jc_braconi Posted December 3, 2009 Share #1 Posted December 3, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Got this lens (midlle) recently; never seen before such a coupling elements : a bayonet mount and a Elmar 3.5/50 (without serial number) from screw mount, lens body . Do you ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted December 3, 2009 Posted December 3, 2009 Hi jc_braconi, Take a look here The missing link. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
DDM Posted December 3, 2009 Share #2 Posted December 3, 2009 If the lens has aperture 22, it could be interessting. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted December 4, 2009 Share #3 Posted December 4, 2009 Hey ! Unless is a photoshop joke... ... very unusual !!! Never seen... most intringuing is the raised red "button"...not typical of very early BM lenses... wouldn't have been for it, I'd say it can be a prototype BM lens for M3... I wonder if it could be a frankenstein-lab-repaired lens... but why the absence of s/n, in that case ? If they used an old Elmar lens tube it ought to have the s/n at its usual location... unless they used a very very old unnumbered (even uncoupled ?) lens unit... does the lens look VERY old ? I can't read clearly the f stops... are they of the prewar "european" scale ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jc_braconi Posted December 4, 2009 Author Share #4 Posted December 4, 2009 @Dirk & Luigi: It is an 'old' Elmar = old aperture scale and no coating. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted December 4, 2009 Share #5 Posted December 4, 2009 But... is the DOF scale coherent with the lens f scale - old values ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jc_braconi Posted December 4, 2009 Author Share #6 Posted December 4, 2009 But... is the DOF scale coherent with the lens f scale - old values ? No Luigi, That surprised me when I saw it, is that the LTM Elmar body have the same diameter than the M version. I never take a dial caliper to measure them before. Now I know it is 29mm . An another case is the Summaron 3.5 / 35; from LTM to M, a lot of bodies differents in shape around the lens which are, fortunely, at the same place. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted December 4, 2009 Share #7 Posted December 4, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) So somebody might have stuck an old lens in a newer mount. Does it focus correctly? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wizard Posted December 4, 2009 Share #8 Posted December 4, 2009 never seen before such a coupling elements : a bayonet mount and a Elmar 3.5/50 (without serial number) from screw mount, lens body . Do you ? No, but I have once seen one the other way round, i.e. the regular screw mount coupled to a lens body of the bayonet type (E39 filter thread and click stop aperture ring). It was a 3.5 version, too. Andy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
doubice Posted December 4, 2009 Share #9 Posted December 4, 2009 It appears that the lens in question has the old aperture scale: 4.5 - 6.3 - 9 - 12.5 - 18. I am sure that if this indeed was a prototype lens from the early 1950's, Leitz would have used a curent version of the 3.5 LTM Elmar. The one here is either pre-war or war-time. I believe that this is a home-made adaptation. As Luigi asked - do the f-stop scale of the lens and the depth of field scale of the mount match? Obviously not. As the focusing movement of the 50mm lens is identical to the movement of the rangefinder cam, this adaptation is fairly easily accomplished, as long as flange to film plane distances are maintained. Best, Jan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UliWer Posted December 4, 2009 Share #10 Posted December 4, 2009 Luigi already mentioned the raised red "button". This casts some doubts whether it really was a prototype for a bayonet-Elmar, or rather a late essay to use an old lens without adapter for the M. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted December 4, 2009 Share #11 Posted December 4, 2009 Well... given the question of the DOF scale... I'd say it's a home (lab, probably) made intimate marriage of a "new" BM Elmar and an old SM Elmar lens tube... done for need (new Elmar glass broken ?) or for nostalgy of ol'Elmar "glow" ... There is still the issue of missing s/n...but it could indeed be simply a very very old unnumbered Elmar... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jc_braconi Posted December 4, 2009 Author Share #12 Posted December 4, 2009 Well... given the question of the DOF scale... I'd say it's a home (lab, probably) made intimate marriage of a "new" BM Elmar and an old SM Elmar lens tube... done for need (new Elmar glass broken ?) or for nostalgy of ol'Elmar "glow" ...There is still the issue of missing s/n...but it could indeed be simply a very very old unnumbered Elmar... For me it is a coffee/lunch break time job from some employees in Wetzlar, I have seen some of them ex. my M4 222 A. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted December 5, 2009 Share #13 Posted December 5, 2009 For me it is a coffee/lunch break time job from some employees in Wetzlar, I have seen some of them ex. my M4 222 A. Can be... in the '50s Leitz was still a factory of that times... FULL of workers and materials everywhere... a big leap from today's clean and streamlined production dept. What's about your M4 ? I don't remember to have seen "a little..." thread of yours with it... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jc_braconi Posted December 5, 2009 Author Share #14 Posted December 5, 2009 http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-collectors-historica/105084-m4-222-litlle-34-addendum.html Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted December 5, 2009 Share #15 Posted December 5, 2009 http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-collectors-historica/105084-m4-222-litlle-34-addendum.html Right body for the above Elmar... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jc_braconi Posted December 5, 2009 Author Share #16 Posted December 5, 2009 Right body for the above Elmar... May be, but you have certainly noted that the Summicron 2/50 on the M4 was a formerly Dummy also. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted December 5, 2009 Share #17 Posted December 5, 2009 I'm curious. Is a dummy lens simply one in which the diaphragm is missing or not linked in to the aperture ring (like the 0.95 Noctilux I saw earlier this year which rather surprised me)? Is it a simple matter of fitting a few parts to make the dummy work or is there more to it? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jc_braconi Posted December 6, 2009 Author Share #18 Posted December 6, 2009 I'm curious. Is a dummy lens simply one in which the diaphragm is missing or not linked in to the aperture ring (like the 0.95 Noctilux I saw earlier this year which rather surprised me)? Is it a simple matter of fitting a few parts to make the dummy work or is there more to it? Usualy a Dummy lens have a (black) false lens in front and it's all. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.