Hollywood_Shooter Posted June 8, 2012 Author Share #21 Posted June 8, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) You guys ROCK! Thanks for the quick responses! I do have the Elmar 9cm f4 as well, but it's already mounted in the bellows, and I didn't realize this was the focusing mount that goes with it. hello, ld like to know if the second item is jut a tube or there are some lens inside ? Hey JC, no, there's no glass inside that black tube. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted June 8, 2012 Posted June 8, 2012 Hi Hollywood_Shooter, Take a look here What is this. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
lumen Posted June 8, 2012 Share #22 Posted June 8, 2012 ... the (fully extended) focusing mount of an Elmar 9 cm f4 : not strange it lacks the lens unit : the two parts were customer-unscrewable for use of the lens unit only on various near focusing and reflex devices ; they were even sold separately. May I ask a question re: the focusing mount of the 90mm Elmar? I am curious as to whether the lens head of the three element Elmar would fit the focusing mount of the four element head? I have been casually looking for a good three element 90mm Elmar (L39) as my 135mm f4 Elmar is lovely but often on the long side. One thought was that it might be possible to marry a three element lens head with another focusing mount- but this raises some questions I haven't been able to find the answers to; firstly being possibility, secondly whether the two would be appropriate with one another, and (very much) thirdly if this would be worth doing with regard to residual value. This question has been flitting through my mind for a while now, if it should generate any thoughts somebody would be willing to share I would be very grateful indeed. Thank you! edit: also may I assume that the three element Elmar lens head was never sold individually? I imagine not, given the numbers, but would also like to ask this. Thank you Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted June 8, 2012 Share #23 Posted June 8, 2012 May I ask a question re: the focusing mount of the 90mm Elmar? I am curious as to whether the lens head of the three element Elmar would fit the focusing mount of the four element head? edit: also may I assume that the three element Elmar lens head was never sold individually? I imagine not, given the numbers, but would also like to ask this. Thank you The screw threads of 3 elements and 4 elements Elmar 90 lensheads are the same... this means, for instance, that the Visoflex focusing mount OUAGO fits both. BUT : owing to a narrow internal diameter, the 3 elements lenshead does NOT fit into the 4 elements focus units; you can do vice-versa... see this just taken and very rough PC-pic of a 4 elements E39 lenshead onto a 3 elements focus mount : 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! But this doesn't mean that this stupid combo does work right... ... measuring with a caliper, one can easily verify that the two (identical) female threads on the 3 and 4 elements focus units are not at the same distance from flange : the strange combo won't focus correctly: I did not try but it's sure.... after all, there was no reason for this odd "backward compatibility"... and even for the 90 4 elements some slight difference form versions of different times does exist... Leitz stated that to achieve infinity focus with OUAGO "old" (s/n unspecified) lenseheads had to be sent to the factory for modification. And about the 3 elements lens unit, afaik it was not sold separately (differently from the 4 elements one, and from the Elmarit 90 lenshead, too : ELKOO/11026 was its code) : but I am not 100% sure... the lenshead was coded ERKOM/11128 and Laney describes it as "Elmar 90 lenshead old and new design"... but the catalog of 1964 depicts the Elmar 90 in the 3 elements version, and the 11128 in the 4 elements version (the last one, of course, E 39), so I think that Laney does refer to the mount design (which changed from A36 to E39), not to the lenses' schema. Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! But this doesn't mean that this stupid combo does work right... ... measuring with a caliper, one can easily verify that the two (identical) female threads on the 3 and 4 elements focus units are not at the same distance from flange : the strange combo won't focus correctly: I did not try but it's sure.... after all, there was no reason for this odd "backward compatibility"... and even for the 90 4 elements some slight difference form versions of different times does exist... Leitz stated that to achieve infinity focus with OUAGO "old" (s/n unspecified) lenseheads had to be sent to the factory for modification. And about the 3 elements lens unit, afaik it was not sold separately (differently from the 4 elements one, and from the Elmarit 90 lenshead, too : ELKOO/11026 was its code) : but I am not 100% sure... the lenshead was coded ERKOM/11128 and Laney describes it as "Elmar 90 lenshead old and new design"... but the catalog of 1964 depicts the Elmar 90 in the 3 elements version, and the 11128 in the 4 elements version (the last one, of course, E 39), so I think that Laney does refer to the mount design (which changed from A36 to E39), not to the lenses' schema. ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/181133-what-is-this/?do=findComment&comment=2035249'>More sharing options...
lumen Posted June 8, 2012 Share #24 Posted June 8, 2012 Dear Mr Bertolotti, thank you very, very much for your knowledge and for the depth of your post. I would also like to offer my appreciation for your trouble in investigating and measuring these combinations empirically. I'm deeply impressed by the generosity and expertise shown to these questions of arcane and obscure matters and think that the concentration of quality information found here is something special (and makes for many hours of interesting reading!) Being unencumbered with the desire to investigate this false path I'll continue looking with an easier heart. (Now, if only there was a known cure for thoughts of the 28mm Summaron...) Thank you! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Geschlecht Posted June 9, 2012 Share #25 Posted June 9, 2012 Hello Everybody, Hello lumen, Welcome to the Forum. Perhaps the black tube w/ what appears to be 60mm's of extension is an extension tube for a Leicaflex. It is similar to the 14198 for the 60mm, F2.8 or the 14262 for the100mm, F4, only twice their extension. Perhaps the tube in the photo is an extension tube for a longer lens. Perhaps a prototype 60mm extension tube for the 400 & 560 F6.8's. Later replaced by the 14182. Or perhaps a non Leitz/Leica adaptrer of some sort. Best Regards, Michael Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jc_braconi Posted June 9, 2012 Share #26 Posted June 9, 2012 Hello Everybody, Hello lumen, Welcome to the Forum. Perhaps the black tube w/ what appears to be 60mm's of extension is an extension tube for a Leicaflex. It is similar to the 14198 for the 60mm, F2.8 or the 14262 for the100mm, F4, only twice their extension. Perhaps the tube in the photo is an extension tube for a longer lens. Perhaps a prototype 60mm extension tube for the 400 & 560 F6.8's. Later replaced by the 14182. Or perhaps a non Leitz/Leica adaptrer of some sort. Best Regards, Michael Is that tube has 3 or 4 bayonet tenons ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted June 9, 2012 Share #27 Posted June 9, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) Dear Mr Bertolotti, thank you very, very much for your knowledge and for the depth of your post. I would also like to offer my appreciation for your trouble in investigating and measuring these combinations empirically. I'm deeply impressed by the generosity and expertise shown to these questions of arcane and obscure matters and think that the concentration of quality information found here is something special (and makes for many hours of interesting reading!) Being unencumbered with the desire to investigate this false path I'll continue looking with an easier heart. (Now, if only there was a known cure for thoughts of the 28mm Summaron...) Thank you! This section is a special one of this very special forum.... we like really a lot to go in depth on odd details .... and what about the Summaron 2,8 cm ? It's simply a delicious tiny lens which is still surprisingly good as user when one doesn't care of top aperture... 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! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/181133-what-is-this/?do=findComment&comment=2035638'>More sharing options...
lumen Posted June 9, 2012 Share #28 Posted June 9, 2012 Yes! This Summaron has been daily in my thoughts for a long time now (I'm sorry to say that the picture will not help either:D)- even repeating the mantra SOOBK, SOOBK, SOOBK is of no help I have been seeking a more 'sensible' 28mm alternative- although in my heart I know that there can be ultimately only one cure for this... Thank you! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jc_braconi Posted June 9, 2012 Share #29 Posted June 9, 2012 Yes! This Summaron has been daily in my thoughts for a long time now (I'm sorry to say that the picture will not help either:D)- even repeating the mantra SOOBK, SOOBK, SOOBK is of no help I have been seeking a more 'sensible' 28mm alternative- although in my heart I know that there can be ultimately only one cure for this... Thank you! kind of them 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! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/181133-what-is-this/?do=findComment&comment=2035774'>More sharing options...
jc_braconi Posted June 9, 2012 Share #30 Posted June 9, 2012 This section is a special one of this very special forum.... we like really a lot to go in depth on odd details .... and what about the Summaron 2,8 cm ? It's simply a delicious tiny lens which is still surprisingly good as user when one doesn't care of top aperture... Avrebbe bisogno di una bella soffiata no ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert_M Posted June 9, 2012 Share #31 Posted June 9, 2012 The OP has put all of this equipment (and more) up on ebay. The focorapid here: Leica Leitz Focorapid FULDY/FULEC --- Hard to find and MINT! | eBay The other stuff is easy to find after that link. It seems that all of the prices he offers are equal to the highest value he finds anywhere on the web. IMHO, many of the offerings are way overpriced. Just thought others might be interested. RM Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lumen Posted June 9, 2012 Share #32 Posted June 9, 2012 Mr Braconi, thank you for sharing these beautiful items. (Also, as the opportunity is present, I would like to offer appreciation for your website- I have learnt much from this incredible resource- most recently in investigating reproduction devices for library use. Thank you) The VIOOH/TUVOO combination has long been an object of interest owing to its unusual appearance- may I ask as to the practical side of viewing through the optic? I imagine that the TUVOO would reduce the 28mm field of view to the 35mm 'frame' of the VIOOH and thus be the largest image to see through; may I ask how the view compares with that through a SLOOZ or SUOOQ? Gentlemen, it is now clear that a SNOOX is in my future, thank you! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert_M Posted June 9, 2012 Share #33 Posted June 9, 2012 We must draw the conclusion that in those days, photographers with tele lenses limited themselves to photographing absolutely immovable objects. Otherwise, given the shallow d.o.f., they would have been stuck with the wrong focus after just a few seconds. And if they did not move, why the need to switch repeatedly at will between three different statues? Photographing the gulls that sit on their heads? The forte of Ernst Leitz in those days was designing complicated, too-clever-by half and very impractical devices. For which today's collectors should of course be grateful. The old man from the Focusing Age Lars, I believe you have made the wrong assumption in this case. Attached is the Focorapid manual in English (and this manual is clearly aimed at the US market). The device was specifically aimed at sports coverage. One could preset several distances where the action would take place (or was expected to take place). My edition of Matheson's book (1969 edition) also has a discussion of the Focorapid use and he also discusses how it is used for sports coverage. You will have to do some cut-and-pasting to put this manual back together. I was hampered by the file limits and the fact it is a foldout style document. RM Focorapid Manual eng - A.pdf Focorapid Manual eng - B.pdf Focorapid Manual eng - C.pdf Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert_M Posted June 9, 2012 Share #34 Posted June 9, 2012 Is that tube has 3 or 4 bayonet tenons ? I see that the tube is also listed on ebay with many more pictures. It looks to be an R mount flange. The seller identifies it as a Visoflex item but that can not be the case with an R flange. I'm puzzled as to what it is. One can make a guess that the front threads are for a roughly 64 to 70mm diameter threaded unit (the outside diameter of an R flange is 60mm for reference in the picture). The front of an M-bellows is a 64mm thread and there are lens heads with that diameter thread (but different pitch). Could be an extension tube. But then, where does the focusing unit go? Ideas anyone? RM Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gvaliquette Posted June 9, 2012 Share #35 Posted June 9, 2012 kind of them JC, This is hardly a cure! Guy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted June 9, 2012 Share #36 Posted June 9, 2012 .... The VIOOH/TUVOO combination has long been an object of interest owing to its unusual appearance- may I ask as to the practical side of viewing through the optic? I imagine that the TUVOO would reduce the 28mm field of view to the 35mm 'frame' of the VIOOH and thus be the largest image to see through; may I ask how the view compares with that through a SLOOZ or SUOOQ? Gentlemen, it is now clear that a SNOOX is in my future, thank you! Waiting for JC opinion... I have all the above 3 28mm VFs... and my preferred is the SUOOQ (use it regularly on M8 for 21mm framing), even if the SLOOZ is the best in strictly optical terms; but the SUOOQ, with its quick and easy "semi-folding" is the less intrusive on the camera... and this, of course, is the main issue for the VIOOH/TUVOO combo.... : it's fine, very well engineered, smart... but is a really HEAVY device to carry around... framing is precise, but you have lot of glass elements in front of your eye, and, even if well clean, the contrast does suffer of this. But... a collector CANNOT have NOT it... (and there are also number of variants... ... right, JC ?) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lumen Posted June 9, 2012 Share #37 Posted June 9, 2012 Thank you- but may I say that this could be a ruinous path which I'm desperately trying to keep away from... being a young man less than two years into Leica I can all too well imagine the ravages that this blight may inflict on my future if not carefully kept in check It is a great pleasure being able to explore photography with such beautiful equipment- I try to restrict myself to the "essentials" (although my "drawer of shame" belies this:o) and this special lens is surely in that category. Incidentally, this place has switched me on to a whole new world. Receiving such guidance is amazing and gratefully appreciated, thank you! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jc_braconi Posted June 9, 2012 Share #38 Posted June 9, 2012 Mr Braconi, thank you for sharing these beautiful items. (Also, as the opportunity is present, I would like to offer appreciation for your website- I have learnt much from this incredible resource- most recently in investigating reproduction devices for library use. Thank you) The VIOOH/TUVOO combination has long been an object of interest owing to its unusual appearance- may I ask as to the practical side of viewing through the optic? I imagine that the TUVOO would reduce the 28mm field of view to the 35mm 'frame' of the VIOOH and thus be the largest image to see through; may I ask how the view compares with that through a SLOOZ or SUOOQ? Gentlemen, it is now clear that a SNOOX is in my future, thank you! Thank you very much for your appreciated comments. The TUVOO is a negative lens so it gives in combination of the VIOOH a large field of view inclosed in the 35mm frame.(same as on the Tele Elmarit 2.8_135 in the 90 frame) for the clearest view, I ld class from less to better as this : SUOOQ, TUVOO, SLOOZ. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted June 9, 2012 Share #39 Posted June 9, 2012 Thank you- but may I say that this could be a ruinous path which I'm desperately trying to keep away from... being a young man less than two years into Leica ... let me calculate... when I was a "young man less than two years into Leica"... it was 1981 (25)... with a IIIC and 5 lenses (Hektor 28 Summaron 35 Elmar 50 Elmar 90 Hektor 135) and no more than 4 viewfinders (but the 135 was still russian... I went to Leica coming from Zorky4K... ) ... I did NOT desperately try to keep away... so that now lenses are 58 and viewfinders 19 (not to speak of the rest)... But am still alive and have grown a family... don't worry, spend with care and fun, and go on !!! (btw... you quote cigarettes as a hobby of yours.... Leica is better in most senses...provided one not gives fire to the gear) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jc_braconi Posted June 10, 2012 Share #40 Posted June 10, 2012 so that now lenses are 58 and viewfinders 19 (not to speak of the rest)... Luigi, is it possible from you to post picts about the 19 viewfinders ? Thank you in advance Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.