern einen Film verballern nur um es selber rauszufinden. Ich fange gerade erst wieder nach 50 Jahren an analog zu fotografieren. Begonnen hatte ich mit einer schönen manuellen Zenith aus den 70ern. Weiß jemand Rat? Hier die Fotos:
-
Hey Everyone, I hope I have the right forum here. I found this Ernst Leitz lens for next to nothing back at my home town. I cannot seem to find a lot of information about it and what cameras it was produced for. Also what it's value might be? Focusing ring is a tad rough when twisting but the optics are clean! Serial Number: 1037673 I would love to hear more about it!! Attatched are some images. Cheers Julian
-
Hi. I was wondering whether the heads of both are interchangeable, i.e. can you screw the head of Elmar 9cm into the barrel of Wollensak Velostigmat 9cm New York? I have seen one such combo but the optical lens was destroyed so I was unable to test. I know the top of inner barrel should have matching last three digits, but I did not get to check them. My two further questions: are Wollensak Velostigmat 9cm 4.5 lenses RF coupled? And was there ever a E. Leitz New York 9cm Elmar? Thank you for your answers.
-
I have a 1936 IIIa (s.n. 184223) that is in need of a lens, and I am now in a position to purchase one. I am leaning towards an f3.5 Elmar, as I think it complements the design of the camera beautifully both in compactness and in general appearance. The other lenses that are possibilities look a bit heavier and some even a bit too modern (even though some of them are not) for an 85 year old camera. I do have some points that I would appreciate comments on from those who know more about things Leica than I do, before I part with my cash. Firstly, condition. Quite a few lenses of this age have either dust or haze in the optics, and others have light marks. Would I be correct in assuming that dust or haze (provided the haze is not excessive) could be fixed with a CLA, as could a stiff aperture ring or focusing ring, but marks would generally not go away? Secondly, coatings. I see that, as a rule, Pre-War lenses are clear, and Post-War lenses are coated, and I understand the basic reasoning behind coating lenses is to cut down internal reflections but, in lenses of this quality, is there really much of a difference between the two? As for the lenses that I’m looking at: Elmar f3.5: My preferred option, as it is so light and compact and just looks so right on a Barnack Leica; Elmar f2.8: Aside from the extra f-stop, is there any reason for preferring this over the f3.5 Elmar? I find it does not have quite the same visual appeal as the f3.5 Elmar, but it could be useful in low light situations. Summar f2: Maybe another lens to consider. Again, not quite the same visual appeal as the f3.5 Elmar, but it could also be useful in low light situations. Summitar: From what I can see, it appears to be an updated and improved version of the Summar. Compared with the Elmar, and even the Summar, it looks a trifle bulky (yes, I know it isn’t really). Summicron: I’m not so keen on this one, as I find the appearance of the earlier lenses more appealing. I would also prefer to fit my camera with a lens that’s a bit closer to what it originally had. I have heard that the front element is made of an unusually soft glass, which means that these lenses are often badly scratched. Is this so? Thank you in advance for helping a newcomer to the world of Leicas.
-
Hallo, gerade was erworben ... Hemmwerk ok, .... sogar T und B laufen einwandfrei !! Stefan
-
Most of us seem to be photographers as well as collectors. Show me your favorite lenses, old and new alike. I like the Noctilux range for the extreme apertures, but I prefer the Summilux range for the best speed:size/weight ratio. Here’s a Summilux gathering of 21, 24, 28, 35, 50 and 75mm. All in black.
- 128 replies
-
- 14
-
-
I love shooting with my Nickel Elmar 50mm f/3.5, but I've always wondered the exact year it was made. It has no visible serial number inside or out. There is a 0 stamped on the bottom and another 0 beside the focus knob. The number 4 is stamped under the focus knob. The front shows: Leitz Elmar 1:3,5 F=50mm The distance marks are: mtr 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 5, 7, 10, 20, infinity, 1, 1.25, 1.5, 1.75 The aperture stops are: 3.5, 4.5, 6.3, 9, 12.5, 18 Any sleuths out there want to hazard a guess for the year the lens was made?
-
Gives the term "red scale elmar" a whole new meaning! Distance seems to be in both feet and meters? I guess you can get these "reproductions" in what ever color you want.
-
Hi, recently I had designed and built by 3D printing a longer Endcap for retractible lenses. Basically it has an internal depth of 23mm, which i think will fit most of the M mount retractible lenses. I designed this Endcap for my 50mm Elmar F2.8 lens. It is better to use a good 3D printer. I printed this Endcap using my Craftbot Plus printer at " 0.100mm " layer height, with 15% infill. I printed these Endcaps on Glass Bed with Dimafix 3D printer glue. The result is mirror smooth bottom. You can use PLA or PETG. This is a very clean design. There is no oozing to be cut except the last one when the nozzle started to go into Home position. You can use any colors you want. I did not take a picture of the Endcaps today but i will add that to the Dropbox download folder. In this folder you can find a stp file and a stl file suitable for 3D printing. You can revise the design by loading the stp file. A computer rendering is included. Tomorrow evening I will put actual pictures into this downloadable folder. This is the link: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/qsjcj2srlp3moea/AAD6QWKuZBCtYeihflJ3ZzIoa?dl=0
-
Hey guys, I'm currently setting up a Leica Screw Mount kit. I will be buying a CLA'd Leica iii with a new splitbeam mirror. The whole kit is planned to be used for a gap year in New Zealand and therefore it needs to be small but still affordable because I'm still a student. Now I can't decide between a probably uncoated but CLA'd Ltm 5cm Elmar f/3,5 and a Nikkor 5cm f/2. The Elmar is incredible small which is amazing for travalling while still having a good quality as a like. And it fits in the ever ready case. BUT I really like using filters and it is very hard to use them on the Elmar because it needs those special A36 filters and I need to put them off everytime to change the aperture which is still hard without the filter. The latter on the other hand doesn't have the advantage of being able to be pushed inside the body to become very small but it uses normal filters and it isnt hard to set the aperture with it. But it does not fit in the everready bag (or am I wrong?). The question is now which one is better? How about the optical quality, I have no ressources to exactly compare them. Greetings
