Elmar 1:3,5 F 3,5cm

[crow]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Is there a chance it needs recallibrating? I am talking, it focuses wrong. When the double images coinside in the viewer, the photograph comes out of focus. I took it for service, but the person did not even tell me it might need recallibration. He said it was OK, took it back home, but it wasn't. He found an excuse like, 30 euro charged for cleaning and something done so the focusing mechanism would get lubricated. Point is it still can't be used on a rangefinder camera, it is way out of focus, and while it turns there is a strange feeling when moving around. I also had to talk more than 15times on the phone, for this excellent "service" I got. Very unprofessional. Any way, how much would Leica, Germany, charge me to have it fixed?

And what could be wrong? I bought it from ebay, and kept it cause I thought it would be an easy fix. That was my first and last encounter with the dealer in my country, looks like they did everything thry could so it would be so.

Edited July 3, 2016 by crow

[Michael Geschlecht]

Hello Crow,

 

First some questions:

 

Does the CAMERA focus correctly with other lenses?

Is this a digital or a film camera?

 

When you focus this lens, with this camera, on the MOON: Does the focusing scale on the lens read "Infinity"?

 

When you MEASURE the distance to the subject, when the lens is SET at 1 & 3 meters: Do the measurements show the 2 images properly coinciding at the subjects at 1 & 3 meters?

This is a start.

 

Best Regards,

 

Michael

Edited July 3, 2016 by Michael Geschlecht

[Advertisement]

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

[crow]

Hi Michael,

thank you for your input.

I can answer one or two questions now. I will run the tests you propose and when done I will let you know the rest of the answers.

I have an M8,an M5, CL, a Sony A7. Other ltm include a summar, an Elmar 90/4, and some russian lenses which all focus corectly on the M8, as well as the summar on a IIIa when I had the time to develope. M lenses include a 50/2 summicron, a 40/2 summicron,Tele-Elmarit 90/2.8, Elmar 135/4,vc 25/4 ltm. I guess the M8, and perhaps the A7 will be ok for the test. I will have some results by 21nish tonight.

Edited July 4, 2016 by crow

[crow]

Hi Michael,

Well,

looking at the crown or wreath where the distance values in m are engraved, for a far out subject to be in focus the pointer should rest at about 12m, a milimeter away from 10m, instead of infinity like it should. 1 meter and 3 meters aren 't focusing the same. And this is on the A7, easier than the M8 cause of the live view. But on the M8 also, there was a gap of about 3-4 mm; I had to focus about 3-4mm before the two images coinside to get the photograph in focus/focused. I had noticed this from the start, and practised a little , having the two images a little bit further from one another cause I new this way the photo would come out focused, but it got borring after a while. Works fine with live view. I like the M8 and I m not buying a new Digital M for years to come, so live view on an M camera is out of the question.

Edited July 4, 2016 by crow

[Michael Geschlecht]

Hello Crow,

 

It appears that the lens focusing mount needs an adjustment. It is unclear whether the lens needed adjustment before it was cleaned or if it was incorrectly reassembled when being serviced recently.

 

If you are not satisfied with the work of the person who worked on it for you recently, you might look into someone in the list of suggested repair people on this Forum.

 

Best Regards,

 

Michael

Edited July 4, 2016 by Michael Geschlecht

[crow]

Thanks Michael.

I found the list on the Leica blog, US, UK, DE, NETH., IT.

Edited July 4, 2016 by crow

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Is there a chance it needs recallibrating? I am talking, it focuses wrong. When the double images coinside in the viewer, the photograph comes out of focus. I took it for service, but the person did not even tell me it might need recallibration. He said it was OK, took it back home, but it wasn't. He found an excuse like, 30 euro charged for cleaning and something done so the focusing mechanism would get lubricated. Point is it still can't be used on a rangefinder camera, it is way out of focus, and while it turns there is a strange feeling when moving around. I also had to talk more than 15times on the phone, for this excellent "service" I got. Very unprofessional. Any way, how much would Leica, Germany, charge me to have it fixed?

And what could be wrong? I bought it from ebay, and kept it cause I thought it would be an easy fix. That was my first and last encounter with the dealer in my country, looks like they did everything thry could so it would be so.

Is it by any chance a lens that should have goggles, but is missing them? You can tell when it has a flat part on the top of the mount. In that case it will never focus properly without them.

[Susie]

Hi Crow.

 

I wonder if when it was reassembled, it has got out of sync.  The focussing arrangement uses a multi thread helix - it is very easy to pick up the wrong thread - some lenses have 10 starts to the helix. You could try undoing the focus button that engages with the infinity stop and unscrewing the barrel completly and then putting it back one thread back - if any of that makes sence!  When the distance scale read infinity the catch should engage and no "spare" thread be showing.

 

Susie

[crow]

Hi,

I hear you both. I don't think there is a goggles version of the 35mm f3,5cm Elmar lens.

Now, the unscrewing I 've never done. Is there a site with directions "how to"? I 'll look it up.

Thank you Susie, andJaap.

Edited July 5, 2016 by crow

[gvaliquette]

Is it by any chance a lens that should have goggles, but is missing them? ...

 

Jaap,

 

Was there ever a 50mm f3.5 Elmar with goggles?

 

Guy

[Michael Geschlecht]

Hello Guy,

 

No.

 

The 35mm, F3.5 Elmar was discontinued before the release of the M3. By the time the M3 (The first bayonet mount production camera) was released the 35mm, F3.5 Elmar had been replaced by the 35mm, F3.5 Summaron. It was the 35mm, F3.5 Summaron & some of the other later 35mm lenses that needed goggles in some versions.

 

Hello Crow,

 

A few more questions please:

Does this lens have its own screw to bayonet adapter or does it use the same adapter(s) that your other screw mount lenses use?

 

When the lens is focused at infinity does the knob that you turn to focus it: Stop at 11 O"Clock or at 7 O"Clock when you are looking at the camera from the front?

When you turn the focus knob to its closest setting & look down at the lens from overhead from the back of the camera: Do you see a 3 digit number on the lens?

Best Regards,

 

Michael

[crow]

Hi Michael,

 

I am using two Leitz adapters I have, one is a 28-50, and the other is a 90mm, so the answer is no, it doesn't have a 35 or a 35-135 adapter. Do you think it is worth buying anothere one, will it make a difference?

 

Focused at infinity the knob stops at 11o'clock.

 

There is no 3 digit number showing when focused at its closest distance.

 

Thanks again.

Edited July 6, 2016 by crow

[Michael Geschlecht]

Hello Crow,

 

I think that you are fine with the adapters that you currently have. I was asking about the adapter that you were using with the 35mm Elmar to see if you were using another, separate, adapter. A different adapter can sometimes be the problem.   

 

The adapters do NOT seem to be the problem.

 

The 3 digit number, most likely where I asked you to look, but possibly elsewhere on the lens barrel:  Would indicate an early lens that has to be individually calibrated to the body it is used with. You might look around the lens barrel in general to see if a 3 digit number is engraved on it

 

An 11 O'Clock focusing knob is indicative of an earlier lens made before the addition of the slow shutter speed dial to screw mount bodies to set the slower shutter speeds.

 

I would suggest asking someone who knows about calibrating lenses with rangefinders to look at this.

 

Best Regards,

 

Michael

Edited July 6, 2016 by Michael Geschlecht

[luigi bertolotti]

Hi Crow.

 

I wonder if when it was reassembled, it has got out of sync.  The focussing arrangement uses a multi thread helix - it is very easy to pick up the wrong thread - some lenses have 10 starts to the helix....

 

Susie

This could be a valid point, Crow : I have a Summaron 35 3,5 that, when bought, focused wrong exactly for the above reason (clearly, it had been opened, cleaned, reassembled wrongly) : it was fixed fine (not by myself... too a delicate task...) and now focus is perfect

[gvaliquette]

Hello Guy,

 

No.

 

The 35mm, F3.5 Elmar was discontinued before the release of the M3. By the time the M3 (The first bayonet mount production camera) was released the 35mm, F3.5 Elmar had been replaced by the 35mm, F3.5 Summaron. It was the 35mm, F3.5 Summaron & some of the other later 35mm lenses that needed goggles in some versions.

 

 ...

Best Regards,

 

Michael

 

Thanks, Michael,

 

I thought so.

 

The only goggled lens I have is a f2.8 35mm Summaron, that I bought specifically to use on my M3!  That said, I must admit that I have also "Googled" many more lenses ;-)

 

Despita having the Summaron, I later bought the f1.4 35mm Summilux-FLE for my M9;  different lenses, different character, different images.

 

Guy

[gvaliquette]

Sorry,

 

...not quite true, I also have the Macro-Elmar 90mm f4.0 and its macro adapter.  I just don't think of that lens as a "goggled" lens.

 

Guy

[Michael Geschlecht]

Hello Guy,

 

I think "goggled" is the term used when the purpose of the optical units is to expand (With 35mm lenses) or reduce (with 135mm lenses) the angle of coverage seen thru the range/viewfinder of an "M" camera.

 

"Macro Adapter" and "Dual Range" are terms associated with the goggle like devices used for viewing the appropriate closer image field in the near range of a lens as seen thru an "M" camera range/viewfinder.

 

Best Regards,

 

Michael

[jdlaing]

 

Sorry,

 

...not quite true, I also have the Macro-Elmar 90mm f4.0 and its macro adapter.  I just don't think of that lens as a "goggled" lens.

 

Guy

 

 

The old version had goggles for close focus or macro. The newer version has done away with them.

[crow]

Hi you all,

it is easy to find information on the lens, you just google...Like this link says http://vintage-camera-lenses.com/leitz-leica-elmar-35mm-35cm-f3-5/, it may be an early lens but not the earliest, cause it reads 3,5cm, instead of 35mm. I don't have the skills either to dissmantle, or make changes on something I know nothing of. It is not a good idea to start learning how to, on a Leica lens. As for the guys who first were given the lens to service, they were so great of a quality people, that they were trying to see if I knew the lens was early, with trick questions, rather than focusing on their job, which they are incapable of doing right. When it came to actually fixing the lens, they would come up with all sorts of excuses, in a pretentiously kind way, avoiding any responsibility. This is Leica we are talking about, and it doesn't matter which country you're in. A Leica dealer should at least have the integrity to speak the truth. This is who they really are. The world is full of people who aren't serious about anything. Anyway, I thought you should know; not every one in this world is responsible enough to be what they claim they are. It is the people behind each establishment that count. Thank you all because we can communicate.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[gvaliquette]

Hello Michael,

 

That's a really fine distinction!  However, the purpose is essentially the same, whether to shift the field of view into different viewfinder framelines (35 -> 50, 135 -> 90) or to shift the magnification to closer focusing distances.

 

That said, I really feel that tho "old" adapter is much more flexible, as it can be used with any M camera, except, of course, the M5.

 

With apologies to the OP for shifting the discussion so far off the initial topic.

 

Guy

Edited July 7, 2016 by gvaliquette