Introduction, 65 Elmar query

[Gary Brook]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hello all. This is my first post, being new to these forums, and the extent of my digital experience is with other brands of SLR and with scanning (not yet very well) film from my M6. By way of introduction I have a small part-time photography business that has been running for almost 10 years now, I am almost completely digital with my work, have a fully colour managed workflow and do most of my printing myself on either a Designjet 130 or Epson 3800. I recently started using my M6 again and found that I had mostly forgotten the benefits of the light weight and small format of the bodies and lenses. As such I have been following the experience/discussions on the M8 with interest, and also for some time before on the DMR. A few days ago I briefly shot on two separate demo M8 bodies in Sydney, mainly to assess focussing accuracy with my 35 and 75 summilux lenses. At roughly 3 metres, one body was consistently back-focussing while the other seemed spot on (within the limits of my eyesight).

 

Anyway, for the moment my M6TTL is a reality and an M8 is a distant possibility, but right now I would appreciate some advice on the 65 Elmar. Can anyone offer me their opinion, hopefully based on experience rather than rumour, on the benefits of the 65 Elmar for macro work on the Visoflex. I am currently using a 135 tele-elmar lens head on a Viso 3 with bellows and hood. I understand there are two models of 65 including the later black model with re-computed optics. I don't know what benefit the changes gave, but hardly think that Leica would have made changes to reduce the performance. I am also aware that the 65 was computed for better performance at closer distances (as with all purpose-built macros) as well as likely better flat field performance and can produce up to 1.4x magnification whereas the 135 cannot do so. Other than these 'specifications', can anyone tell me whether they are seeing better quality in their images with the 65 as opposed to any other lenses they may be using.

 

I have also posed this question on the film fffforum, so bear with me if you see it in both places as this seems to be more active in recent times. Thanks in anticipation,

 

Gary

Canberra.

[luigi bertolotti]

I have the Elmar 65 1st version chrome, and the Tele Elmar 135 like yours, and use both on Viso (II, in my case); my impression has been always that 135 IS BETTER: but I do not shoot strong macro, I think have never gone beyond 1:1 about. Besides this, I have never tried the Elmar 65 REVERSED (have not the gear for) ,nor I have ever tested the 2nd 65, black, that generally is said to have better rendering than the 1st. For what it worths, my thinkings about are these:

1) You have already the Tele Elmar 135: besides myself, I have read (here too) of a lot of people declaring it's one of the best Leitz lenses for "no strong" macro use; of course, a good tele 135 too.

2) The Elmar 65 is a really specialized lens: rather unuseful outside macro usage.

3) For ratios, say, 1:5 to 1:1,5 I imagine not great difference from 135 and the 2nd version 65 : does it worth ?

4) Have to go frequently to 1:1 AND OVER ? I would prefer to have, at this point, a REALLY specialized lens for bellows (Photar, if You like Leitz, I have seen in this forum people that use Rodenstock/Schneider lenses on Viso+Bellows)

5) In respect to the solution above, the only advantage of 65 towards, say, a Photar, is that you can avoid the bellows , using combination of tubes like OTRPO; but, without pretending to be an expert, i suppose that in strong Macro, necessary on tripod, the bellows II is better finely adjustable for framing/focusing

[telewatt]

....2) The Elmar 65 is a really specialized lens: rather unuseful outside macro usage....

 

The Elmar 65mm was build as a allround lens for the visoflex..so you can use it for a lot of different pictures....without Reproduction because of the visible distortion...

 

If you look at the FILM FORUM..there I put in some pictures with this lens...

 

regards,

Jan

[lars_bergquist]

The 65 Elmar exists because this is the shortest lens that can be focused to infinity with the Viso I or II. It is not a particularly good macro lens, or even lens, as its definition is pretty soft off-axis, a condition that does not clear up completely even on stopping down (the later black version is somewhat better, but not really good). There is a certain amount of linear distortion, no problem for general close-up work but not modern macro grade, let alone a process lens.

 

Before the Viso II, the 135 mm Hektor was the close-up lens of choice. Both the 135 mm Elmar (with the proper extension ring for work with the Universal Focusing Mount) and the ditto Tele-Elmar work fine. My own choice however is that of most workers of those days: The 90 mm Elmarit. Focusing from infinity to 1:1.5 even without any extension ring and very good results.

 

The old man from the Age of Close-Up Lenses

[carstenw]

Lars, which 90 Elmarit is that? Do you find it better than both the 65 Elmar and the 135 Tele-Elmar?

[lars_bergquist]

Lars, which 90 Elmarit is that? Do you find it better than both the 65 Elmar and the 135 Tele-Elmar?

 

This is the original 1958–74 long (not Tele) Elmarit. This one is the only one with a detacheable lens head. It is superior to the 65 and optically equal to the 135, but I do find the 90 handier. This old 90 mm warhorse is also a nice lens on its old focusing mount; don't sell it short in that role either.

 

The old man ...

[kobold]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Welcome to the forum, Gary, and let's 'do coffee' next week! For other LDUG members, Gary's printing is superb; he is a modest fellow, and does a lot of work for a number of pros in this area. Cheers, kit

[hankg]

I have the black version of the 65 elmar and love the rendering. Although it might not be Leica's sharpest macro lens ever it has a beautiful signature. Unfortunately it commands a premium price almost double that of the 135/4 used.

 

For really high resolution macros a Rodenstock Apo-Rodagon D enlarging lens mounted on the bellows will give unbeatable resolution at 1:1.

[telewatt]

...I have the black version of the 65 elmar and love the rendering. Although it might not be Leica's sharpest macro lens ever it has a beautiful signature. ...

.

 

... ...I'm happy too with he the black Elmar 65mm....the "fingerprint" is great...

[hankg]

To my eye the results from the 65 elmar on the M8 are very film like, files have a fat, luscious look to them.

 

Here are 2 images I posted in another thread:

http://www.leica-camera-user.com/digital-forum/20043-m8-macro-thread-2.html?highlight=macro+m8#post232639

 

Here is one on my photoblog:

Hank Graber : Photographs

 

I'm looking to pick up a 135/4 and try them both on some portraits shots.

[Gary Brook]

Thanks to all who have posted advice to date. I'm amazed at the respose in such a short time frame. Kit, you embarrass me, but flattery will get you everywhere! I'll call you regarding the coffee. As an aside I've just posted a note in another thread here about the DMR that you might be interested in. Hank, regarding the respective values of the 65 Elmar, can you give me an idea of price as I am considering a black one here for $475AUD without the universal focussing mount. I had thought it should be not much more than that with a mount but prices move on and I haven't seen one for sale for a while. Cheers,

 

Gary

Canberra.

[hankg]

Thanks to all who have posted advice to date. I'm amazed at the respose in such a short time frame. Kit, you embarrass me, but flattery will get you everywhere! I'll call you regarding the coffee. As an aside I've just posted a note in another thread here about the DMR that you might be interested in. Hank, regarding the respective values of the 65 Elmar, can you give me an idea of price as I am considering a black one here for $475AUD without the universal focussing mount. I had thought it should be not much more than that with a mount but prices move on and I haven't seen one for sale for a while. Cheers,

 

Gary

Canberra.

As with most used Leica lenses lately, prices seem to be rising for the 65 elmar. You would be hard pressed to find the black one without the focusing mount for less then $750USD. over here. Compare that to the 135/4 which sells in a range from 250-500 and is a lot easier to find.

[Guest tummydoc]

As someone already said correctly, the 65 Elmar was not designed as a macro lens but rather as the shortest focal length usable to infinity on a Visoflex. Any M lens can be directly fitted to a Visoflex for use in extreme close-up, though none of them were computed with that in mind so it has been recommended to stop down well. There are also the Photar lenses which must be used in conjunction with the bellows, and those are specficially designed for macrophotography. With the right specification of adaptor, the bellows-only version of the R-series 100 Macro Elmar could be used on a Visoflex bellows, and adaptors can be fashioned that allow almost any lens to be mounted in reverse by its filter threads. The possibilities in macrophotography are limited mainly by one's access to a willing machinist.

[carstenw]

I also looked at the bellows version of the 100/4-R, but was unable to find any adapter to fit it onto the Bellows II-M. It was made for the R system. Is there some adapter which would work here?

[hankg]

I also looked at the bellows version of the 100/4-R, but was unable to find any adapter to fit it onto the Bellows II-M. It was made for the R system. Is there some adapter which would work here?

 

Cameraquest has R to M adapters.

[Gary Brook]

Hello all,

 

for those who may share my interest in this lens, during the last few weeks I have examined six examples of this lens in Canberra, Melbourne and Sydney, five of which were for sale. Three were chrome and three were black and all but one had fungus. The only one that was clean was one of the black ones and, unfortunately, was the only one not for sale. Many conclusions can be read into this, but it seems to me to reflect the fact that many appeared not been used very much and seemed to have been residing in dark and presumably damp places for long periods. The good news, however, is that my searching turned up a good example of a a 90 Elmarit (lens head only) that I now have the opportunity to at least test. Regards,

 

Gary.

[tmg]

Hi Gary.

 

I would just like to note that I have "tested" the earlier Canadian chrome elmar 65 and the later black Wetzlar on the M8. In my opinion, the contrast and definition of the recomputed later black model are definitely superior. That is probably the reason for the difference in price.

 

best regards,

 

Tobias

[Gary Brook]

Thanks for the advice Tobias.

 

Indeed, the consensus here and elsewhere seems to be that the black lens is more contrasty and perhaps even sharper, but even though neither example is anything like Leica's best performing designs, owners who use them report a very pleasing 'look and feel' to their images. That may be enough to sway me if only I can find a clean example for sale at a price I am happy to pay. Regards,

 

Gary.

[wparsonsgisnet]

... Here is one on my photoblog:..

 

Hank what a wonderful shot. I don't know how I missed it the first time. The reflection of the flower in the glasses make it a standout shot, even mystical.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear