Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have heard some negatives about using older 50mm Leica lenses on a CL. I inherited an M3 body from a friend I was in photo school with way back when. So I want to get a period 50mm for it. But I also would like to use it on my CL. All I have now is a 35 which works fine on the CL but is out of place on the M3, though I have taken pictures with it. From what I know I have 3 choices.

1. Collapsible Summicron, obvious problems with the collapse, but have heard of ways to control that feature. 

2. My favorite a DR Summicron, have owned 2 and sold them both because when I was shooting professionally I just didn't use a 50, they were both excellent. Have heard negative about these lenses, glass fogging, and not operating well on digital Leicas. Would like to have the close focus capabilities.

3. Rigid 50mm Summicron, would rather have the DR Summicron but if these have aged better it would be worth a look.

4. I guess the 1.5 Summarits would also be a choice. 

Perhaps I have been reading too much, any suggestion would help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no idea what you have been reading, but in my experience the CL brings out the best in older lenses. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, jaapv said:

I have no idea what you have been reading, but in my experience the CL brings out the best in older lenses. 

Yes I agree with my 35 Summilux and 90 Elmarit are great on the CL, but I was more worried about physical handicaps of the lenses, the collapsing of collapsible lenses, with the DR Summicron, there is yellowing of the glass and the extended focus system interfere with the CL or is that just with digital Ms. Again I may have been taking detractors too seriously.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The CL is less forgiving than digital Ms about protruding lenses. I have no experience with the collapsible Summicron but i suspect it cannot be fully collapsed on the digital CL for the same reason as collapsible Elmars. Now rigid Summicrons have not this problem of course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, tommonego@gmail.com said:

I have heard some negatives about using older 50mm Leica lenses on a CL. I inherited an M3 body from a friend I was in photo school with way back when. So I want to get a period 50mm for it. But I also would like to use it on my CL. All I have now is a 35 which works fine on the CL but is out of place on the M3, though I have taken pictures with it. From what I know I have 3 choices.

1. Collapsible Summicron, obvious problems with the collapse, but have heard of ways to control that feature. 

2. My favorite a DR Summicron, have owned 2 and sold them both because when I was shooting professionally I just didn't use a 50, they were both excellent. Have heard negative about these lenses, glass fogging, and not operating well on digital Leicas. Would like to have the close focus capabilities.

3. Rigid 50mm Summicron, would rather have the DR Summicron but if these have aged better it would be worth a look.

4. I guess the 1.5 Summarits would also be a choice. 

Perhaps I have been reading too much, any suggestion would help.

The Rigid v2 and DR Summicron share the same lens head. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Think I'll have to try a DR Summicron, heck if it doesn't work well on the CL I still have a 55 TL mount. What I am worried about is the focus cam in close focus mode.

Thanks everyone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

My experience is that any lens for which the rear element does not extend beyond the L-mount flange (whether collapsible and collapsed, or not) when fitted to the Leica M Adapter L is perfectly compatible with the CL. I've only been able to try this notion out with a few lenses but all of them have done fine with this check. 

The '50s era collapsible 50mm and 90mm lenses that I tried have failed on this test, so I wouldn't bother with them. Adding limiter rings to the collapsing mechanism seems a kludge to me. 

G

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The collapsible Elmar-M 50/2.8 is my favorite 50mm on the CL. Suffice it to put a tape or another kind of safety strip on the lens barrel the same way as Leica was advising about the film CL 40+ years ago. See Leitz notice # 120-50 below. 

120-50_notice_en_roc.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I may end up with a collapsible Summicron, rigid, non DR seem to be going for a lot of money for a 50-60 year old lens. The collapsible is the vintage of the M3 I have, may be the way to go. Have also heard a suggestion of using a hair elastic band so it would be removable, to restrain the collapse. 

The DR is out because I also have an M8 and per Leitz they aren't compatible. Just to make things more complex.

Thanks

Tom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, tommonego@gmail.com said:

Have also heard a suggestion of using a hair elastic band so it would be removable, to restrain the collapse.

Or the elastic loop of a cap keeper. I use an old Sima on my collapsible Elmar currently but Hama ones work fine as well.
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Hama-Lens-Cap-Holder-1/dp/B00005QFC2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure if this is answered above but I regularly use a 1956 (such a great year for everything) collapsible Summicron on my CL, no issue with it collapsing as you can see it goes no further than the M/L mount adaptor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, that is interesting, good news. Probably the way I will go. It will spend the most time on my M3. I have been leaning towards the collapsible, but then a V5 Summicron was on KEH in Atlanta for more than I wanted to spend, not off the wall, but isn't that the Leica dilemma. 

Edited by tommonego@gmail.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can also use the Summicron 5cm/f:2.0 on the CL, without any fear when retracted:

Edited by papimuzo
pictures

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been very surprised at the quality of the images from my 1936 Summar on my CL. I still haven't found any advice as to whether I can collapse the lens when used with the M adaptor plus a screw to M adaptor. It looks as if it should be ok but I don't want to risk it. Has anyone any experienc of this set up ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, pebbles said:

I have been very surprised at the quality of the images from my 1936 Summar on my CL. I still haven't found any advice as to whether I can collapse the lens when used with the M adaptor plus a screw to M adaptor. It looks as if it should be ok but I don't want to risk it. Has anyone any experienc of this set up ?

I have no experience with this lens but you may wish to check if the collapsed "tube" protrudes further into the body than the M/L adapter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, lct said:

I have no experience with this lens but you may wish to check if the collapsed "tube" protrudes further into the body than the M/L adapter.

The daptor doesn't project into the space of course. It is when the lens is collapsed that I need the clearance. Clearly it is closer to the sensor that the adaptor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, pebbles said:

The daptor doesn't project into the space of course. It is when the lens is collapsed that I need the clearance. Clearly it is closer to the sensor that the adaptor.

Glad you understood my poor English. You may then wish to put a tape or another safety strip on the lens barrel the same way as Leica was advising about the film CL in the Leitz notice # 120-50 attached to the post linked to below. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not quite. The barrel is as close to - or far from- the sensor as any M camera. The register distance is immutable. The sensor can never be touched.
However, the CL has a shroud in front of the sensor. Worst-case: the rear of the barrel hits the shroud. If not too hard, no harm done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, jaapv said:

Not quite. The barrel is as close to - or far from- the sensor as any M camera. The register distance is immutable. The sensor can never be touched. [...]

Did i say the opposite? My English must be much worse than i thought then.

Share this post


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.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue., Read more about our Privacy Policy