Jump to content

135mm Elmar


Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi guys, I decided to sell one of my lens earlier on this month so I put my 135mm Elmar M mount on e-bay and sold it quite easily for £380 inc post to a guy in Greece.

 

Well I thought it was an M mount lens but according to the buyer it is an LTM lens with a M adaptor fitted. Must confess I never even noticed and the lens was bought from Everard in the US at auction about two years ago and it was advertised then as an M mount lens.

 

Serial no is 17770954 and it was in mint condition (e-bay link below to sale)

 

Too late now but there were only about 3200 LTM lenses made according to the WiKI and in fact the serial no on my my lens isn't listed as a LTM lens but a bayonet lens.

 

1768001 1771000 Elmar 1:4 / 135mm (M) 1960 3000

 

I'm not convinced that the lens is an LTM lens but I can only take the buyer at face value and he doesn't want to return the lens and is also happy with it so I can only conclude that he is correct.

 

Just wondering if I've made a big mistake here or are prices roughly the same for both lens?

 

Can anyone tell from the photos whether in fact the lens is an LTM mount?

 

Leica Elmar M 135mm F4.0 | eBay

 

Thanks

 

Tony

Edited by Twotone
Link to post
Share on other sites

I noticed when you bought it !!!

 

Tony why sellin it ?

 

Quite frankly JC I needed to get some funds to pay bills plus I wasn't really using the lens but I knew that would be the case when I bought it as I have an old Nikon 135mm lens that has rarely been used in the 30 odd years that I've had it.

 

I never noticed that there was an adaptor on the lens at all.

 

What about the SN JC, it seems to be from a batch of bayonet mount lenses, no?

 

Tony

Link to post
Share on other sites

...

Serial no is 17770954 and it was in mint condition (e-bay link below to sale)

 

Too late now but there were only about 3200 LTM lenses made according to the WiKI and in fact the serial no on my my lens isn't listed as a LTM lens but a bayonet lens.

 

1768001 1771000 Elmar 1:4 / 135mm (M) 1960 3000

 

..

 

Your number 1770954 (no triple 7 behind the 1 and before the 0 !) does fit into the numbers which are listed for a batch of 3000 lenses from 1.768.001 to 1.771.000 of the 1:4/135mm Elmar from 1960 - a part of them being in LTM mount (according to Thiele's "Kleines Fabrikationshandbuch - Leica-Objektive,, 3. edition, Munich 2007).

 

The photos obviously show an LTM 135mm Elmar with adapter for M bayonet. The different batches of the Elmar were not either M or LTM, but always mixed up - with just a small number of LTM versions among them.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Your number 1770954 (no triple 7 behind the 1 and before the 0 !) does fit into the numbers which are listed for a batch of 3000 lenses from 1.768.001 to 1.771.000 of the 1:4/135mm Elmar from 1960 - a part of them being in LTM mount (according to Thiele's "Kleines Fabrikationshandbuch - Leica-Objektive,, 3. edition, Munich 2007).

 

The photos obviously show an LTM 135mm Elmar with adapter for M bayonet. The different batches of the Elmar were not either M or LTM, but always mixed up - with just a small number of LTM versions among them.

 

Thanks UliWer, appologies for the typo in the SN.

 

Obviously both me and the auction house who sold me the lens missed the M adaptor.

 

Not that it makes any difference to me now but purely for academic purposes are any of the lenses more collectable/valuable or are both versions of the lens pretty much the same in every way, i.e. performance and sell on value etc.

 

I noticed in another thread that someone posted that M lenses when new were slightly more expensive to buy than the equivalent LTM lens but there wasn't much in it, probably about £50/$100 or so back in 1960.

 

regards,

 

Tony

Link to post
Share on other sites

....

 

Not that it makes any difference to me now but purely for academic purposes are any of the lenses more collectable/valuable or are both versions of the lens pretty much the same in every way, i.e. performance and sell on value etc....

 

Tony

 

The lenses in themselves are absolutely the same : there is the feeling that the screw mount are someway less common than the M mount (which is logical, being a lens belonging to the "M era" - introduced in 1960) so they are often valued a bit more... but of course the CONDITIONS do command the value. It's a very appreciated lens, in general, and, though not rare, significantly more costly than its older brother Hektor

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty nearly identical to my no 1892492, also LTM with M adaptor. Bought secondhand with my M3 in '68 and a valued companion ever since.

The price seems very good, I haven't really looked but I had the impression that even the Elmar f/4 went for less than that usually, well done.

 

Gerry

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty nearly identical to my no 1892492, also LTM with M adaptor. Bought secondhand with my M3 in '68 and a valued companion ever since.

The price seems very good, I haven't really looked but I had the impression that even the Elmar f/4 went for less than that usually, well done.

 

Gerry

 

Hi Gerry, the prices for Leica lenses are definitely creeping up.

 

Before I sold my lens there was an M bayonet Elmar sold on ebay UK, which was mint too and came with a lens case and lens cap and body cap and maybe an original receipt, that lens went for £300 with one bidder and a starting price of £300.

 

There is currently another one on e-bay UK with the same starting price of £300.

 

I started my own auction at £350 and had two bidders one from Canada who matched my starting bid, and the guy who bought it was from Greece. He paid to £360 plus £20 postage but the postage actually cost me £30 because I insured the lens for another £10.

 

Rigid summicrons are now getting sold for up to £900, I bought mine two years ago in mint condition for £550 inc postage and bank fees from Holland.

 

Leica M3s are generally not going up in line with lens prices in fact I would say that the prices for the cameras are going down.

 

I offered my entire collection to a Leica dealer in the South of England but he came back with a derisory offer and in fact he told me that the Elmar was worth only about £150:D

 

Tony

Edited by Twotone
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The lenses in themselves are absolutely the same : there is the feeling that the screw mount are someway less common than the M mount (which is logical, being a lens belonging to the "M era" - introduced in 1960) so they are often valued a bit more... but of course the CONDITIONS do command the value. It's a very appreciated lens, in general, and, though not rare, significantly more costly than its older brother Hektor

 

Thanks Luigi, the lens is in mint condition, I doubt it was ever used but it's not a collector's lens as it doesn't have the box or papers, it has the plastic keeper but that's in poor condition as you can see from the photos.

 

A lovely lens nevertheless, I really liked it but I could see that I was only ever going to use it very rarely, maybe once or twice on a roll of film, which made it a very expensive occasional use lens.

 

Tony

Link to post
Share on other sites

....

 

...I really liked it but I could see that I was only ever going to use it very rarely, maybe once or twice on a roll of film, which made it a very expensive occasional use lens....

 

Tony

 

:) ... which is NORMAL for all the lovers of old Leitz gear...:)... How many times did I use my Hektor 125 ? or my Summicron 90 in screw mount ? or my goggled Summaron 35 ? or... ?... and none of them is "collector grade"... but I like to have them :o

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

:) ... which is NORMAL for all the lovers of old Leitz gear...:)... How many times did I use my Hektor 125 ? or my Summicron 90 in screw mount ? or my goggled Summaron 35 ? or... ?... and none of them is "collector grade"... but I like to have them :o

 

Hi Luigi, yes completely agree with you but unfortunately I can't afford to have expensive glass that isn't being used.

 

Personally I have too much money tied up in the camera stuff and I have bills to pay so it's really a no brainer I'm afraid plus the lenses have gone up in price since I bought them.

 

I can always buy the lenses again, maybe:)

 

Regards,

 

Tony

Link to post
Share on other sites

The best way is not to be impressed too much by some auction results. With a bit of patience, other opportunities will come. If you don't intend to use a lens for a screwmount body in the case of the the 4/135 Elmar you will succeed perhaps safer and cheaper if you look for a M-mount version.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I doubt I have taken as many as an average of 2 pictures per roll with both my 135s altogether (I have a 135/2.8 as well) but I wouldn't like to be without them, I prefer a reflex usually for that long, but you can't always take everything with you.

I paid about £40 for my 135/4 in '68 if I remember rightly, so like most leica lenses its a good investment for my heirs as well as fun to use, as long as I can afford to hang on to them!

 

Gerry

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello, TwoTone and All,

 

I have lens #1770988 which I inherited from my dad, just 34 serial numbers from this one under discussion. It is in screw mount. The lens depicted also looks to me to have an M adapter meant for bringing up the 35 mm frame on M2 and 135mm frame on M3. Fabulous lens to be used with Visoflex II or III plus Bellows II.

 

Best,

David

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello, TwoTone and All,

 

I have lens #1770988 which I inherited from my dad, just 34 serial numbers from this one under discussion. It is in screw mount. The lens depicted also looks to me to have an M adapter meant for bringing up the 35 mm frame on M2 and 135mm frame on M3. Fabulous lens to be used with Visoflex II or III plus Bellows II.

 

Best,

David

Fabulous lens head to be used with Visoflex II or III plus Bellows II.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...