Jump to content

Lens heads


Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Many Leitz lenses have lens heads to be used on bellows with Visoflex. Was it a kind of policy so these lenses could be used for macro work as well? And most importantly, I know I can unscrew the lens of the Summicron 50mm (II) for instance, but were there adapters available right away to use lens heads on bellows? 

Were the lens heads of all Elmar 4/90mm in new style mount from the start meant to be used on bellows as well? And were the lens heads of all the Hektor 4.5/135mm lenses from 1950 on meant to be used on bellows as well?

Thanks for any information, Lex

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Lex,

 

Before the coming of the first Leicaflex, Leitz was sometimes called "The adapter company that also made lenses & cameras".

 

If you go to the top of this page and "click" the "WIKI" icon

 

And then go to "M Series Lenses & Camera Accessories"

 

And then "Visoflex"

 

And then "click" the "About Visoflex" & the 5 categories at the top of that page.

 

You will find a lot of what you are looking for.

 

There is more in the " About Visoflex" general section also.

 

Best Regards,

 

Michael

Edited by Michael Geschlecht
Link to post
Share on other sites

Generally speaking, ALL the Leitz lenses with removable lenshead had some adapter for mounting on bellows... and this applies even for someway "odd" lenses like the Hektor 125mm... the Telyt 280mm...

I think that Leitz had a smart idea in joining a manufacturing need (to assemble a lens, is good to have, at the final phase of the process, two distinct subassemblies : a lenshead - with glasses and diaphragm - and a focusing mount - with helicoid and RF coupling) with a functional facility (the lenshead can be used by itself on various devices - bellows but also other gear, Leitz catalog was huge...). It was such a standard policy that some lenses were even made available and listed as "lenshead only"

 

Of course, for macro usage the best are the classic 50/90/135 focals : time ago, in the Forum, there was an heated discussion on how to Mount the Telyt 280 lenshead on bellows :)... well is possible.. but surely not a good macro solution...

 

As for your questions : yes all the Elmar 90 f4 have removable lensheads, including the last "3 elements" version (the only exception, obviously, is the Elmar 90 retractable). And same is for all the Hektor 135 : the various postwar versions differ mostly for the front size/filter mount... and of course the SM/BM variant, but the lenshead - focus Mount coupling was Always the same, unscrewable and with the same thread.

Edited by luigi bertolotti
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

See images below scanned from my Visoflex III manual:

 

Wilson

 

 

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 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Michael, Luigi and Wilson, thanks for your input! I should have added that I am interested to find out what Leitz did for those interested in macro, in the decade of rougly 1950 to 1960. Apart from the SOOKY-M and SOMKY, that is. Simply said: which lenses or lens heads could be used on bellows and Visoflex for macro photography.

The Wiki says that the lens head of the Summicron 50mm (I) could be used on the bellows UXOOR, that would mean the lens head of the collapsible Summicron. I think that may be a mistake, Laney only mentions the unscrewable head of the Summicron 50mm (II), but I haven't found the code of the adapter yet.

In the decade 1950-1960 that means that the lens head of the Elmar 4/90mm (new style, from 1951 onwards) could be used, from 1959 the lens head of the Elmarit 2.8/90mm, from 1957 the lens head of the Summicron 2/90, and the lens head of the Hektor 4.5/135mm. From 1954 the Hektor 2.5/12.5 cm was available.

Lex

Link to post
Share on other sites

...The Wiki says that the lens head of the Summicron 50mm (I) could be used on the bellows UXOOR, that would mean the lens head of the collapsible Summicron. I think that may be a mistake,...

Well... it depends on the "numbering" of the various Summicrons 50... which isn't an official identification... if we call Summicron 50 (I) the collapsible, yes is a mistake... its lenshead is unremovable : but if we mean Summicron (I) as the first 7-elements design, after all it was shared by both the collapsible and the first fixed-mount version.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Michael, Luigi and Wilson, thanks for your input! I should have added that I am interested to find out what Leitz did for those interested in macro, in the decade of rougly 1950 to 1960. Apart from the SOOKY-M and SOMKY, that is. Simply said: which lenses or lens heads could be used on bellows and Visoflex for macro photography.

The Wiki says that the lens head of the Summicron 50mm (I) could be used on the bellows UXOOR, that would mean the lens head of the collapsible Summicron. I think that may be a mistake, Laney only mentions the unscrewable head of the Summicron 50mm (II), but I haven't found the code of the adapter yet.

In the decade 1950-1960 that means that the lens head of the Elmar 4/90mm (new style, from 1951 onwards) could be used, from 1959 the lens head of the Elmarit 2.8/90mm, from 1957 the lens head of the Summicron 2/90, and the lens head of the Hektor 4.5/135mm. From 1954 the Hektor 2.5/12.5 cm was available.

Lex

 

 

 

Well, you can use any 50mm Summicron with M-mount on the bellows, since you don't have to unscrew the lens head. The adapter for lenses with M-mount on the Bellows II is the 16596. The range where the lens can be focussed will be very small, but it's possible. 

 

Why did Leitz produce many lenses with the head to be unscrewed and even sold the heads seperately?

 

The optical system of any lens needs a defined distance to the sensor/film level - the distance is short for wide angle lenses and gets larger for longer focal lengthes (for the exception see below).

 

Since the optical system made up of several lenses doesn't differ so much, the lenses need a shaft - obviously a short one for wide angles and a long one for longer focal lengthes. If you look at the rear side of a Super-Angulon you see the rear lens element protruding wide into the camera, the complicated optical system with 8 lenses being longer than the shaft, same with the first 28mm Elmarit with 9 lenses. For the 135mm Hektor the shaft adds approx. 5 cm distance between the rear element and the bayonet level. For the 50mm Summicron II it's perhaps only 1 cm.

 

The defined distance with the rigid shaft - and the rangefinder - limit the usability of Leica lenses for close distance photography. To allow macro distances they had to insert the Visoflex body, which replaced the rangefinder by a mirror reflex system. But with the extension of the Visoflex the necessary distance between lens and sensor/film level could not be achieved - it was much too long.  So the solution was to get rid of the shaft - by unscrewing the lens head.

 

Now - with the short lens head - you get more flexibility. The extension by the Visoflex and the adapter for focussing or the bellows can replace the necessary longitude of the shaft - so you can use your lens head on the Viso as usual going right to infinity. But the adapter for focussing plus further extension rings or the bellows can also extend the distance between lens and sensor/film level - so going into the macro region. 

 

The rather short shaft extension of a 50mm lens isn't useful for the much larger Visoflex extension. By unscrewing the head you don't loose enough length to compensate for the Visoflex. The shortest extension you could achieve with a Visoflex was too long for the focal lenth of 50mm. Unscrewing the lens head of the Summicron II was only meant to be used with the much slimmer SOMKY + the adapter UOORF (16508) - adding some flexibility for close ups, but no real macro. 

 

The shortest focal length to be used with the Viso was 65 mm - but the 3.5/65mm Elmar-V was never sold with a shaft, but only as a lens head.

 

For longer focal lengthes the Viso extension can be compensated by unscrewing the head. It is easier to list the lenses which had no unscrewable head than those who had and could in some way or other be used on the Viso and/or the bellows:

 

The 85mm Summarex was a special lens for which it didn't make any sense to use the head separately. But even the 1.9/73mm Hektor or the 90mm Thambar can be unscrewed and had special short focussing mounts to be used on the old Viso (PLOOT) - though those mounts are extremely difficult to find today. The first 90mm Tele-Emarit had a different optical design, which made it much shorter then a "normal" 90mm lens, so the shaft was too short and the lens head alone wasn't useful.  From the late 60s onwards the Visoflex became outdated: they had the Leicaflex which allowed much more flexibility for close ups and Macro. So newer lenses have a fixed lens head.

 

The new 90mm Macro-Elmar M uses the same principle - compensating the extension of the Macro device by shortening the lens - as the old unscrewable lens heads: when the Macro adapter is attached you can use the Elmar collapsed as usual. When you extend the shaft you can use it for Macro.  

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

An added lens which does not appear in the above charts or narrative is the 135mm Elmarit F:/2.8 which unscrews from the focusing mount and towards the end of the M film dynasty was alternately offered in a regular M focusing mount, a short mount (in the general Leitz catalog) or a short mount lens in Viso focusing mount 16462.  In the Bellows III it is used with adapter 16598 and has a range from about 12 inches to perhaps 12 feet. I believe these are the same mounts/adapters used for the Midlands 90mm Summicron. Regards, Ron

Edited by Ronazle
Link to post
Share on other sites

Ron, you are referring to the Elmarit 2.8/90mm which was available in the years 1959-1974, not really to the end of the analog M camera's. The Tele-Elmarit 2.8/90mm and the Elmarit-M 2.8/90mm lenses did not have removable lens heads.

Lex

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lex, No, I am in fact referring to the 135mm Elmarit 2.8 that most often came with a gogles/eyes focusing mount. Actually, I was thinking about the analog M's being in near complete dominance before the SLRs  which is, perhaps, an overstatement. My 135 Elmarit (III) 2.8 (one of two I have, the other has "eyes") was made after 1968 and sold in a short mount w/the associated 16462 focusing mount. Puts is the date source. Regards, ron

Edited by Ronazle
Link to post
Share on other sites

An added lens which does not appear in the above charts or narrative is the 135mm Elmarit F:/2.8 which unscrews from the focusing mount and towards the end of the M film dynasty was alternately offered in a regular M focusing mount, a short mount (in the general Leitz catalog) or a short mount lens in Viso focusing mount 16462.  In the Bellows III it is used with adapter 16598 and has a range from about 12 inches to perhaps 12 feet. I believe these are the same mounts/adapters used for the Midlands 90mm Summicron. Regards, Ron

 

Yes, the threads of the lens heads of Elmarit 135 and Summicron 90 are the same.... I have the focusing Mount 16462, but it is chrome (came with a chrome Summicron) and makes an odd looking with the black lenshead of Elmarit 135... :o

Link to post
Share on other sites

Luigi,  Actually I bought my short mount with the 16462 from a dealer in Australia who had bought an estate collection. I think it was a non-using collector in that the combination appeared truly mint.  I've used the focusing mount a fair amount but am inclined to use my other lense w/the gogles when I use one (a 135). Probably given old eyes and critical digital focus I should only use it with the Viso - given Viso brightness and focus accuracy, it probably would be an ok (but large) street lens (I'm sometimes shy).  Take care, Ron

Edited by Ronazle
Link to post
Share on other sites

I was going to buy a 135/2.8 and as I had to phone Malcolm Taylor on something else, I asked him what I should look out for on one of these lenses. The door out of the camera shop before I buy it, was his answer. He said he had had endless grief with these lenses, with fogging which may be repairable on the earlier lenses but usually not on the later ones with epoxy cemented elements. Also the goggles are often misaligned or damaged and generally he felt the lens is one of Leica's poorer efforts. I bought a new/old stock 135/4 Tele Elmar instead, which works just fine. 

 

Wilson

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wilson, Well, except for the power, the goggles are pretty much the same for all of the goggled lenses. I have, in fact, cracked two goggles over the years without hurting the lens on the associated mount(s). Which leads me to believe you are correct on the mounts.  The 135 Elmarit image is a little warm which generally I like, particularly outdoors in the winter. Given the speed it is useful to use when photographing animals with a handheld camera and the Viso. (yes, I know it sounds strange, but it works). Regards, Ron

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I was going to buy a 135/2.8 and as I had to phone Malcolm Taylor on something else, I asked him what I should look out for on one of these lenses. The door out of the camera shop before I buy it, was his answer. He said he had had endless grief with these lenses, with fogging which may be repairable on the earlier lenses but usually not on the later ones with epoxy cemented elements. Also the goggles are often misaligned or damaged and generally he felt the lens is one of Leica's poorer efforts. I bought a new/old stock 135/4 Tele Elmar instead, which works just fine.

 

Wilson

Malcolm Taylor overhauled my 135/2.8 M when I got it about 5 yrs ago, including sorting out the goggles which were damaged (not the glass bits fortunately). He didn't complain at the time! And did a good job as usual.

I bought a 16462 short mount too, from a member of the forum, and it gets more use on the short mount, on Nikon and Fuji, than anything else although it IS good on an M3.

I tried selling it a year ago on the forum, but got no interest.

 

Gerry

Link to post
Share on other sites

....I tried selling it a year ago on the forum, but got no interest.....

 

 

Maybe interest in older Leica equipment is slowing waning as people flock to newer and greater things. I am currently trying to sell my Telyt and Visoflex collection in another forum and got no interest and no offers. The only thing sold was not even Leica: a tilt/shift bellows by Hama/Spiratone/Kenlock.

Link to post
Share on other sites

....

I tried selling it a year ago on the forum, but got no interest.

 

Gerry

Is not a "loved" lens... and definitely not pleasant to carry with you... but I have a very late item and it's excellent in any sense... and goggles are REALLY a plus for focusing... wasn't for its size :angry: I would take it always instead of the Tele Elmar...

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.

×
×
  • Create New...