LTM users, its time to stand up and be counted!

[doubice]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Leica is an amazing company. Where else in the world could you return a fifty five year old product for serving as I did with my IIf.

 

It actually gets better.... Where else in the world can you use a 70 year old lens on a current camera while retaining all of the camera's features?

 

My 1936 vintage 1.9/73mm Hektor does quite well on an M7 and will do equally well on an M8!

 

Best,

 

Jan

[dcoombs]

Include me, too. I bought my IIIg in 1965 from my brother, along with a collapsible Summicron 50mm and the 135mm Elmar. Used it for years as a regular camera, lugging it around in a backpack when traveling. Didn't realize it was so special as a collector's piece until much later.

 

Still love the feel and use of the camera, even though I've since added M-series examples to the stable.

 

Doug

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[wlaidlaw]

It actually gets better.... Where else in the world can you use a 70 year old lens on a current camera while retaining all of the camera's features?

 

My 1936 vintage 1.9/73mm Hektor does quite well on an M7 and will do equally well on an M8!

 

Best,

 

Jan

 

I was going to get an LTM to M adapter so that I could use my collapsible Summitar on my M8. The Summitar is currently on my IIF, which my father bought on a trip to New York in 1953 and which I still use regularly. I decided in the end not to, as if you collapse the Summitar in error, it is goodbye M8 shutter. I am so used to collapsing it, one day I would forget. I therefore got a modern collapsible Elmar-M 50/2.8 instead. Pity it is nothing like as well made as the Summitar. It is however a lot crisper. It may be time for the Summitar to have a rebuild, although visually it seems perfect with not a mark on the coating and no visible separation or fungus.

 

Wilson

[doubice]

I was going to get an LTM to M adapter so that I could use my collapsible Summitar on my M8............I decided in the end not to, as if you collapse the Summitar in error, it is goodbye M8 shutter. I am so used to collapsing it, one day I would forget..........

 

Wilson

 

Wilson,

 

In the days of the M5 with its meter on a swing arm in front of the shutter, collapsible lens owners faced the same dilemma. If you collapsed the lens, it was 'good bye' meter....

 

A simple fix at the time was to use DYMO self-adhesive label tape and affix it around the collapsible tube of the lens. Measure how deep the lens can be collapsed without touching anything and attach an appropriate width tape.

 

The only problem might be availability of DYMO tape. You are in the UK and the brand name is probably different. The tapes came in 3/8" and 1/4" widths and many different colours - mine was black and when affixed neatly, looked almost original.

 

Best,

 

Jan

[wlaidlaw]

Wilson,

 

In the days of the M5 with its meter on a swing arm in front of the shutter, collapsible lens owners faced the same dilemma. If you collapsed the lens, it was 'good bye' meter....

 

A simple fix at the time was to use DYMO self-adhesive label tape and affix it around the collapsible tube of the lens. Measure how deep the lens can be collapsed without touching anything and attach an appropriate width tape.

The only problem might be availability of DYMO tape. You are in the UK and the brand name is probably different. The tapes came in 3/8" and 1/4" widths and many different colours - mine was black and when affixed neatly, looked almost original.

 

Best,

 

Jan

 

Jan,

 

Thanks for the tip. I had thought of doing that, as I have a Dymo machine at my French house and have 3/8" silver tape but as the lens normally lives on my IIF and I now have bought the Elmar-M 50mm, I think that unless I particularly want the gentle look of the Summitar, I will leave all as it is. On the note of a soft look, I remember my father coming home in the late 1950's and proudly showing my brother and I, the Thambar he had just bought. He was not amused when we laughed and told him that the 1930's Summar he used on his IIIC, was so soft he could have saved his money. Of course, I now wish I had the Thambar.

 

Wilson

[hektor]

Of course, I now wish I had the Thambar.

 

Wilson,

Don't get a little wet eyed over the Thambar. Twenty five years ago I was caught up in the hype and bought three in sequence each time I found one in better condition. The last was mint in its box, and I suspect is in Japan now.

Tried as I did to like it, the Thambar was IMHO a low contrast lens that had not been fully corrected. Exposure with it was difficult to predict, however in front of an M5 or Minolta CLE it became usable.

In 1935 it was one of the cheapest lens in the Leica catalogue which says something about the optical design. I have never regretted selling it and on the rare occassion that soft effect is sought prefer the results obtained with a Rollei Softar.

Have fun.

Justin

[bill]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Just as a matter of interest, we appear to be up to 66 Barnack users "outed" on this thread; I couldn't count the multiples of bodies!

 

Regards,

 

Bill

[luigi bertolotti]

It actually gets better.... Where else in the world can you use a 70 year old lens on a current camera while retaining all of the camera's features?

 

My 1936 vintage 1.9/73mm Hektor does quite well on an M7 and will do equally well on an M8!

 

Best,

 

Jan

 

One of my absolutely first pictures taken with my 2-days-old M8, jpg shot, standard settings on M8, no post processing.

Hektor 7,3 1,9 s/n 129.006 , i.e. 75 years old ! f 3,2.

It's simply astonishing to use 3/4 of a century ago lens, on a tech brand new camera, working the same way as a brand new lens (uh..., ok, the frame is for 7,5 not 7,3...), and gett such results

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[hektor]

Luigi,

 

What a wonderful combination. When I owned a 73mm Hektor its low contrast could only be corrected by +1 film development and harder paper. I have taken the liberty of a little "post processing":

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[hektor]

Just as a matter of interest, we appear to be up to 66 Barnack users "outed" on this thread; I couldn't count the multiples of bodies! Regards, Bill

 

Bill,

 

Approximately 820,709 "screw-thread" cameras were made by Leitz if one includes the pre 1930 fixed lens models. There must be a lot of owners yet to register.

 

As a bit of trivia, during the 1939-45 war the German government was fairly even-handed when buying equipment from suppliers. Accordingly a similar number of Contax cameras were bought from Zeiss. Where have they all gone? It says something for the resilience of the Leica that so many are still in use.

 

Regards,

 

Justin

[christoph_d]

Justin,

 

As soon as this Forum activity expands from LTM users to include classic Contax users you'll find me with my IIa + pictures here...

 

Regards C.

[wlaidlaw]

Bill,

 

Approximately 820,709 "screw-thread" cameras were made by Leitz if one includes the pre 1930 fixed lens models. There must be a lot of owners yet to register.

 

As a bit of trivia, during the 1939-45 war the German government was fairly even-handed when buying equipment from suppliers. Accordingly a similar number of Contax cameras were bought from Zeiss. Where have they all gone? It says something for the resilience of the Leica that so many are still in use.

 

Regards,

 

Justin

 

I suspect it is down to the shutter mechanism on the Contax, which is probably 10 times as difficult to repair when it goes wrong as a Leica and is also more fragile, so more likely to go wrong. There are probably still hundreds of people worldwide, who can repair a Leica shutter against I would guess, less than 10 who can repair a Contax one. The other thing is that Contax cameras have this unfortunate habit of getting very lumpy leather and so look tatty in comparison to old Leicas, therefore, are more likely to be junked. I keep hoping to find a nice old Contax sitting in the back of a dusty old junk shop and have looked in many over Europe and Asia but no luck so far.

 

Wilson

[wizard]

... it is goodbye M8 shutter. I am so used to collapsing it, one day I would forget. I therefore got a modern collapsible Elmar-M 50/2.8 instead.

 

Wilson, I am almost sure you know this, but just to be certain, you should not try to collapse your Elmar-M 50/2.8 into the M8 as well, it protrudes too far into the body and may do damage to internal parts. Otherwise it's a great lens, enjaoy it.

 

Cheers,

 

Andy

[luigi bertolotti]

Luigi,

 

What a wonderful combination. When I owned a 73mm Hektor its low contrast could only be corrected by +1 film development and harder paper. I have taken the liberty of a little "post processing":

 

Good work Hektor ! I am still "virgin" on digital photo (M8 is my first inroad into... hope the definite...), and have just learned that playing with Software can give a new value to venerable lenses I love a lot to use. Encouraged by the 7,3 Hektor, next days I am going surely to mount on the M8 :

1) Elmar 10,5 (135mm VF)

2) Summarex 85, a lens I absolutely LOVE

3) Thambar... but sincerely I do not expect too much from it...but sm curious to see what

really means "softness" on digital media.

4) The un-famed Summar 50....

 

... and then...I will start mounting a Viso III and playing with long telyts and Hektor 125 !!!

[wlaidlaw]

Wilson, I am almost sure you know this, but just to be certain, you should not try to collapse your Elmar-M 50/2.8 into the M8 as well, it protrudes too far into the body and may do damage to internal parts. Otherwise it's a great lens, enjaoy it.

 

Cheers,

 

Andy

 

Andy that was the thought at first but lots of us are collapsing these wholly into the body with no problems at all. Both Jaap and I have measured the projection into the body and it clears the shutter by about 3mm. Mine was a new factory coded lens and therefore made for the M8. There was no warning in any of the enclosed literature, which I assume there would have been if you were not supposed to fully collapse the lens. Maybe they have altered the design on the very latest coded ones.

 

Wilson

[wizard]

Wilson, you do see me surprised . My recollection was that Leica had specifically advised against collapsing the current Elmar in the M8 manual, but apparently I am wrong.

 

Best,

 

Andy

[dcoombs]

Wilson, are you referring to the Elmar 50mm from the 1930's? I noticed that it has a longer barrel than other collapsibles and with my admittedly amateur measuring it seems very close to the shutter.

 

It's deeper than the collapsible 90mm Elmar, which I believe Leica said not to use on the M8. Do you have any experience with that one?

 

Regards, Doug

[wlaidlaw]

Wilson, are you referring to the Elmar 50mm from the 1930's? I noticed that it has a longer barrel than other collapsibles and with my admittedly amateur measuring it seems very close to the shutter.

 

It's deeper than the collapsible 90mm Elmar, which I believe Leica said not to use on the M8. Do you have any experience with that one?

 

Regards, Doug

 

Doug,

 

I have two Elmar 50's. A just post-war coated LTM f3.5 one and a two month old current model Elmar-M f2.8 6 bit coded lens (made as a 6 bit coded not later modified). I was originally going to get a JM LTM to M mount adapter and use either my Elmar LTM or Summitar 50 f2 lenses on my M8. I was advised that these have a longer retractable barrel than the current Elmar and it certainly visually appears that is the case. In that the modern Elmar only clears the shutter by 3mm, there is not a lot to play with. I don't want to have rings round the LTM lenses as they normally get used on my LTM Leicas and would only have very occasional use on the M8. The thought of forgetting I had an old style lens on and closing it onto the M8 shutter is horrendous, so I will probably not get a JM adapter. In any case I have now blown the budget totally and bought a 6 bit Noctilux, so I have somewhat of a surfeit of 50mm lenses. No experience of the collapsible 90mm, as I have a non-collapsible Elmarit-M 90 f2.8.

 

Wilson

[dcoombs]

I don't think I'll take a chance either with my old Elmar. I've got a Summicron 50 collapsible which works on the M8 and am happy with that.

 

I'm tempted by the 90mm macro Elmar, but am waiting for Sean's review of the 90's before spending my 30% discount coupon. Hope he has a chance to finish before the end of June!

 

Enjoy the Noctilux! I borrowed one a while ago and was amazed how it gathered more light than I could see with my eyes at the time. A most amazing lens.

 

Doug

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[wlaidlaw]

I don't think I'll take a chance either with my old Elmar. I've got a Summicron 50 collapsible which works on the M8 and am happy with that.

 

I'm tempted by the 90mm macro Elmar, but am waiting for Sean's review of the 90's before spending my 30% discount coupon. Hope he has a chance to finish before the end of June!

 

Enjoy the Noctilux! I borrowed one a while ago and was amazed how it gathered more light than I could see with my eyes at the time. A most amazing lens.

 

Doug

 

I have to say I am delighted with the Elmarit-M 2.8. I bought a mint fairly recent one for just over GBP400. I wish I was as delighted with the Noctilux. It is going to have to go back to Solms. It was coded and had a "once over" in December/January and I bought it from the original owner who had barely used it since. It focuses at infinity and close up but is nearly 2 meters out in the mid range. It is a pretty recent lens in any case and in otherwise mint condition. All my other lenses are OK on the M8, so I know it is not the body. Leica UK say they think there may be an internal focus cam problem. Ho - humm...

 

Wilson