Jump to content

Let's discuss the Super-Angulon


philipus

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I do think that his reviews are fact based, it is his writing style that is not very matter-of-factly by making fun of this and that along the way. Still, he examines lens sharpness under more controlled, but still real word conditions, than most other internet experts, who just post a couple of hand held shots. He gives correction numbers for lens distortion in Photoshop at various distances and so on ...So, no, I don't think KR is "distorting facts".

 

It's more that some readers can handle the irony, others don't. If you take every single word at face value and out of context you will come to the conclusion that he is contradicting himself all the time. He isn't. It's just that some readers cannot distinguish ironic statements/jokes from factual ones. So, when he writes about a "crappy little Voigtländer lens" then this is purely ironic, you will realize that when you have read a couple of reviews, where he praises some CV lenses (he will condemn others). Same with the running joke of the "Leica man", who "of course only deserves the best". You must be able to read between the lines. This is not everybody's cup of tea, so I understand that a lot of people criticize him. In a way, he is an stylistic anti-thesis to the clinical, factual (but often confusing and sometimes indeed contradictory) writings of E. Puts. In the end, I prefer both to self-proclaimed superficial and boring Internet experts like S. Huff and the like.

Totally agree & well put

 

Here in Australia some may use the term "Takin' The Piss" but in a creative way

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 years later...

An old thread, but somewhere to post test pictures from my recently purchased 21mm f3.4 Super-Angulon.

M2, FP4, Rodinal. Copies of darkroom prints.

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!

  • Like 11
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Just a shot of my early f/4 Super-Angulons. Two in original screw mount, and one for the M body. All from 1959.

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!

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 years later...

A question for anyone how knows?

If a Super Angulon 21mm f4 is a screw mount fitted with a M-Mount adapter, is it still classed as one of the 1,500 "screw mounts" produced or does the 1,500 refer strictly to SA 21 f4s with no screw holes for adapters?

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 12/30/2020 at 3:04 PM, Pyrogallol said:

An old thread, but somewhere to post test pictures from my recently purchased 21mm f3.4 Super-Angulon.

M2, FP4, Rodinal. Copies of darkroom prints.

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!

The lens I used for these pictures two years ago was a black one. I have just bought another, an earlier chrome one, which has the infinity catch unlike the black one.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Not popular thread, but two Super-Angulon

around here

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!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Am 29.8.2023 um 20:04 schrieb TLG:

If a Super Angulon 21mm f4 is a screw mount fitted with a M-Mount adapter, is it still classed as one of the 1,500 "screw mounts" produced or does the 1,500 refer strictly to SA 21 f4s with no screw holes for adapters?

Like with other lenses which were sold as LTM as well as  M-mount versions: if the M-"adapter" was fixed at the factory the item will not qualify as an original screw mount version. I'd call a lens with removed M-Mount a faked "screw mount".

I don't know where the number of 1,500 LTM Super-Angulons 21/4 comes from. The list I have give a much larger number, though you cannot be sure whether these published numbers are right, as you don't know wther all items in a certain batch were really made and whether there wasn't a mix of LTM and M-versions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I believe that there should be some super angulon lenses converted that don’t adhere to to m5 “safe numbers”. I am looking for information on how to spot “m5 safe” converted super angulon, apart from obvious serial number over 2473251? Which part of the mount is converted is it 6 o’clock part of m mount? Can someone share some knowledge on the topic?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Carlos,

Welcome to the Forum.

There are actually a number of lenses that need to be adapted before the lenses will function on an M5 without causing damage. The meter will not function with that individual lens once the modification is made.

When the M5 was current Leitz would make this modification to previously purchased lenses.

Many of these modified (Or, not modified) lenses can do damage & will NOT work on a (film) Leitz/Leica CL. or its variations.

What needs to be done is for the lens to have a "cutout" in the BAYONET mount so that the bayonet mount does not cause the metering arm to move into the measuring position. Because, when there is no lens mounted on the camera the metering arm drops down to the floor of the camera so that it is protected from damage.

Putting on a lens with a regular bayonet mount will raise the metering arm to the measuring position when the shutter is cocked, or is cocking. When making an exposure: Sufficient pressure on the shutter release, releases the arm, which then falls out of the image path & into its protected position prior to the exposure being made.

The BAYONET lenses that need this modification are:

21mm f4 Super Angulon lenses. If the bayonet is an adapter which comes off: Only the adapter needs to be modified. Any original screw mount 21mm f4 Super Angulon lenses must have a modified adapter for safe use on an M5.

21mm f3.4  Super Angulon lenses below serial number 2 473 251

28mm f2,8 Elmarit lenses below serial number 2 314 921

ALSO:

Lenses with DETACHABLE viewfinders that interfere with the M5 cover plate need to be adapted:

35mm f3.5 Summaron with detachable viewfinder

50mm f2 Dual Range Summicron & detachable viewfinder.

Best Regards,

Michael

 

 

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

11 hours ago, Michael Geschlecht said:

Hello Carlos,

Welcome to the Forum.

There are actually a number of lenses that need to be adapted before the lenses will function on an M5 without causing damage. The meter will not function with that individual lens once the modification is made.

When the M5 was current Leitz would make this modification to previously purchased lenses.

Many of these modified (Or, not modified) lenses can do damage & will NOT work on a (film) Leitz/Leica CL. or its variations.

What needs to be done is for the lens to have a "cutout" in the BAYONET mount so that the bayonet mount does not cause the metering arm to move into the measuring position. Because, when there is no lens mounted on the camera the metering arm drops down to the floor of the camera so that it is protected from damage.

Putting on a lens with a regular bayonet mount will raise the metering arm to the measuring position when the shutter is cocked, or is cocking. When making an exposure: Sufficient pressure on the shutter release, releases the arm, which then falls out of the image path & into its protected position prior to the exposure being made.

The BAYONET lenses that need this modification are:

21mm f4 Super Angulon lenses. If the bayonet is an adapter which comes off: Only the adapter needs to be modified. Any original screw mount 21mm f4 Super Angulon lenses must have a modified adapter for safe use on an M5.

21mm f3.4  Super Angulon lenses below serial number 2 473 251

28mm f2,8 Elmarit lenses below serial number 2 314 921

ALSO:

Lenses with DETACHABLE viewfinders that interfere with the M5 cover plate need to be adapted:

35mm f3.5 Summaron with detachable viewfinder

50mm f2 Dual Range Summicron & detachable viewfinder.

Best Regards,

Michael

 

 

Thank you Michael for detailed explanation, you wouldn’t have any images showing how bayonet was modified, how deep is this cut out? I believe that’s 6 o’clock part that actuates light meter on m5, but I can’t find any confirmation on my guess.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Basically it is lenses that protrude too far into the camera. Wind the camera on to bring the meter arm into position so you can measure the distance from the flange to the meter, deduct a bit for safety and compare that to your lenses that might be a problem.

On my CL film camera the meter arm is about 20mm down from the lens flange. A Super Angulon is about the same distance and should not be used. A Zeiss Biogon 21mm is about 14mm and is ok to use.

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!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Another 21mm lens that is ok to use, Voigtlander 21mm f4 Color-Skopar, screw with bayonet adaptor.

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!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I have to admit that my 21/4 R mount Super Angulon has sat on a shelf gathering dust, ever since I got the 21-35/4 Vario Elmar, which is at least the S-A's equal at 21mm with the convenience of being able to zoom and alter the framing as needed. As I am now often sitting on a mobility scooter on a path or pavement, I no longer have the facility to use my built in zoom (my legs and feet). The 21-35 is also a first class performer on my M10-R, using the Visoflex 2 for focusing. I have an LTM CV 21/4, which lives on my Ig Leica, as a film point and shoot. I just leave it at the hyperfocal distance all the time. It is just about an OK lens and certainly better than my first CV 21/4, which I had, that was so de-centred as to be unusable. 

Wilson

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...