Leica 50mm Summicron Rigid Question...

[RobWCanada]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hey,

 

I've read a lot on this forum, but I believe this is actually my first post. Everyone here seems so knowledgable. Anyway, just got an M9, 50mm Summilux ASPH, 90mm Summicron ASPH APO, 28mm Summicron, and most recently a 50mm Summicron Rigid from 1957 (very nice feeling lens. So small too. ha!

 

Anyway, that is the question I have. Just got the rigid last week and looking at the front element there are absolutely no scratches or fog or fungus, however, what is the thing which goes around the element on the edge by the filter threads (circumference of the lens element)...it kind of looks like black plastic or something? Is that normal? In the pic, you can see it best on the left side of the lens element but it does go all the way around.

 

 

Rob

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!

[Advertisement]

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

[TomB_tx]

In your photo the ring appears to be on top of the front element, just under the retaining ring. I can't be sure, because there are no reflections of the light source that overlap that ring. (They would be cut off at the edge if the ring is on top.)

My rigid is a later (1962) vintage, and at first I thought it also had that ring, but looking closer you can tell that on my lens the ring at that diameter is just under the thin front element, so I moved around to show the light reflection over the ring:

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!

It's possible that they used a "pad" ring under the front retaining ring and then deleted it later as un-necessary, but my earlier M collapsible doesn't have that either.

So you might make sure it isn't under the front element. If not, since there is a similar diameter ring under that element anyway, I doubt if it has any effect on the performance.

[RobWCanada]

Well, from what I can tell from using the lens it doesn't affect performance. I just want to make sure it's supposed to be like that (if that's how they are, that's how they are...). I paid a bit more for this lens because of it's condition and I want to make sure that it's not in fact a defect I overlooked.

[jdlaing]

I believe it is part of the mechanism that holds the lens elements on that model. Not to worry.

[semi-ambivalent]

*Guessing just from your image* that ring looks like a very thin crescent. Is it centered on the front element, equally visible all around the element's edge? If not something is amiss. Leica did have optical formula(s) that involved a very thin air gap between a couple elements. Someone here will certainly know their Leica lenses better than I and post but this doesn't look correct.

[semi-ambivalent]

*Guessing just from your image* that ring looks like a very thin crescent. Is it centered on the front element, equally visible all around the element's edge? If not something is amiss. Leica did have optical formula(s) that involved a very thin air gap between a couple elements. Someone here will certainly know their Leica lenses better than I and post but this doesn't look correct.

 

I was thinking of this. Took a bit to find it:

Antique and Classic Cameras

 

s-a

[RobWCanada]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

*Guessing just from your image* that ring looks like a very thin crescent. Is it centered on the front element, equally visible all around the element's edge? If not something is amiss. Leica did have optical formula(s) that involved a very thin air gap between a couple elements. Someone here will certainly know their Leica lenses better than I and post but this doesn't look correct.

 

Well, the ring/crescent seems to go all the way around the lens...it's just not even all the way around...I will take another photo of it tomorrow and try and show what I mean.

 

Thanks so far

[RobWCanada]

So this shows the whole band/gasket looking ring around the element.

 

Again, I don't see this in the images but I'm concerned something has happened with this gasket. Has anyone ever seen this before? Is it normal?

 

...there are no scratches or dust inside or out...that dust is from my house, lol

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!

[RobWCanada]

Anyone have any comments? What is that ring and why is it not evenly spaced on the front element?

[tobey bilek]

It belongs there, but should be even all around. I just unearthed mine. I would guess the purpose is to keep the name ring from rubbing on the glass as it is tightened, a buffer if you will.

 

50+ year old lens and undoubtedly was cleaned internally and not reassembled properly.

 

I works quite well on digital, but the sharp area at f 2.0 is rather small & improves at 2.8 and by 4 or 5.6 covers 90+% of the frame. This improves with each generation of the Summicron.

 

 

 

Contrast is low compared to modern lens, but very useable.

 

Unscrew the front lens cell and the last 4 digits of the serial will be on the black ring revealed on the focus mount. If they do not match, that is grounds for rejection.

The actual focal of the lens is mated to a particular focus mount.

[RobWCanada]

It belongs there, but should be even all around. I just unearthed mine. I would guess the purpose is to keep the name ring from rubbing on the glass as it is tightened, a buffer if you will.

 

50+ year old lens and undoubtedly was cleaned internally and not reassembled properly.

 

I works quite well on digital, but the sharp area at f 2.0 is rather small & improves at 2.8 and by 4 or 5.6 covers 90+% of the frame. This improves with each generation of the Summicron.

 

 

 

Contrast is low compared to modern lens, but very useable.

 

Unscrew the front lens cell and the last 4 digits of the serial will be on the black ring revealed on the focus mount. If they do not match, that is grounds for rejection.

The actual focal of the lens is mated to a particular focus mount.

 

Thanks Tobey. Great Info.

 

I will check when I get home from work. I assume I can just unscrew the front cell by hand? No special lens tools? Do you happen to know what that material is made of? I only ask is it flexible enough that it will even out if it was to be move or is it permanently in that position?

[RobWCanada]

It belongs there, but should be even all around. I just unearthed mine. I would guess the purpose is to keep the name ring from rubbing on the glass as it is tightened, a buffer if you will.

 

50+ year old lens and undoubtedly was cleaned internally and not reassembled properly.

 

I works quite well on digital, but the sharp area at f 2.0 is rather small & improves at 2.8 and by 4 or 5.6 covers 90+% of the frame. This improves with each generation of the Summicron.

 

 

 

Contrast is low compared to modern lens, but very useable.

 

Unscrew the front lens cell and the last 4 digits of the serial will be on the black ring revealed on the focus mount. If they do not match, that is grounds for rejection.

The actual focal of the lens is mated to a particular focus mount.

 

Hey Tobey, looked at the lens. I'm not sure what I'm supposed to unscrew here...

[wda]

Rob, I have a 1966 version which I believe is the 2nd version made. It closely resembles yours except mine does not have the four letters GmbH inscribed around the bezel, typical of the early production run. Providing your copy is sound in all respects, you should find that it gives a lovely rendering despite lacking the clinical 'bite' of modern versions. It is particularly liked for its rendering in portraiture and dreamy landscapes. I bought mine new and have never felt disposed to sell it for that reason, even after buying the current version. Enjoy it!

 

I occasionally unscrew the front unit and attach it to the Leica copy-legs BOWUM for useful close-up photography. It saw much use in this way before affordable desktop scanners became available.

[RobWCanada]

Rob, I have a 1966 version which I believe is the 2nd version made. It closely resembles yours except mine does not have the four letters GmbH inscribed around the bezel, typical of the early production run. Providing your copy is sound in all respects, you should find that it gives a lovely rendering despite lacking the clinical 'bite' of modern versions. It is particularly liked for its rendering in portraiture and dreamy landscapes. I bought mine new and have never felt disposed to sell it for that reason, even after buying the current version. Enjoy it!

 

I occasionally unscrew the front unit and attach it to the Leica copy-legs BOWUM for useful close-up photography. It saw much use in this way before affordable desktop scanners became available.

 

Yes, it renders the image very pleasingly. And I obviously want it. I'm just contemplating on returning this copy and finding another which doesn't have the front element retainer out of place. What do you think?

[Jean-Michel]

Hi,

Mine dates from 1965 or so (according to the serial number), purchased new with an M4 in 1968. It works just fine on my M9. Depending on how much you paid for your lens, you may want to have it serviced by Leica -- NJ since you are in Canada. I had my serviced by them after getting my M9, as the lens was not focussing accurately. Their service was good and it did not take too long to get my lenses back.

Jean-Michel

[wda]

Yes, it renders the image very pleasingly. And I obviously want it. I'm just contemplating on returning this copy and finding another which doesn't have the front element retainer out of place. What do you think?

If the misalignment suggests an earlier repair job gone wrong, I would return it. There is usually a good choice of used 50mm Summicron lenses, so take you time and entrust a Leica dealer to find you a better one.