9 element 28 Elmarit

[farnz]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have a puzzle for those members who so kindly but expertly solve the more difficult questions posed on this forum.

 

I recently came across a black 9 element Elmarit that looks unused, is in its original box with the serial number inscribed on the bottom of the box in faded fountain pen ink in the space provided. However, the rear lens cap is metal with "Leitz" stamped into it and looks unused but it is silver.

 

Is it possible or likely that any black 9 element Elmarits were shipped with silver rear lens caps or should I assume that it is from another lens?

 

If the lens cap is not the original is it likely to affect the lens's collectable value?

 

Thank you for considering my puzzle.

 

Pete.

[luigi bertolotti]

Hi Pete,

me too have a 9 elements Elmarit 28 (a Wetzlar one) in original box : the rear cap is black, metal, with a silver dot to match the red dot on lens to be mounted (a "luxury" detail that I think was soon abandoned...) ; I'm prone to think that a silver rear cap was originally for another lens, the Super Angulon being the most reasonable canditate (this cap had code IROOW - 14042 - made both black and silver, and was listed as spare for both Elmarit and Super Angulon). I don't think this damages lens' value, anyway... btw, the Elmarit 28 "9" is interesting as a collectible... but not a good performer in comparision with later versions (and on M8 it doesn't meter right, too, like the SA 3,4).

Edited November 18, 2011 by luigi bertolotti

[Advertisement]

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

[farnz]

Thanks, Luigi.

 

Pete.

[Pecole]

I have a puzzle for those members who so kindly but expertly solve the more difficult questions posed on this forum.

 

I recently came across a black 9 element Elmarit that looks unused, is in its original box with the serial number inscribed on the bottom of the box in faded fountain pen ink in the space provided. However, the rear lens cap is metal with "Leitz" stamped into it and looks unused but it is silver.

 

Is it possible or likely that any black 9 element Elmarits were shipped with silver rear lens caps or should I assume that it is from another lens?

 

If the lens cap is not the original is it likely to affect the lens's collectable value?

 

Thank you for considering my puzzle.

 

Pete.

 

HI !

I had seven Elmarit 28 passing through my Fontenelle Collection, 3 of them being of the first, 9-element version engraved Germany and bearing serials 2061933, 2062979 and 2063334; 3 Canada-engraved (and supposedly 8-element, 2d version) with serials 2062120, 2062881 and 2315734; and finally a third (?) version nº 2977835 (Canada).

It seems that all 9-element lenses were made in Germany (Dennis Laney, 2d edn, page 210), and I am surprised that two of my Canada-engraved lenses bear serials so close to the German ones.

I illustrate here the nº 2315734.

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!

[jc_braconi]

HI !

and I am surprised that two of my Canada-engraved lenses bear serials so close to the German ones.

I illustrate here the nº 2315734.

My 2nd version 2 315 970 is an ELC

 

Objectif LEICA Elmarit-M 28 mm f/2,8 (1969-1979)

[luigi bertolotti]

HI !

I had seven Elmarit 28 passing through my Fontenelle Collection, 3 of them being of the first, 9-element version engraved Germany and bearing serials 2061933, 2062979 and 2063334; 3 Canada-engraved (and supposedly 8-element, 2d version) with serials 2062120, 2062881 and 2315734; and finally a third (?) version nº 2977835 (Canada).

It seems that all 9-element lenses were made in Germany (Dennis Laney, 2d edn, page 210), and I am surprised that two of my Canada-engraved lenses bear serials so close to the German ones.

I illustrate here the nº 2315734.

 

I think Laney is wrong... several 9 elements with Canada engraving do appear for sale, time to time: seems even that probably they are more than the Wetzlars (unless is a "Wetzlar magic" effect... fact is that they make regularly higher prices at auctions... )

[Theodor Heinrichsohn]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I think Laney is wrong... several 9 elements with Canada engraving do appear for sale, time to time: seems even that probably they are more than the Wetzlars (unless is a "Wetzlar magic" effect... fact is that they make regularly higher prices at auctions... )

 

While living in Japan from 1986 to 1995 I saw more ELC first version lenses than Wetzlar. The latter was much more expensive as Japanese collectors favored it.

Teddy

[luigi bertolotti]

Btw... I love a lot my 9 elements Wetzlar also because is one of the 2 only lenses in my collection on which I had an incredibly bargain price being sold from a totally "ignorant" dealer (the other was an Hektor 7,3 - splendid conditions - in an old drawer in a small shop in my town: dealer : "an old lens , dunno if it works... doesn't mount on my reflex...").

[jpattison]

Forever known as "Lucky Luigi";)

[adan]

"I am surprised that two of my Canada-engraved lenses bear serials so close to the German ones."

 

Leica/Leitz - especially all those decades ago - assigned serial numbers to lens types (e.g "28mm Elmarit - x,xx0,000 to x,xx2,000") in blocks of 1,000-2,000. For less popular lenses (i.e. not 35/50) the blocks might cover 2-4 years of production.

 

If the lens design, or manufacture location, changed in the middle of a block, as in the 28 f/2.8 (which changed from symmetrical-wideangle/Wetzlar to retrofocus/Midland, on the advent of the M5 with metering arm) - the new lenses would simply use up the remainder of the pre-assigned numbers. Otherwise there would be "orphaned" numbers that never appeared on any lens.

 

I had a very early compact 90mm f/2 (introduced 1980) that had a serial number from a block designated for "90mm Summicrons" in 1977. Same deal - when the design was changed, the last unit of the old design was numbered "n", and the first of the new design were numbered "n+1", "n+2", etc.

 

BTW - I actually used and owned a v.1 symmetrical 28 Elmarit, and not only was it sharp, but the performance was generally better than the first retrofocus successor, esp. in the corners.

 

Leitz/Leica had a difficult learning curve with retrofocus designs - note how many of these were "farmed out" to Schneider, Minolta or Zeiss designers (21 f/4 R, 24 f/2.8 R, 16 R, 15 R). Leica really didn't get a handle on the type until the redesigned 28 Elmarit-M v.3 of 1980 (and subsequent R lenses, 28 f/2.8 v.2, 35 f/2 v.2, 19 f/2.8 v.2 from 1980-1990)

[jc_braconi]

I also prefer my V1

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!

Edited November 26, 2011 by jc_braconi

[luigi bertolotti]

...

Leitz/Leica had a difficult learning curve with retrofocus designs - note how many of these were "farmed out" to Schneider, Minolta or Zeiss designers (21 f/4 R, 24 f/2.8 R, 16 R, 15 R). Leica really didn't get a handle on the type until the redesigned 28 Elmarit-M v.3 of 1980 (and subsequent R lenses, 28 f/2.8 v.2, 35 f/2 v.2, 19 f/2.8 v.2 from 1980-1990)

 

Indeed, Puts writes that even the symmetrical Elmarit 28 v1 was a "Schneider Angulon inspired" design. Frankly, my feeling is that only with Elmarit 28 v3 they surpassed the modest-but-honest Summaron 2,8cm f 5,6...

Edited November 25, 2011 by luigi bertolotti