Jump to content
Perca

Unknow Nickel 11 o'clock 5cm Elmar

Recommended Posts

This is a picture of the back of the 664 Elmar, perhaps the camera rangefinder roller is just running on the back of the lens focussing screw thread and not on a coupling mount, so it is not actually coupled?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

your lens looks exactely the same as on my non-std set. For coupled lenses Leitz narrowed the inner diameter to provide better contact with the rangefinder cam.

Info that you gave about how the rangefinder is off indicate that the mount is too short by cca 0,3-0,4mm (length marked with arrow).

At that time mount was not machined having rangefinder in mind. It can be adopted, I have done it once, but it took me 2 days to machine it.

If lens would have been rangefinder coupled by Leitz it would receive new mount, either 11 oclock with infinity lock or 7 oclock, depeneding when conversion would have been done.

Because of missing "0" on DIF I believe lens is not standardized, but by coincidence it may focus properly when focus set accoring to distance scale and not rangefinder. Test with film will show it. And if it will be out of focus it can be repaired, much easier than coupling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, jerzy said:

your lens looks exactely the same as on my non-std set. For coupled lenses Leitz narrowed the inner diameter to provide better contact with the rangefinder cam.

If lens would have been rangefinder coupled by Leitz it would receive new mount, either 11 oclock with infinity lock or 7 oclock, depeneding when conversion would have been done.

Because of missing "0" on DIF I believe lens is not standardized, but by coincidence it may focus properly when focus set accoring to distance scale and not rangefinder. Test with film will show it. And if it will be out of focus it can be repaired, much easier than coupling.

Jerzy, your conclusions match my initial sentiments about this lens. It is for a non standardised I Model C (the numbers are a giveaway) and its design with milled helicoid matches that of the earlier I Model A lenses. It might just match the standardised lens focus parameters without being standardised. I doubt, however, if Leica would have standardised the lens without putting a '0' on somewhere. Although the lens is not coupled, which, as you say, would have required a new mount, it may cause a rangefinder patch to move, but this would neither be reliable or accurate.

William

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

correct, William. If James would like to use rangefinder, without modyfing the mount it can be done as well. He would need just to dedicte one body to this particular lens and adjust rangefinder horizontally to match on infinity. All other distances would match as well.

excersize which I mentioned in previous post was done on my Summar. Yes, all Summars were rangefinder coupled but one of the preious owners shorten (I do not why) the mount by 0,6mm. Otherwise lens was focusing properly when focus set on distance scale ignoring the rangefinder. I cut 0.7mm thick brass ring which I soldered to the mount and then lathed the mount to required length. Took me 2 days, lathing mount off in many steps - if I would take too much off that I would have to start from the very beginning :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for the useful information. This lens also measures 31.3mm inside the focussing thread.

I think I will keep it in its original non-Standard, non-coupled condition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My film test of the non-standard 664 Elmar was not very successful, most of the negatives were out of focus. It looks as if the lens is further out of standard than I was expecting.

After initially thinking I could use the camera rangefinder, as it was moving but not accurately, I changed to focussing using the distance scale on the lens, checking the distance using a FOFER clip-on rangefinder. Most of the pictures were taken at middle distance at f6.3 or close up at f3.5.

The only one that is useful is the one shown here, scanned from the negative. I set the lens to f3.5 and the distance scale to 1 metre, then used a tape measure from the back of the camera to the fishing reel and placed the tape measure in the picture at 1 metre.

Result is that the best point of focus is around 800mm on the back of the old developing tray and pens. So the lens at its closest focussing of 1 metre is producing an image from about 20% closer.

I will assume that it should be about 20% out at all distances and do another film test on that basis.

 

The film was not all a failure as I should have my Barnack Challenge pictures to print, taken with my Summar.

 

Then this afternoon talking about the Elmar with a friend I thought that if I get a cheap Zorki or Russian "Leica" I could take out the paper shims from behind the lens flange and maybe file down the flange to make it into a non-standard body to fit the lens? If the focus had been too distant rather than too near I could have just put a spacing washer between the body and lens, all very similar to the way I set up the focussing on my homemade large format wooden cameras.

 

I have some 120 Pan F in my Fuji 645 to finish next so may not get back to the Elmar right away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Pyrogallol said:

My film test of the non-standard 664 Elmar was not very successful, most of the negatives were out of focus. It looks as if the lens is further out of standard than I was expecting.

After initially thinking I could use the camera rangefinder, as it was moving but not accurately, I changed to focussing using the distance scale on the lens, checking the distance using a FOFER clip-on rangefinder. Most of the pictures were taken at middle distance at f6.3 or close up at f3.5.

The only one that is useful is the one shown here, scanned from the negative. I set the lens to f3.5 and the distance scale to 1 metre, then used a tape measure from the back of the camera to the fishing reel and placed the tape measure in the picture at 1 metre.

Result is that the best point of focus is around 800mm on the back of the old developing tray and pens. So the lens at its closest focussing of 1 metre is producing an image from about 20% closer.

I will assume that it should be about 20% out at all distances and do another film test on that basis.

 

The film was not all a failure as I should have my Barnack Challenge pictures to print, taken with my Summar.

 

Then this afternoon talking about the Elmar with a friend I thought that if I get a cheap Zorki or Russian "Leica" I could take out the paper shims from behind the lens flange and maybe file down the flange to make it into a non-standard body to fit the lens? If the focus had been too distant rather than too near I could have just put a spacing washer between the body and lens, all very similar to the way I set up the focussing on my homemade large format wooden cameras.

 

I have some 120 Pan F in my Fuji 645 to finish next so may not get back to the Elmar right away.

Your suggestion, discussed with your friend, is one possibility. This was what was done with the I Model A, but with a camera with interchangeable lenses putting in shims would put other lenses 'out'.  A good CLA person might be able to fix the lens itself by altering it, but you would need to discuss this with someone you trust and who has the requisite tools, including a ground glass screen for determining true focus etc.

William

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Distance scale at 1m, lens is focusing properly at cca 80cm, this is how I understood. This means that the optics shall be retracted, closer to film plane by approx 0,7mm. I am afraid that you will not be able to compensate it with paper shims, one layer is approx 0,1mm, metal shims are 0,2mm. But you would need to remove the shims which are under the flange on the camera. I rather think that the lens flange on the camera would need to be lathed off to make non std camera to fit the lens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

in addition to above -  0,7mm is approx the distance how much optics travels between 1,25m and 1m on distance scale, number is just for orientation.

I am aware about 3 methods how to match lens to camera. Two of them require body with screw at behind )converted IA, IC of early II), but the rest what is needed everyone has at home, most probably.

1. rear side screw removed, ground plate inserted instead of film. Camera set on the object at known distance, projected image is observed through the hole with magnifying glass (10-15x). Advantage of this methid is that you may check focus in the whole range

2. rear screw remowed, test pattern (old microfilm or similar) insereted instead of film, camera illuminated from behind. Lens set to infinity. Using good binocular/moncular (set as well to infinity) you look into the lens. This method, however modified, is used by me when checking focus of the lenses. My modification requires parts which not everyone has at home, if you are interested send me PM. Focus check occurs at infinity, but due to mechanical construction focus shall be accurate in the whole range. 

3 the third method is more accurate and does not require opened camera back, but requires autocolimator. For interested forum mebers: autocolimator is optical device. It projects test pattern on the test object, reflected pattern is observed through the viewer in autocolimator (AC). Camera has a reflecting sheet inserted instead of film, lens is set to infinity. AC projects test pattern focused at infinity through the lens to be tested, it is reflected on film plane, goes back to AC, halfmirror directs reeflected pattern to the AC viewer. Advantage of this method is that the light travels twice through the combination camera/lens thus possible failures cumulates and is better to see.
AC is an expensive and rare device, not every repair shop has it.
As mentioned, I am using modified method 2, after calibration I checked the lens once on AC (at friendly repair shop here in Vienna) and test proved that my method is  good as well, there was no need for readjusting the lens after AC test.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×