Winterized Elmar 50 3.5?

[George Furst]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

This lens certainly saw history. This division was sent to the Ukraine, I am sure, because of the destruction of the 6th Army in the Stalingrad sector at the end of January 1943. This historic event and the imprisonment of Field Martial Poulis was one of the great diseasters of the war. I am sure that this unit was sent to the Ukraine to fill the hole caused by the encirclement and destruction of this army. It was a very difficult time for the Germans. They would have also helped with the evacuation of the Caucasus well documented in the book by Walter Benser “My Life with the Leica”. This book has a vivid description of the evacuation of the Caucasus and I recommend to anyone who I interested in the history of Leica Cameras and their use during the Second World War. It is claimed that this diseaster was a major factor that doomed the Germany war effort. They lost their hope of sourcing oil from the Oil fields located in the eastern Caucas area and the lack of oil doomed them.

 

How do I know this. It is because I was born in 1942 and I have read everything available about this pivotal year. It was my beginning and the end of German expansion.

[tranquilo67]

Hi all,

Just for completion.

Today I was reviewing the 30 Jahre supplement of Leica Historica (Screwmount cameras with military engravings WWII), and in the introduction Dr. Luigi Cane states that "some lenses in the list show the entry "K" ... Most probably the preparation of lenses for use at low temperatures was done by the use of special low temperature resistant lubricants". He comments also that there haven't seen any difference in mechanics. I've reviewed the whole list and the ones that have that K are in the period February 1942 to March 1942 (very short if we compare with the 5 years of military production).

So my understanding is that yes, there were lenses prepared for the cold, and my guess is that it could have been just the removal of the grease. Of course, my Elmar 50 3.5 is not in that list, but it could have been winterized (originally or later on) not applying/removing the grease.

Best regards,

Augusto

[Advertisement]

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

[wizard]

If you would like to regrease your lens, it is really easy to do that on an Elmar 5 cm lens. You just have to unscrew the pin that is mounted in the lens flange, then you can unscrew the lens body from the flange. One word of caution here, do make sure you remember the position in which the lens body came off the lens flange, as that will be the position you have to reinsert the lens body into the flange (there are several positions in which this is possible, but only one of them is the correct one). Get some specialized optical grade grease (available over the internet) and apply that grease to the threads with the help of a toothpick (less is more here). Reassemble the lens and, bingo, that was it.

I have done that with an Elmar I own, and the result was perfect. Note that I am not inclined to do that with any other lens, but the Elmar is really easy here (note that I am not talking about the M-version Elmar and the later Elmar-M, as those lenses are of different construction).

Cheers, Andy

[tranquilo67]

35 minutes ago, wizard said:

If you would like to regrease your lens, it is really easy to do that on an Elmar 5 cm lens. You just have to unscrew the pin that is mounted in the lens flange, then you can unscrew the lens body from the flange. One word of caution here, do make sure you remember the position in which the lens body came off the lens flange, as that will be the position you have to reinsert the lens body into the flange (there are several positions in which this is possible, but only one of them is the correct one). Get some specialized optical grade grease (available over the internet) and apply that grease to the threads with the help of a toothpick (less is more here). Reassemble the lens and, bingo, that was it.

I have done that with an Elmar I own, and the result was perfect. Note that I am not inclined to do that with any other lens, but the Elmar is really easy here (note that I am not talking about the M-version Elmar and the later Elmar-M, as those lenses are of different construction).

Cheers, Andy

Thank you very much for the advice!! I do some simple tasks in my cameras and lenses but in case of doubt I send them to a technician.

As I have several other Elmar 50 probably I'll leave it as it is due to it's like "part of it's charm".

Best regards,

Augusto

[willeica]

6 hours ago, tranquilo67 said:

Hi all,

Just for completion.

Today I was reviewing the 30 Jahre supplement of Leica Historica (Screwmount cameras with military engravings WWII), and in the introduction Dr. Luigi Cane states that "some lenses in the list show the entry "K" ... Most probably the preparation of lenses for use at low temperatures was done by the use of special low temperature resistant lubricants". He comments also that there haven't seen any difference in mechanics. I've reviewed the whole list and the ones that have that K are in the period February 1942 to March 1942 (very short if we compare with the 5 years of military production).

So my understanding is that yes, there were lenses prepared for the cold, and my guess is that it could have been just the removal of the grease. Of course, my Elmar 50 3.5 is not in that list, but it could have been winterized (originally or later on) not applying/removing the grease.

Best regards,

Augusto

Thanks Augusto. I may have seen this before, but it certainly flew under my radar when we last discussed this. I have never seen a lens engraved with a K, so this may have just been a journal entry. I will also look at what I got back from the Leica Archives about my IIIcK. The vintage Leica world is one of continuous discovery.

William

[UliWer]

Leitz tested the lubrication for the cameras as early as 1932. In older models they used „bone“-oil for lubrication which was not good under very cold surroundings. Then they used „Singer-Öl Nr.1“ which was tested in a fridge and they found out it worked well until -20 degree Celsius. The new lubrication was introduced from serial No. 100400 onwards. (This is documented in the „Tagebuch für Leica-Änderungen“ - „diary of changements for the Leica“, which was edited new  by Leica Historica e.V. in 10/2010). Unfortunately lens assembly is not mentioned in this diary.

The later „K“-models are mentioned in this diary under No. 352376: „From no. 352376 onwards the Leica 250 gets ball-bearing until -45 degree Celsius. The cold tests were done at the „Berliner Reichsprüfanstalt“. The Reporter-Camera runs on 13 ball-bearings with 167 balls alltogether in following order: 19 balls 0.6mm diameter, 110 balls 1mm diameter, 31 balls 1.2mm diameter, 7 balls 1.5mm diameter“ (my translation). They do not mention any new lubrication.

Later the diary reports that 60 IIIc were delivered to the army with ball-bearings; some models still worked at -50 degree celsius; nos. 387101 - 38716. Obviously it got colder.

From no. 388926 onwards all cameras IIIc and IIId were delivered with ball-bearings. There is no date for this entry in the diary.

But there are two further entries: „Cessation of Leica camera assembly from January 1944 because of total war“.

The last one in the diary is: „Restart of camera assembly on May 5, 1945.

So my impression is „Winterfest“,  „K“ and ball-bearing was not so good for Leica cameras. May was better.

 

[Pyrogallol]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

5 hours ago, wizard said:

If you would like to regrease your lens, it is really easy to do that on an Elmar 5 cm lens. You just have to unscrew the pin that is mounted in the lens flange, then you can unscrew the lens body from the flange. One word of caution here, do make sure you remember the position in which the lens body came off the lens flange, as that will be the position you have to reinsert the lens body into the flange (there are several positions in which this is possible, but only one of them is the correct one). Get some specialized optical grade grease (available over the internet) and apply that grease to the threads with the help of a toothpick (less is more here). Reassemble the lens and, bingo, that was it.

I have done that with an Elmar I own, and the result was perfect. Note that I am not inclined to do that with any other lens, but the Elmar is really easy here (note that I am not talking about the M-version Elmar and the later Elmar-M, as those lenses are of different construction).

Cheers, Andy

On a similar servicing theme, something that will horrify serious collectors, and I know you must never use WD40 on cameras, but if you have a classic design 50mm Elmar/Hektor with a gummed up diaphragm that you break your nails trying to move (as I had) it is probably not the diaphragm itself that is stuck but the ring that has the indicator/adjuster on it and is open to the air to collect dirt over the years/decades.

A small amount of WD40, in my case on the tip of a feather, around the outside edge of the adjuster ring should free it off enough to work it backwards and forwards until it is moving in a more usable manner. On the Hektor shown in this picture I could hardly move it when I got the lens. After a little WD40 it freed off, though a couple of weeks later it has tightened a bit but is still now very usable.

This week the same treatment worked on a rangefinder 35mm Nikon MIOJ lens from circa 1951, it has a similar diaphragm adjustment ring.

And a 135mm Schneider Xenar large format lens/Compur shutter is now working after being in such a poor condition it was about to be put back in the junk box.

 

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!

Edited November 20, 2019 by Pyrogallol

[romanus53]

WD40 doesn't Cure anything obviously, try lighter-gasoline but if there is dirt and grease inside you have to remove that; and never put oil on Diaphragma-blades.

[tranquilo67]

19 hours ago, UliWer said:

Leitz tested the lubrication for the cameras as early as 1932. In older models they used „bone“-oil for lubrication which was not good under very cold surroundings. Then they used „Singer-Öl Nr.1“ which was tested in a fridge and they found out it worked well until -20 degree Celsius. The new lubrication was introduced from serial No. 100400 onwards. (This is documented in the „Tagebuch für Leica-Änderungen“ - „diary of changements for the Leica“, which was edited new  by Leica Historica e.V. in 10/2010). Unfortunately lens assembly is not mentioned in this diary.

The later „K“-models are mentioned in this diary under No. 352376: „From no. 352376 onwards the Leica 250 gets ball-bearing until -45 degree Celsius. The cold tests were done at the „Berliner Reichsprüfanstalt“. The Reporter-Camera runs on 13 ball-bearings with 167 balls alltogether in following order: 19 balls 0.6mm diameter, 110 balls 1mm diameter, 31 balls 1.2mm diameter, 7 balls 1.5mm diameter“ (my translation). They do not mention any new lubrication.

Later the diary reports that 60 IIIc were delivered to the army with ball-bearings; some models still worked at -50 degree celsius; nos. 387101 - 38716. Obviously it got colder.

From no. 388926 onwards all cameras IIIc and IIId were delivered with ball-bearings. There is no date for this entry in the diary.

But there are two further entries: „Cessation of Leica camera assembly from January 1944 because of total war“.

The last one in the diary is: „Restart of camera assembly on May 5, 1945.

So my impression is „Winterfest“,  „K“ and ball-bearing was not so good for Leica cameras. May was better.

 

Thank you very much for the such detailed information!!

I've read about K cameras (in fact I have one late wartype IIIc serial 397305 that despite of not being marked as such I think it has ball bearings).

What I've never heard about is "K lenses" and as per Luigi Cane they didn't have any ball bearings or any other mechanical difference. It should be just a matter of lubricants (or lack of them).

Best regards,

Augusto

 

20 hours ago, willeica said:

Thanks Augusto. I may have seen this before, but it certainly flew under my radar when we last discussed this. I have never seen a lens engraved with a K, so this may have just been a journal entry. I will also look at what I got back from the Leica Archives about my IIIcK. The vintage Leica world is one of continuous discovery.

William

Hi William!! That is my understanding also, that it should be something in the books with no marks on the lens. And yes (at least to me) it's an amazing and surprising world.

Best regards,

Augusto

[landsknechte]

If you've got a name, you might consider reaching out to the Bundesarchiv.  A lot of records were destroyed in the war, but I've had some luck getting some really useful information on individual soldiers from them in the past.  (I'm a militaria collector with a few named items in my collection, and my wife had some family on that side of the war.)

https://www.bundesarchiv.de/EN/Navigation/Use/Using-specific-types/Military-Records/military-records-en.html

[willeica]

On 11/21/2019 at 6:38 PM, tranquilo67 said:

Hi William!! That is my understanding also, that it should be something in the books with no marks on the lens. And yes (at least to me) it's an amazing and surprising world.

I have had a chance to look again at the Cane list. There is some material in the introduction which is useful, but it is also somewhat confusing, possibly due to translation issues. The point is made that some lenses are marked with a K. In some cases Cane is talking about journal entries, but he does say also that lenses with those journal entries have been found to be engraved with a. I have never seen a lens engraved with a K, but I do not doubt that some may have been found. Cane nails his colours to K meaning 'kaltefest' ( prepared for use at low temperatures rather than 'Kugellager' meaning ball bearings, which is another way of achieving 'kaltefest' with a camera. Confused?

The text refers to lenses with 'K' and 'Luftw. K' and in the lists these are all 'SOORE', which means that they were Summitars, largely delivered in February 1942. There are, however, later deliveries of Elmars, which are marked 'Ka' which presumably means 'kaltefest'. These were largely delivered in very early 1943. In the introduction Cane says that a strip down of the K lenses showed no sign of different construction, such as the use of ball bearings, so he concludes that the 'kaltefest' was achieved by means special low temperature resistant lubricants. The chances of such lubricants being effective almost 80 years later would seem to be quite slim, though.

Looking at my own grey paint IIIcs, the first of these  which I bought cheap with no military provenance) was, according to the Leica Archives delivered in November 1942 with a Summitar (which I do not have). No SN is given for that lens, nor does 'K' appear in respect of the lens. The Archives have appended a K to the camera SN in their reply, but this does not appear on the camera. The Archives told me that this camera was delivered to the Air Force in Berlin, but neither I nor Jim Lager, with whom I discussed the camera believe that this is correct. The camera does not appear in the Cane list. 

My other grey IIIc, a genuine 'K' model, appears to have been a private sale and the delivery details refer to the camera as having been delivered with a 'remunerated' Summitar, which would seem to have referred to a private purchaser who would have to have paid for his/her own lens. I did not receive a Summitar with this camera, but, rather, a nice Elmar from 1941.

The Archives mentioned the Hahne list in respect of both lenses in the context of 'serial number circle of 387501-390525 = Leica IIIc grey for air force', but I do not know what to make of that. It is possible that one or both these cameras came with a 'SOORE K', but I think that is unlikely as I believe that both cameras were actually civilian and I would suspect that the K lenses were intended for military use only.

William

[tranquilo67]

On 11/23/2019 at 2:40 AM, landsknechte said:

If you've got a name, you might consider reaching out to the Bundesarchiv.  A lot of records were destroyed in the war, but I've had some luck getting some really useful information on individual soldiers from them in the past.  (I'm a militaria collector with a few named items in my collection, and my wife had some family on that side of the war.)

https://www.bundesarchiv.de/EN/Navigation/Use/Using-specific-types/Military-Records/military-records-en.html

Hi,

Thank you very much for your comment. I already wrote them but with the name, military grade and the 335th infantry division they told me that was not sufficient. They asked me for birth date

Anyway I will try again (it looks like there are several achieves) or even I'll try to arrange a personal visit next time I'll be in Germany.

 

 

On 11/23/2019 at 7:37 PM, willeica said:

I have had a chance to look again at the Cane list. There is some material in the introduction which is useful, but it is also somewhat confusing, possibly due to translation issues. The point is made that some lenses are marked with a K. In some cases Cane is talking about journal entries, but he does say also that lenses with those journal entries have been found to be engraved with a. I have never seen a lens engraved with a K, but I do not doubt that some may have been found. Cane nails his colours to K meaning 'kaltefest' ( prepared for use at low temperatures rather than 'Kugellager' meaning ball bearings, which is another way of achieving 'kaltefest' with a camera. Confused?

The text refers to lenses with 'K' and 'Luftw. K' and in the lists these are all 'SOORE', which means that they were Summitars, largely delivered in February 1942. There are, however, later deliveries of Elmars, which are marked 'Ka' which presumably means 'kaltefest'. These were largely delivered in very early 1943. In the introduction Cane says that a strip down of the K lenses showed no sign of different construction, such as the use of ball bearings, so he concludes that the 'kaltefest' was achieved by means special low temperature resistant lubricants. The chances of such lubricants being effective almost 80 years later would seem to be quite slim, though.

Looking at my own grey paint IIIcs, the first of these  which I bought cheap with no military provenance) was, according to the Leica Archives delivered in November 1942 with a Summitar (which I do not have). No SN is given for that lens, nor does 'K' appear in respect of the lens. The Archives have appended a K to the camera SN in their reply, but this does not appear on the camera. The Archives told me that this camera was delivered to the Air Force in Berlin, but neither I nor Jim Lager, with whom I discussed the camera believe that this is correct. The camera does not appear in the Cane list. 

My other grey IIIc, a genuine 'K' model, appears to have been a private sale and the delivery details refer to the camera as having been delivered with a 'remunerated' Summitar, which would seem to have referred to a private purchaser who would have to have paid for his/her own lens. I did not receive a Summitar with this camera, but, rather, a nice Elmar from 1941.

The Archives mentioned the Hahne list in respect of both lenses in the context of 'serial number circle of 387501-390525 = Leica IIIc grey for air force', but I do not know what to make of that. It is possible that one or both these cameras came with a 'SOORE K', but I think that is unlikely as I believe that both cameras were actually civilian and I would suspect that the K lenses were intended for military use only.

William

Thank you very much William. As always, it's a pleasure to have people like you here in the forum.

My guess is that may be instead of having different lubricants the winter preparation could have been to have no lubricant at all. That could explain the metal-to-metal friction sensation when focusing my Elmar. By the way, I didn't locate any Elmar with the K in the book entry. Interesting to know. Thank you!!

Best regards,

Augusto