luigi bertolotti Posted July 19, 2013 Share #21 Posted July 19, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) OK ... doubt solved, thanks Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted July 19, 2013 Posted July 19, 2013 Hi luigi bertolotti, Take a look here Elmar red scale. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
UliWer Posted July 19, 2013 Share #22 Posted July 19, 2013 Uhm... I'd like to have an evidence of this... don't remember to have seen one RS at f16 (and surely haven't one in my "personal archives"... some dozens of Elmars' pictures from various sources... I've checked... )JC... have you something to say about ? I know that, as you say, "exception is the rule" but I'm curios about this minor question... I tried to assemble a list of post-war changes of the 3.5/50mm Elmar in the German forum once: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-sammler-historica/162295-elmar-3-5-5-cm-neue.html#post1588636 If my sources are not wrong, f/16 and the modern f-stop scale was introduced after no. 630.001 (1946). F/22 was introduced after 647.001 (1948). For the red scale - with f/22 - and the rhombic mark sources differ : Thiele: 1.001.001; van Hasbroeck and Laney: 905.000; the Leica Pocket Book: about 910.000. I don't know sources which tell when the triangle mark started. The change must have come between 1.066.826 and 1.089.547, for mine with rhombic mark has the former number, mine with triangle the later one. It is still not completely clear if there have been optical changes before the red scale and when they were introduced. Laney in his "Leica Collector's Guide, 2nd. edit. 2005, p. 226 gives a hint: "it has been suggested that for a brief period there was an intermediate design." He quotes "Nicholson-Johnson, B&A, Viewfinder, 1997, 30, No.1, p32." as a source. Anyway, as hard as I try I don't see any differences in the results of early prewar versions and a red scale. My coated nickel version from 1932 still seems to be the best - though this may just be the result of focussing differences when I tried to compare them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted July 20, 2013 Share #23 Posted July 20, 2013 ...For the red scale - with f/22 - and the rhombic mark sources differ :Thiele: 1.001.001; van Hasbroeck and Laney: 905.000; the Leica Pocket Book: about 910.000. . Thanks for the link Uli.... interesting read (despite my very poor knowledge of Deutsch ) But for the start of Red Scale the above s/n are really in the high range.... considering that JC has a Red Scale in the 772.xxx... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
farnz Posted July 20, 2013 Share #24 Posted July 20, 2013 ... I don't know sources which tell when the triangle mark started. The change must have come between 1.066.826 and 1.089.547, for mine with rhombic mark has the former number, mine with triangle the later one. ... In case it helps, my RS has the rhombic mark, f/22, and s/n 1,003,7nn. Pete. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jc_braconi Posted July 20, 2013 Share #25 Posted July 20, 2013 Thanks for the link Uli.... interesting read (despite my very poor knowledge of Deutsch ) ... Luigi, use Google chrome and so you can translate German to English that is the better version way. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orient XI Posted July 25, 2013 Share #26 Posted July 25, 2013 Luigi,I have a lot of Red Scale, if you accept that 7 is a lot ... Some with triangle some with rhombus some at f 16 and some at f 22 The old one from 1950 772xxx the youngest from 1655.1 244xxx I hope you mean 1955 for the youngest! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jc_braconi Posted July 25, 2013 Share #27 Posted July 25, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) I hope you mean 1955 for the youngest! Thanks, corrected it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UliWer Posted July 25, 2013 Share #28 Posted July 25, 2013 Luigi, use Google chrome and so you can translate German to English that is the better version way. Well, may be that Google is better, though I tried to translate the essentials from the link into some sort of English in #22. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.