luigi bertolotti Posted March 12, 2007 Share #21 Posted March 12, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) Last question... which lenses are the 50 (1,5) and 35 ? Can You tell me the name and the s/n ? That is just for curiosity...as You have well understood, I'm really a passionate amateur of this kind of equipments. I suppose 50 is a Summarit... if it has a "strange" engraving with the words "Taylor & Hobson"... is not so common. The 35 suppose is Summaron (f 3,5 or 2,8) or Summicron (f 2) : if it is Summicron and marked "Leitz Wetzlar" and not "Leitz Canada" COULD BE of a rather rare version... I wait for your data, if You like. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted March 12, 2007 Posted March 12, 2007 Hi luigi bertolotti, Take a look here Visoflex - What are these parts. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
ASBR Posted March 12, 2007 Author Share #22 Posted March 12, 2007 Last question... which lenses are the 50 (1,5) and 35 ? Can You tell me the name and the s/n ? That is just for curiosity...as You have well understood, I'm really a passionate amateur of this kind of equipments. I suppose 50 is a Summarit... if it has a "strange" engraving with the words "Taylor & Hobson"... is not so common. The 35 suppose is Summaron (f 3,5 or 2,8) or Summicron (f 2) : if it is Summicron and marked "Leitz Wetzlar" and not "Leitz Canada" COULD BE of a rather rare version... I wait for your data, if You like. Yes the 50 is a Summarit, 50/1.5, Nr 1120144, no Taylor/Hobson or anything like that. Full of dust deep down, and some scratches on the lens. Hope it dont show on the pics... The 35 is a Summaron f3.5. Nr 1289297, Leitz Wetzlar (just like the 50mm). Thanks again for all your help I'll go out now and do some teleshooting with the 280mm. Gonna try it at some different apertures, just like the other lenses. Heard the 50mm are supposed to be real soft when wider than 5.6, but I mostly shoot a bit wider anyway. Short DOF is fun and I'm not used to that from my P&S's.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted March 12, 2007 Share #23 Posted March 12, 2007 Scratches...damn... they soften the image a lot... pity Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ASBR Posted March 12, 2007 Author Share #24 Posted March 12, 2007 Scratches...damn... they soften the image a lot... pity But no BIG ones that you see straight away, like "oh god, thats one hell of a scratch". Rather loads of very small and short scratches that you only spot when viewing the lens at special angles and special lighting. Dont know how bad that is. Anyway the lens is supposed to be very soft (and bad?) anyway.....and also its full of dust. To top it all it got a hard punch today, when it fell out of the case, like 5-10 cm down to a wooden bench. I guess it might be ok anyway with no extra harm done, its not like its full of loose pieces and moving parts and stuff, but I took a lot of testshots afterwards, at all kinds of lighting and all kinds of apertures. Gonna turn the film in tomorrow I hope (some shots left) and then in 2-3 days I'll get the answers of how good it, the other lenses, and the body, is By the way, are there any new production of lenses for the M3, or lenses for some other Leica that perfectly fit the M3? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted March 12, 2007 Share #25 Posted March 12, 2007 ALL the current Leica lenses for the current models (M7 M8 MP) fit perfectly Leica M3 : M3 has three frames in the viewfinder (50 - 90 - 135 mm) so is better to chose between these focal lengths... for other lengths you have to focus through the Rangefinder, but frame through an external viewfinder, mounted on the usual accessory shoe (a lot of viewfinders are available... new, used, 3rd party....) ; current Leica product range includes lenses from 21 to 135 mm (21-24-28-35-50-75-90-135). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ASBR Posted March 13, 2007 Author Share #26 Posted March 13, 2007 I dared disasembling it Think it went well. I loosened the front-clip around the lens and took out the outer bellow, then unscrewing the 130mm and its adapter. Then, the 50mm Elmar doesn't fit any way, so I put it in its 5cm Elmar adapter that I thought were for some other use, but then it does actually fit on the bellow. Though I cant have the front bellow attached to its front like on the 135mm, the 50mm is just too small and doesn't have the same traces/tracks/rails (whatever is the correct word) on front of it. mediaHUMP - Where all the media lurks! Anyway, no matter if I did something wrong or not, I'm gonna try some macro with this setup cause it seems I get around 1:1 with it EDIT: Wow, the highest magnification ain't when its pushed back, its when its as far away from the mirrorbox as possible, and its like 3:1 then !!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted March 13, 2007 Share #27 Posted March 13, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) Your impression of a STRONG Macro is correct: yesterday evening I gave a look to the specifications of the Elmar 50 mounted on your bellows (I have a catalog of 1960...): they stated that it gives a 2,5:1 magnification ratio. Enjoy it ! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ASBR Posted March 13, 2007 Author Share #28 Posted March 13, 2007 Your impression of a STRONG Macro is correct: yesterday evening I gave a look to the specifications of the Elmar 50 mounted on your bellows (I have a catalog of 1960...):they stated that it gives a 2,5:1 magnification ratio. Enjoy it ! Well, I captured 11mm wide with it, and the film is 36mm wide, so 36/11 ought to give 3.3:1 But I'm no good at these things really so I'm not sure thats how you calculate it. Anyway the film is in now and with some luck I'll get in on friday. Then I can scan it in a few weeks when I'm by the scanner the next time.....lots of wait Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ASBR Posted March 15, 2007 Author Share #29 Posted March 15, 2007 Ouch, I just got the film back. Didn't do any prints, just developing the film and got small miniature film-sized prints collected on one page. The strange thing is that like 6-7 of the pictures have a straight line high up in the frame, where above it everything seems more sharp and less exposed, while the rest of the picture below that line are like hazy or something. You better look for yourselves at two samples below. No high quality since its very small pictures and I photographed them quickly just to show you. mediaHUMP - Where all the media lurks! Anyone have any idea what it might be? Something wrong with the film, the developing, or the camera? As I said, around 6-7 pics are affected with this. The rest seem to be fine. One of these pics are with the 50mm and one are with the 280mm tele, so its not connected to one lens, and other pics with both the 50 and the 280 look nice, as do all of the 35mm ones. Thanks if anyone has any idea Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ASBR Posted March 19, 2007 Author Share #30 Posted March 19, 2007 By the way, it says "Limited" on my 280/4.8. Does that mean theres something special with mine, or is it just, as someone said earlier, a regular 280mm of type 2? mediaHUMP - Where all the media lurks! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted March 19, 2007 Share #31 Posted March 19, 2007 Difficult to give a definitve answer regarding the "stripe" problem... surely it is NOT the camera shutter (the banding , in this case, would show parallel to the short side of the film), could be some kind of light intrusion, and it can happen in certain conditions with an old Visoflex: some coupling not correct... could also come from the viewfinder of the Visoflex if not well fitted and with some "baffle" of light that strikes somewhere... this can explain why the "stripe" appears only on some shots. Or could be incorrect movement of the Visoflex mirror... but I suppose in this case one would see a stronger effect (a completely black area along the long side, as an example)... anyway I suggest to try to make some picture, flipping the mirror BEFORE releasing the shutter, to be sure that mirror does not concern this problem: you can do it avoiding to use the twin cable release, and tipically with a tripod: you frame in and focus, then, with the proper button, flip up the mirror of the Visoflex, THEN fire the shutter. Where is located the "Limited" engravings on the 280 ? It can be part of the name of the manufacturer written around the front lens (something like "Leitz Canada Limited") Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
k_g_wolf ✝ Posted March 19, 2007 Share #32 Posted March 19, 2007 Could be the shutter of the M3, which is bouncing back. Can be adjusted. The best would be to sponsor your camera a short brake in aLEICA- clinic. The cure for this disease is a cla ... Best Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ASBR Posted March 19, 2007 Author Share #33 Posted March 19, 2007 No it cant be the visoflex, since its on lots of pics with the regular 50mm too. I'll go to the store and ask later on, they know lots about old cameras and Leicas. I dont see "Limited" anywhere on the 280mm, but it is on the box as you can see on the screen I posted above. Strange though that the box says "11912 F", which I thought were some kind of serial, but around the lens it says 1850622. Anyway I dont get why the box wouldn't be the original for the lens, sounds very unlikely, and the box says Limited...whatever that now might mean. Made a small collage of the lens, since I'm probably about to sell it. mediaHUMP - Where all the media lurks! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted March 19, 2007 Share #34 Posted March 19, 2007 All OK, "Limited" is simply the complete name of the Company "Ernest Leitz Canada Limited" - written also as "Ltd"... is like "Gmbh" in German or "Inc." in US... 11912 F was the model number of the 280 f 4,8 lens: any Leica item has its own The six digit number is the serial number of the lens; all Leica lenses are numbered... starting in the '20s at about 96.000 (previous were fixed lenses); numbering is unique, indipendently from the factory (Germany or Canada) and goes on nowadays (think in the range of 4.xxx.xxx; the number allows to define the year of manufacturing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ASBR Posted March 19, 2007 Author Share #35 Posted March 19, 2007 All OK, "Limited" is simply the complete name of the Company "Ernest Leitz Canada Limited" - written also as "Ltd"... is like "Gmbh" in German or "Inc." in US...11912 F was the model number of the 280 f 4,8 lens: any Leica item has its own The six digit number is the serial number of the lens; all Leica lenses are numbered... starting in the '20s at about 96.000 (previous were fixed lenses); numbering is unique, indipendently from the factory (Germany or Canada) and goes on nowadays (think in the range of 4.xxx.xxx; the number allows to define the year of manufacturing. Ah, ok, thanks for info Guess its not worth much more than around 250 US $ then. Seen lots of them go for around that price. Maybe depends if you're lucky and find a desperate buyer or not, since they dont seem to be THAT common on ebay and similar. Mine is in pretty good shape too I believe, looks very nice. A little dust in a thin smooth layer just below the front lens that can be seen at specific angles/lighting, but of course not visible when looking through the lens from the back. We'll see how it goes, thanks for all help anyway. I'm gonna keep the camera though thats for sure, selling most of the accessories though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.