Search the Community

Just saw this Nickel Rigid Summar 5cm f2 while browsing for lenses on a shops site, is that front "ring" a hood or part of the lens system?

Good Afternoon, i have revently managed to clean my Leica Summar 50mm from arroung 1937. Internally the lens is beatuifuly with no scars or paintchips. But the frontlens is heavly scratched. I've tried contacting my local Leica dealer and camera store, but both couldn't really help me. Does anyone have an idea how i can "fix" it myself without buying a new lens and spending a huge amount of money. Thanks in regard!

Leider muss ich davon ausgehen, dass meine Leica IIIf (Nr. 529700) mit einem Summar 2/5cm (Nr. 265488) auf dem Weg von einer Überholung bei Fa. Paepke zurück zu mir von DHL vorlogen wurde. Falls einem Forenten ein Angebot dieser Kamera / dieses Objektives auffällt, bitte eine Info an mich. Dieses Set hat für mich einen hohen emotionalen Wert, da es die Kamera meines Vaters war.

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.

Hi there, my name is Wim, I’m from the Netherlands and I am new on this forum. I came here because i bought a Old black leica camera in a thriftstore. I got curious about the name of the model, if i can make it work, it’s value, and if i could clean and (if needed) repair it myself or if its better to bring it to an expert. I already did some research on the forum but i couldnt find my exact model and lens. Here are some pictures. I hope you can help me out with some info!