50mm f/1.4 Summilux-M III Screw Mount??

[Pyrogallol]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 1/10/2020 at 4:33 PM, tri said:

Many did, including with the LTM S-Nikkor 1.4/50mm.

Doubt anybody nowadays still sets distances on a screw mount with a 50mm lens at 1.4

Used my 50mm Xenon close up at f1.5 the other day, focussed ok on a Leica 11.

[wlaidlaw]

9 hours ago, robert_parker said:

That's an interesting comment - the 1999 Summilux LTM  is also my go to lens and I also have the suspicion that it is an out-performer.

I've suspected that in part that this is due to the enhanced quality control that revolves around some special editions, so the lens is tighter to specification but I also prefer the rendering and the steady progressive change in contrast, to what I sometimes call the 'jagged' style of certain aspheric lenses.

Robert, 

When I got the Summilux IIISE, I ran some focus tests on it, expecting to find very noticeable aperture shift, as was its reputation. To my very pleasant surprise, although there was some measurable focus shift, certainly up to an appropriate CoC for the M240 I used for testing, it really was within the DOF and could effectively be ignored. I have used my M10-R very little as I have in effect been shielding since last March but I suspect with the smaller CoC on the M10-R, the aperture shift may become slightly more apparent. Like you, I did not like the rendition of the 50 Summilux ASPH that I used to have. If I had to put my finger on the problem, I would say it was excessive edge contrast. I think this is a consequence of the floating lens elements, as the 35FLE also demonstrates this. On digital, this tends to result in purple fringing. 

Having read a bit more about the re-issued 1.2 Noctilux, I am not convinced it is an answer. If I want ultra high resolution, I think I might be best getting an APO Summicron. The 0.95 Noctilux really is a brilliant all round performer, if only it was a bit lighter. 

I think you may well be correct about the construction standards of the special edition lenses. I also have the final special edition chrome/brass 35 ASPH Summilux, which were made in September 2006. The man who machined the bodies from brass billets  in a small factory in Wetzlar apparently retired, so no more bodies were available. It is an excellent performer, again with minimal aperture shift. When I had it coded at Solms in 2007, I gave very strict instructions not to do anything to the lens other than change the mount. 

Wilson

[insideline]

8 hours ago, wlaidlaw said:

Robert, 

When I got the Summilux IIISE, I ran some focus tests on it, expecting to find very noticeable aperture shift, as was its reputation. To my very pleasant surprise, although there was some measurable focus shift, certainly up to an appropriate CoC for the M240 I used for testing, it really was within the DOF and could effectively be ignored. I have used my M10-R very little as I have in effect been shielding since last March but I suspect with the smaller CoC on the M10-R, the aperture shift may become slightly more apparent. Like you, I did not like the rendition of the 50 Summilux ASPH that I used to have. If I had to put my finger on the problem, I would say it was excessive edge contrast. I think this is a consequence of the floating lens elements, as the 35FLE also demonstrates this. On digital, this tends to result in purple fringing. 

Having read a bit more about the re-issued 1.2 Noctilux, I am not convinced it is an answer. If I want ultra high resolution, I think I might be best getting an APO Summicron. The 0.95 Noctilux really is a brilliant all round performer, if only it was a bit lighter. 

I think you may well be correct about the construction standards of the special edition lenses. I also have the final special edition chrome/brass 35 ASPH Summilux, which were made in September 2006. The man who machined the bodies from brass billets  in a small factory in Wetzlar apparently retired, so no more bodies were available. It is an excellent performer, again with minimal aperture shift. When I had it coded at Solms in 2007, I gave very strict instructions not to do anything to the lens other than change the mount. 

Wilson

I too owned the lovely 50 1.4 pre-asph Summilux Japanese limited edition. I sold it last year in a moment of madness over feeling I owned too many 50mm Leica lenses, 6 at the time..... This year I purchased a nice used black alloy bodied example in close to mint condition and while it exhibits the same very nice out of focus rendering, when compared to the files I have taken with my M10 Monochrom the special edition Summilux appears sharper in every image, plus the tactile feel of the buttery smooth focus ring along with perfect clicks on the aperture ring have me longing for my old lens. I contacted the buyer but alas he had already traded it away. 

[robert_parker]

19 hours ago, wlaidlaw said:

Robert, 

I think you may well be correct about the construction standards of the special edition lenses. I also have the final special edition chrome/brass 35 ASPH Summilux, which were made in September 2006. The man who machined the bodies from brass billets  in a small factory in Wetzlar apparently retired, so no more bodies were available. It is an excellent performer, again with minimal aperture shift. When I had it coded at Solms in 2007, I gave very strict instructions not to do anything to the lens other than change the mount. 

Wilson

I wonder if a similar production protocol / method applied to the special edition Summicron LTM of 1999, which I always found to be an excellent performer and was my go to 35mm, again with a John Millich adapter, for many years.

Edited January 30, 2021 by robert_parker

[robert_parker]

10 hours ago, insideline said:

I too owned the lovely 50 1.4 pre-asph Summilux Japanese limited edition. I sold it last year in a moment of madness over feeling I owned too many 50mm Leica lenses, 6 at the time..... This year I purchased a nice used black alloy bodied example in close to mint condition and while it exhibits the same very nice out of focus rendering, when compared to the files I have taken with my M10 Monochrom the special edition Summilux appears sharper in every image, plus the tactile feel of the buttery smooth focus ring along with perfect clicks on the aperture ring have me longing for my old lens. I contacted the buyer but alas he had already traded it away. 

I've done something similar and re-bought at a later date, although not the same example, which tantalizingly appeared and disappeared briefly on the secondhand market before I could grab it again, I now have a mint example bought from a European seller as consolation - they do appear at reasonable prices from time to time.

This may be coincidence but I've a found that the standard Leica adapter seems to allow slightly more accurate focus than the John Millich version but that may vary from example to example.

Edited January 30, 2021 by robert_parker

[robert_parker]

Possibly a little too much done in the conversion but this is an example of a 35mm Summicron LTM 1999 image taken in B+W on an M8,2 a few years ago.  The location is the Pont St Michel, Paris.

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!

[wlaidlaw]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Robert,

The 1999 SE Summicron, which I also have, is by far the best Summicron V I have had. Through various deals and swaps, I have twice ended up with black alloy 50 Summicron V lenses. The first one was just a bit soft but useable. As I had a Summilux IV ASPH and a 2.8 Elmar at the time, I did not need it so sold it. I picked up another one when I sold on a new and unopened one of the post bankruptcy Rolleiflex Wide TLR's, which a dealer was desperate to buy for a Russian client. I got a whole lot of stuff including another Summicron V as the dealer was running out of stuff I wanted. It was in focus at infinity but progressively went further out of focus at nearer distances. Malcolm Taylor said he could only assume that the RF cam had been reground for use on Russian cameras. The dealer took it back with no quibble for a new ZM Planar instead. However, I wanted a really sharp lens to use on my IIIg and the chance came up via a Japanese friend to buy both the 50 mm SE lenses at an estate sale and I got them for a very reasonable price (about £2200 for the pair). The gods must have been smiling on me that day, as they sailed through French customs with no charges, which made them even more of a bargain. The only things I don't like about both lenses is the absence of a focus tab so I use the rubber Taab focus tab rings. The supplied cap for the Summicron is a really nasty cheap bit of flimsy plastic but the nice metal APO 50 cap is a good fit with a strip of self-adhesive velvet stuck in the rim. 

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!

[wlaidlaw]

One point I would make for those using these lenses or any LTM lens on an M camera with live view. You cannot use just any LTM to M adapter ring, as most will give the infamous "no lens detected message". From a few years experimenting, I have found that the only good quality rings that work consistently, are the type 2 Voigtlander (no longer made) or the Rayqual, both in the matt/silk black finish. This is so that no reflection is generated from the IR coding detectors. I checked the Rayqual with a 1/10,000th of an inch  dial gauge on my M&W surface plate and the surfaces were parallel to within this tolerance, which is excellent. Robert White in the UK stock Rayqual, usually in all three VF tab flavours: 28-90, 35-135 and 50-75. 

Wilson

[Matlock]

1 hour ago, wlaidlaw said:

One point I would make for those using these lenses or any LTM lens on an M camera with live view. You cannot use just any LTM to M adapter ring, as most will give the infamous "no lens detected message". From a few years experimenting, I have found that the only good quality rings that work consistently, are the type 2 Voigtlander (no longer made) or the Rayqual, both in the matt/silk black finish. This is so that no reflection is generated from the IR coding detectors. I checked the Rayqual with a 1/10,000th of an inch  dial gauge on my M&W surface plate and the surfaces were parallel to within this tolerance, which is excellent. Robert White in the UK stock Rayqual, usually in all three VF tab flavours: 28-90, 35-135 and 50-75. 

Wilson

It appears that Robert White no longer stock these adaptors. 

[wlaidlaw]

All the UK Rayqual/Kindai stockists appear to have no stock of these. There are some for sale on eBay from Japan at silly prices. If enough people wanted these, it might be worth putting together an order and getting Bellamy Hunt in Japan (Japan Camera Hunter) to buy them and ship them for us. I would not mind another 50-75 and a 28-90. 

Wilson

PS Classic Photography UK are selling some very similar looking adapters on eBay but I have no knowledge of their quality. 

Edited January 30, 2021 by wlaidlaw

[frame-it]

Rayqual adapters are very good.

https://www.japanexposures.com/shop/camera-lens/leica-l-m-ring-for-ltm-lens-use-on-leica-m-mount.html

 

https://shop.cameraquest.com/leica-screw-mount-adapters/rayqual-50/75-6-bit-coded-leica-screw-mount-type-iii-lens-to-leica-m-body-adapter/

https://shop.cameraquest.com/leica-screw-mount-adapters/rayqual-28/90-6-bit-coded-leica-screw-mount-type-iii-leica-screw-mount-lens-to-leica-m-body-adapter/

 

Edited January 30, 2021 by frame-it

[wlaidlaw]

Dirk's price works out at about 50% more than Robert White were charging and then you will have to pay import duty, processing fee, collection fee and VAT on the whole lot including postage, when it comes into the UK, which I would guess would make the cost around £110 each. Robert White were selling these at £49.Stephen Gandy will not send outside USA, as I have had him send stuff to my daughter in Baltimore before now. I don't know if his price is $89 for all three adapters as if so, that is very reasonable. It is not clear on his website. 

Wilson

[robert_parker]

I've tended to use the John Millich adapters, which re machined from what I suspect is phosphor bronze (might be brass - I'm out of practice with my metal recognition 🧐) so they can be coded and from memory there is one Voigtlander adapter where you can paint on the coding without undue risk to the recognition device in the camera.

I called into Wetzlar just ahead of 'The One' Challenge in Vienna and they were kind enough to tune up my then 50 Summilux 1999 LTM to competition standards matching to the M240 that I had at the time.  They noted they couldn't get complete perfection by their standards but the result was more than adequate for me at all distances.  A John Millich adapter on my 35 Summicron 1999 LTM was sound at all distances.

The other option that I've used is to use un-coded Leica or Voigtlander adapters and tell the camera what it's looking through but obviously there is a level of inconvenience about that process.

Edited January 30, 2021 by robert_parker

[wlaidlaw]

You can't use chrome, bright aluminium or infinity lock cut away adapters with live view M cameras or with the active M to L adapter or you get the "No lens detected" message, unless this has been removed with an FW update. I have used black Rayqual type III adapters for the last few years so have no problems. I would just like a few more of these adapters so I did not have to swap them backwards and forwards. 

Wilson

[wlaidlaw]

As the Classic Photography adapters are not very expensive, I will get one of those and check it for accuracy with micrometer, dial gauge and surface plate. If it is within 1/2 a thousandth of an inch (12 microns) for both parallelicity and the correct dimensions of 1.00mm, It is acceptable as an adapter. I will also check that they don't cause the no lens detected message. Given they are about 1/4 the price of the difficult to obtain Raygual/Kindai adapters, it could be a reasonable alternative. That reminds me I must send one of my dial gauges off for service, as it is sticking slightly. 

Wilson

Edited January 31, 2021 by wlaidlaw

[wlaidlaw]

I regret to advise that the Classic Photography LTM to M adapter rings do not pass muster. The flange thickness varies between 0.95mm and 0.97mm, so it is not the correct thickness (1.00mm) nor has parallel mounting surfaces. It will be going back for a refund. Back to the drawing board. 

Wilson

[Matlock]

5 hours ago, wlaidlaw said:

I regret to advise that the Classic Photography LTM to M adapter rings do not pass muster. The flange thickness varies between 0.95mm and 0.97mm, so it is not the correct thickness (1.00mm) nor has parallel mounting surfaces. It will be going back for a refund. Back to the drawing board. 

Wilson

That's a shame. I have a Voigtlander Type II 28/90 and a Rayqual 50/75 and I was rather hoping for a 35/135. 

Edited February 5, 2021 by Matlock

[Matlock]

I came across a Fotodiox adaptor and the flange thickness was identical to a Leica adaptor. If this was Representative or a one off I don't know but it might be worth a look.

Edited February 5, 2021 by Matlock

[wlaidlaw]

Unfortunately the only Fotodiox adapters I can find in the UK, are chrome or bright aluminium, which will give the “no lens detected” message on live view M cameras. 

Wilson

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Matlock]

12 minutes ago, wlaidlaw said:

Unfortunately the only Fotodiox adapters I can find in the UK, are chrome or bright aluminium, which will give the “no lens detected” message on live view M cameras. 

Wilson

The one I came across was 6 bit coded.