Affordable Screw-Mount L39 Options?

[wlaidlaw]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Repeat this 50 times until it finally sinks in: "Russian lenses do not focus properly on Leica and Leica clone LTM bodies"  These are Leicas themselves and others such as Reid and Sigrist and many Japanese, Italian LTM cameras plus others. The Russian cameras and lenses are outliers and use a different system but still with the 39mm x 26TPI mount thread. For low priced LTM lenses that will work properly on Leica, Japanese lenses from the likes of Canon and Nikkor are the best option. Older Leica lenses are often not expensive. See my thread here for a technical explanation why: 

Wilson

 

[Advertisement]

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

[Matlock]

41 minutes ago, wlaidlaw said:

Repeat this 50 times until it finally sinks in: "Russian lenses do not focus properly on Leica and Leica clone LTM bodies"  

Wilson

 

I think you delude yourself Wilson if you believe that anyone will take notice. People generally do not like facts and think you are just being a spoilsport. But please keep trying. The fact that Russian lenses do not work was drummed into me many, many years ago by a professional photographer with a lifetime of experience (he actually took my wedding photos back in the 1960s) and I have never forgotten his wise words.

[Martin B]

17 hours ago, wlaidlaw said:

Repeat this 50 times until it finally sinks in: "Russian lenses do not focus properly on Leica and Leica clone LTM bodies"  These are Leicas themselves and others such as Reid and Sigrist and many Japanese, Italian LTM cameras plus others. The Russian cameras and lenses are outliers and use a different system but still with the 39mm x 26TPI mount thread. For low priced LTM lenses that will work properly on Leica, Japanese lenses from the likes of Canon and Nikkor are the best option. Older Leica lenses are often not expensive. See my thread here for a technical explanation why: 

Wilson

 

It is a very useful information which you provided but nevertheless I just ordered a Jupiter-12 lens in a nice design for a decent price. Honestly, I don't care too much if there is some little deviation in regard to rangefinder focusing with the IIIc. It's a f/2.8 small wide angle lens, so estimating the distance will work in most cases anyway without even using the rangefinder. Where I fully disagree with you is in your sentence "Older Leica lenses are often not expensive". They are. Just check any of the online used gear sites or ebay and you see how overpriced they all are. It is crazy. Some are priced similar to much better M-mount lenses in the same FL - as pointed out earlier, this is caused by collector interest driving prices up (in addition to a run in recent times to use old lenses on newer mirrorless cameras even I believe only few are vesting this amount of money for these older Leitz lenses just for this purpose). Btw, the LTM options from Canon and Nikon are priced less but still quite high for most of the condition of the lenses offered. Indeed the best bang for your buck for older LTM lenses are the Russian ones or with some luck Cosina-Voigtlander type lenses. Can't wait to test my Jupiter-12 lens soon - seems to be a nice character lens. 

Edited August 28, 2019 by Martin B

[levegh]

Martin,

It all depends what is meant by "not expensive." My disposable income these days is meagre so I have to make choices, as I suspect do you. Those Leica users who have multiple copies of the same lens or who only use the latest, the best or the most expensive are never likely to understand somebody who is trying to eke out the money available. I enjoy what I have, but I would also enjoy what I do not have. My relative penury is the result of my life choices not anybody else's, so I am not complaining. For those whose childhood reading included Moonfleet, Ita in vita ut in lusu alae pessima jactura arte corrigenda est. I was never a very good player of backgammon.

Stuart

 

[wlaidlaw]

27 minutes ago, levegh said:

Martin,

It all depends what is meant by "not expensive." My disposable income these days is meagre so I have to make choices, as I suspect do you. Those Leica users who have multiple copies of the same lens or who only use the latest, the best or the most expensive are never likely to understand somebody who is trying to eke out the money available. I enjoy what I have, but I would also enjoy what I do not have. My relative penury is the result of my life choices not anybody else's, so I am not complaining. For those whose childhood reading included Moonfleet, Ita in vita ut in lusu alae pessima jactura arte corrigenda est. I was never a very good player of backgammon.

Stuart

 

Stuart, 

In the last year or so, I have bought an LTM 1952/3 Canon 50mm/f1.8 "Hiroshi" Serenar (the all chrome one with locking focus tab) in lovely condition. to put on a Leotax. I bought the Leotax  because it was very cheap, had just had a CLA and came with three of the beautiful spring loaded spools, which fit in Barnack Leicas and make changing film so much easier. I am now going to sell the Leotax with a Leica spool in it but I felt it would sell better with a "correct" lens on it. I paid around $130 for the Canon lens. It is certainly better than my contemporaneous 50mm/f2 Leica Summitar and maybe even a touch better than my slightly later rigid 50/2 Summicron, with better central and peripheral resolution, less chromatic aberration, and a touch more contrast. Not for nothing, were these lenses know as the "Japanese Summicron". I would have had to pay at least £1,000 for a Rigid Summicron in equivalent condition. I bought about 11 months ago one of the legendary Nikkor 105mm/f2.5 lenses from an auction in Japan and I paid $160 including buyer's commission. I don't think anyone could class either of those lenses as being expensive and what is more, they focus perfectly on my various Barnack cameras (and on the Leotax).

There are loads of old LTM Japanese lenses for sale from Japan, Taiwan and Korea, all of which should focus correct on a Leica screw thread camera. Look on one of the international auction sites as well as eBay. Google Chrome works just about well enough to enable bidding or make friends with a Japanese member of the forum like I did and he bids for me. There are real bargains to be had. In the last two years at Japanese estate auctions I have picked up 2 of the very rare 1999 year Leica chrome LTM lenses, the last LTM lenses made by Leica. A 50/2 Summicron series V special edition and a 50/1.4 Summilux series III special edition. Both were in mint, virtually unused condition and I got them at half the price people are asking in the west. They were originally, nearly all sold by Leica in Japan as collector items. 

Wilson

[Martin B]

46 minutes ago, wlaidlaw said:

Stuart, 

In the last year or so, I have bought an LTM 1952/3 Canon 50mm/f1.8 "Hiroshi" Serenar (the all chrome one with locking focus tab) in lovely condition. to put on a Leotax. I bought the Leotax  because it was very cheap, had just had a CLA and came with three of the beautiful spring loaded spools, which fit in Barnack Leicas and make changing film so much easier. I am now going to sell the Leotax with a Leica spool in it but I felt it would sell better with a "correct" lens on it. I paid around $130 for the Canon lens. It is certainly better than my contemporaneous 50mm/f2 Leica Summitar and maybe even a touch better than my slightly later rigid 50/2 Summicron, with better central and peripheral resolution, less chromatic aberration, and a touch more contrast. Not for nothing, were these lenses know as the "Japanese Summicron". I would have had to pay at least £1,000 for a Rigid Summicron in equivalent condition. I bought about 11 months ago one of the legendary Nikkor 105mm/f2.5 lenses from an auction in Japan and I paid $160 including buyer's commission. I don't think anyone could class either of those lenses as being expensive and what is more, they focus perfectly on my various Barnack cameras (and on the Leotax).

There are loads of old LTM Japanese lenses for sale from Japan, Taiwan and Korea, all of which should focus correct on a Leica screw thread camera. Look on one of the international auction sites as well as eBay. Google Chrome works just about well enough to enable bidding or make friends with a Japanese member of the forum like I did and he bids for me. There are real bargains to be had. In the last two years at Japanese estate auctions I have picked up 2 of the very rare 1999 year Leica chrome LTM lenses, the last LTM lenses made by Leica. A 50/2 Summicron series V special edition and a 50/1.4 Summilux series III special edition. Both were in mint, virtually unused condition and I got them at half the price people are asking in the west. They were originally, nearly all sold by Leica in Japan as collector items. 

Wilson

Please keep in mind that this topic which I started handled wide angle LTM lenses (maybe I should have written it in the thread's subject headline, but I stated it in the intro post) - I agree with you that 50 mm and above you can find really good bargains out there (including even the Leitz brand). But the story is very different when looking at 35 mm lenses. The ebay offerings here from Japan are a bit cheaper but you need to add customs/shipping and it will be about the same high. 

Edited August 28, 2019 by Martin B

[Martin B]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 hour ago, levegh said:

Martin,

It all depends what is meant by "not expensive." My disposable income these days is meagre so I have to make choices, as I suspect do you. Those Leica users who have multiple copies of the same lens or who only use the latest, the best or the most expensive are never likely to understand somebody who is trying to eke out the money available. I enjoy what I have, but I would also enjoy what I do not have. My relative penury is the result of my life choices not anybody else's, so I am not complaining. For those whose childhood reading included Moonfleet, Ita in vita ut in lusu alae pessima jactura arte corrigenda est. I was never a very good player of backgammon.

Stuart

 

I have a good number of M lenses (from different brands). I won the IIIc recently at an auction in good condition for an excellent bidding price, I just had a CLA done. I don't want to invest a lot to use this quite appealing and small camera with a few lenses. As I said, I am not a collector at all, just a user, so price is definitely an issue here to consider. 

[tranquilo67]

Reading the post, I was going to recommend the Sankyo Kohki W-Komura 35 2.8 as an small, nice and affordable lens with performance far from Summaron but reasonable, but I've checked Ebay and it looks like now it's priced almost like Summaron.

[willeica]

18 hours ago, Martin B said:

Please keep in mind that this topic which I started handled wide angle LTM lenses (maybe I should have written it in the thread's subject headline, but I stated it in the intro post) - I agree with you that 50 mm and above you can find really good bargains out there (including even the Leitz brand). But the story is very different when looking at 35 mm lenses. The ebay offerings here from Japan are a bit cheaper but you need to add customs/shipping and it will be about the same high. 

The tone of your posts is to the effect that the prices of 35mm LTM lenses are disgracefully high. As a British Prime Minister once famously said ' you cannot buck the markets'. However, your sense of value and affordability may be different to mine and mine may be different to Wilson's and so on. The sellers of 35mm LTM lenses must genuinely expect to get the prices that they seek from buyers. In which case, unless you can haggle over the prices, you either have to pay what is being sought or move on.

To get down to specifics, I have an example of this lens the performance of which is every bit as good as that of the 3 35mm f2.8 Summarons (LTM, M and M with goggles) which I have in my collection.

https://www.ebay.ie/itm/Excellent-Canon-35mm-f-2-8-Leica-Screw-Mount-LTM-M39-Rangefinder-lens-from-JP/264420880319?hash=item3d90b66fbf:g:6NkAAOSwpKtdSCvR

I paid between 2 and 4 times the price sought here for each of the various Summarons. I might add that I have no connection with the seller and, indeed, I have rarely bought items on eBay. I bought my example of this lens along with a IIIf RD ST and a leather ERC case and an SBLOO finder from an auction in Sweden. The price I paid was reasonable considering the items which were included. If my memory is not failing me, I believe that I mainly bought this lot to get the SBLOO finder.

William

[Martin B]

13 hours ago, willeica said:

The tone of your posts is to the effect that the prices of 35mm LTM lenses are disgracefully high. As a British Prime Minister once famously said ' you cannot buck the markets'. However, your sense of value and affordability may be different to mine and mine may be different to Wilson's and so on. The sellers of 35mm LTM lenses must genuinely expect to get the prices that they seek from buyers. In which case, unless you can haggle over the prices, you either have to pay what is being sought or move on.

To get down to specifics, I have an example of this lens the performance of which is every bit as good as that of the 3 35mm f2.8 Summarons (LTM, M and M with goggles) which I have in my collection.

https://www.ebay.ie/itm/Excellent-Canon-35mm-f-2-8-Leica-Screw-Mount-LTM-M39-Rangefinder-lens-from-JP/264420880319?hash=item3d90b66fbf:g:6NkAAOSwpKtdSCvR

I paid between 2 and 4 times the price sought here for each of the various Summarons. I might add that I have no connection with the seller and, indeed, I have rarely bought items on eBay. I bought my example of this lens along with a IIIf RD ST and a leather ERC case and an SBLOO finder from an auction in Sweden. The price I paid was reasonable considering the items which were included. If my memory is not failing me, I believe that I mainly bought this lot to get the SBLOO finder.

William

I have already seen this link a few days ago when I posted my earlier reply - for me the price/quality ratio is not given here seeing how worn the body is and the price for a Canon f/2.8 lens. I think I found then a much better deal with a mint looking metallic Jupiter-12 lens instead which I ordered instead - also f/2.8. Since I already have an excellent 35/2.0 Summicron-M lens, I rather go for a [cheaper] character lens quality on my screw-mount camera. But as you said each on their own, preferences surely will differ. I also agree with "you either have to pay what is being sought or move on" - this was exactly the reason why I opened this thread to raise awareness of this issue. Often people here avoid talking about prices, and I don't see why this should be a no-no since especially since this 35 mm screw-mount market niche is very offset IMO from what else you could get for the similar amount of money for example in M-mount. 

I am also aware that unfortunately the Barnack camera and lenses are part of the collector forum on LUF. That's not ideal IMO since the preferences between collectors and users are very different as we see in our discussion. But I also see the advantage that sometimes information can be shared between both groups of collectors and regular users. And it is possible that Leica II and III cameras are actually mostly collector items these days of some sort (even there is still a huge price gap between a "regular" camera body and a special series and/or with specific engravings etc - I suspect only the latter is important for collectors). 

Edited August 29, 2019 by Martin B

[willeica]

9 hours ago, Martin B said:

I have already seen this link a few days ago when I posted my earlier reply - for me the price/quality ratio is not given here seeing how worn the body is and the price for a Canon f/2.8 lens. I think I found then a much better deal with a mint looking metallic Jupiter-12 lens instead which I ordered instead - also f/2.8. Since I already have an excellent 35/2.0 Summicron-M lens, I rather go for a [cheaper] character lens quality on my screw-mount camera. But as you said each on their own, preferences surely will differ. I also agree with "you either have to pay what is being sought or move on" - this was exactly the reason why I opened this thread to raise awareness of this issue. Often people here avoid talking about prices, and I don't see why this should be a no-no since especially since this 35 mm screw-mount market niche is very offset IMO from what else you could get for the similar amount of money for example in M-mount. 

I am also aware that unfortunately the Barnack camera and lenses are part of the collector forum on LUF. That's not ideal IMO since the preferences between collectors and users are very different as we see in our discussion. But I also see the advantage that sometimes information can be shared between both groups of collectors and regular users. And it is possible that Leica II and III cameras are actually mostly collector items these days of some sort (even there is still a huge price gap between a "regular" camera body and a special series and/or with specific engravings etc - I suspect only the latter is important for collectors). 

Thanks. I plead guilty to being a collector, but I do not apologise for that. The point I was making was that there is no particular entitlement to a specific price level when it comes to second hand photographic items of any kind. The market is what it is and you have work within its confines. As for user items falling within the collectors section, you should raise that with Andreas. I somehow doubt if there is scope for further division on this subject. I am happy to be both a 'Collector and User' as my title says.

William

[earleygallery]

10 hours ago, Martin B said:

 

I am also aware that unfortunately the Barnack camera and lenses are part of the collector forum on LUF. That's not ideal IMO since the preferences between collectors and users are very different as we see in our discussion. 

It's 'Collectors & Historica' actually. 

I guess you could lump M3/M2 users, even R users, into this catagory if you're being pedantic but I think most of us take it that 'historica' is pre M era Leica. 

Collectors and users all welcome! Even collector-users! 

[Stacey]

On 8/29/2019 at 7:07 PM, Martin B said:

I am also aware that unfortunately the Barnack camera and lenses are part of the collector forum on LUF. That's not ideal IMO since the preferences between collectors and users are very different as we see in our discussion. 

The difference between collector pricing and user pricing of this gear is the condition. If I am looking to use something, a dent on the top plate or a bunch of scratches on the bottom etc don't matter and in some cases are preferable as then I don't feel guilty about scratching up a mint sample of a 60+ year old camera. If I am buying a character lens, a small chip or a large scratch on the front glass isn't an issue in use, but kills it's collector value. And as others have said, the quality control issues (which are very real) + the incompatibility with the FSU optics, makes me look elsewhere for lenses to use on a Leica. I'd much rather use a Canon 35mm f2.8 with a big scratch on the front element than hope that a 35mm FSU lens was assembled corrected, it probably wasn't.

[Martin B]

On 8/31/2019 at 8:44 AM, Stacey said:

The difference between collector pricing and user pricing of this gear is the condition. If I am looking to use something, a dent on the top plate or a bunch of scratches on the bottom etc don't matter and in some cases are preferable as then I don't feel guilty about scratching up a mint sample of a 60+ year old camera. If I am buying a character lens, a small chip or a large scratch on the front glass isn't an issue in use, but kills it's collector value. And as others have said, the quality control issues (which are very real) + the incompatibility with the FSU optics, makes me look elsewhere for lenses to use on a Leica. I'd much rather use a Canon 35mm f2.8 with a big scratch on the front element than hope that a 35mm FSU lens was assembled corrected, it probably wasn't.

Couldn't agree more about the description why lens character is more than exterior beauty! But it is subjective how much each of us is willing to spend for such character lens (partially scratched, chipped, worn on the body) as pointed out earlier in this discussion. Still even if the collector value has maybe nearly vanished, I find 35/2.8 mm LTM prices for example for used and worn Canon lenses very expensive. 

[willeica]

3 hours ago, Martin B said:

Couldn't agree more about the description why lens character is more than exterior beauty! But it is subjective how much each of us is willing to spend for such character lens (partially scratched, chipped, worn on the body) as pointed out earlier in this discussion. Still even if the collector value has maybe nearly vanished, I find 35/2.8 mm LTM prices for example for used and worn Canon lenses very expensive. 

If LTM lenses are too expensive for you there are plenty of cameras with excellent lenses made by other manufacturers. At the end of the day 35mm cameras just need a correctly tuned shutter, a nice lens and straight film. Leica is not the only brand available for both 35mm cameras and lenses. I own about 40 Leica cameras and I can assure you that there is nothing particularly magical about them.  There are plenty of excellent cameras made by other manufacturers. Continually repeating that you find LTM lenses too expensive won't change the situation one bit and if you feel that way you may need to look at other brands of cameras and lenses to fulfil your needs. I am sorry if that sounds harsh, but it may be something that you must face up to at some stage. This has nothing to do with the collector issue as, for example, the price for a Canon 35mm f2.8 lens is not really affected by collector activity as it is not really the type of item that collectors seek. You are correct in saying that price sensitivity is a personal thing, though.

William

Edited September 1, 2019 by willeica

[gyoung]

I don't think you'll find a better modern 35mm lens than the 2.5 Voigtlander,  you will, probably have to pay £250 for it but I doubt you'll find a good modern lens for less than that for any camera.  Nikon 35mm f/2s AiS lenses will fetch that, and you'll need a Nikon body to put it on, the 2.8 Nikon 35 is not in the same league.  Canon and minolta slr lensesmight be a bit cheaper but again you'll need the f/2 versions to be top quality and they wont be cheap.  A really cheap lens is usually that way because neither collectors NOR users want it!  A lot of what is written about old slr lenses I find quite amusing, people recommend lenses I tried 40 years ago and found wanting,  I can only assume they don't know what a really good lens is.

Gerry 

[Stacey]

8 hours ago, Martin B said:

Couldn't agree more about the description why lens character is more than exterior beauty! But it is subjective how much each of us is willing to spend for such character lens (partially scratched, chipped, worn on the body) as pointed out earlier in this discussion. Still even if the collector value has maybe nearly vanished, I find 35/2.8 mm LTM prices for example for used and worn Canon lenses very expensive. 

Probably the cheapest way to shoot film is to get an old Pentax (around the spotmatic vintage) camera and shoot with M-42 lenses. Bomb proof camera and good optics for cheap. You also don't have to worry about compatibility as it's an SLR. I have a few of them, the H3v is a nice camera and these can be found for $30-50 in nice condition. 

[gyoung]

10 hours ago, Stacey said:

Probably the cheapest way to shoot film is to get an old Pentax (around the spotmatic vintage) camera and shoot with M-42 lenses. Bomb proof camera and good optics for cheap. You also don't have to worry about compatibility as it's an SLR. I have a few of them, the H3v is a nice camera and these can be found for $30-50 in nice condition. 

Back in 1963 I swopped a IIf for a Pentax S1a, mainly because I needed to do some motor racing photography  (paid work) and they are fine cameras. I moved on to M3 and eventually Nikon later, via Olympus etc.  I still have an S1a and a few lenses, 35mm though is a bit of a problem, the 3.5 Takumar is not so good, I have tried mine out on FullFrame and aps-c, like most of the early small max aperture lenses,  and I doubt the 35/2 is as good as the Nikon or Canon alternatives, and none of them are IMHO as good as the Voigtlander LTM lenses.  Cheap yes, but for a reason.  The 55s are good snd there is one of the 28s with a good reputation, but again modern Voigtländers will be better.

Gerry 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[spydrxx]

I'm surprised nobody has mentioned the unorthodox adapter route. Canon made an adapter ring called the "Canon mount Converter B" which mounts Canon FD lenses to the LTM (Barnack) bodies. There are readily available Nikon->Canon FD adapters increasing the flexibility of this system. So, if you have these 2 adapters you can mount wide angle Canon FD as well as Nikon lenses on Leica screwmount bodies - zone focus only though. But wait - there's more - using the Tamron Adaptall system you can also use the Tamron SP Adaptall lenses, including their 17mm/3.5, and if you're really into experimentation, you can mount and use the AFIF 70-210/4 zoom and actually get autofocus, which along with batteries is built into the lens body but you do need to determine with either the camera's viewfinder or an external viewfinder the field covered. Several years ago I mentioned this in a post with sample photos and details. Of course with and LTM->M adapter ring you can use these combos on M bodies as well. In the photo of one arrangement below, I used a diferent set of adapter rings, but with the same effect, which I tested out at both ends of the zoom range very satisfactorily. I've had good success with WA lenses which were in my collection, zone focusing as well. Just a thought to add to the discussion.

 

 

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 September 2, 2019 by spydrxx

[spydrxx]

I should have shown an example of 28mm lenses on screwmount bodies. My oversight..so here is an example.

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!