Elmar 3.5cm with Flat Field

[mickjazz]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

This has undoubtedly been discussed but for another round,  I read an article on the Leica Historical Society site about the Elmar 3.5cm. The article said that some early versions of the lens had very flat field, little or no field curvature.  Some were used by pros to get shots at small aperture and  close focus where the entire field was in focus as one might assume on a lens without field curvature.

I have quite a few of these lenses,  probably Allan has a hundred, and I have never looked for flat field with mine. I do have some quite early lenses with the F=35mm markings. 

Did the lens formula change or did Leitz make some special Elmar 3.5cm lenses for special clientele?

Thanks. Be safe. 

M

[luigi bertolotti]

Leitz did make, in the '50s an Elmar 3,5 for specific repro usage (named DOOGS - see the Wiki - they aren't rare) : repro lenses are typically optimized for flat field correction (the basic need for reproduction) and I remember to have read somwhere that DOOGS was a specific design, though with the stanard Elmar-type schema ; afaik, previous Elmars sold as lenses for specific usage  were not different in optics, but only in mount (like the VAROB for enlargers : it's an Elmar 3,5 as lens' schema).

 

Edited March 31, 2020 by luigi bertolotti

[Advertisement]

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

[mickjazz]

Interesting. Thanks. Will check.

M

[mickjazz]

Luigi 

The LHSA article from February 2019 was in regard not to an Elmar enlarger lens, but to a 3.5cm close focus uncoupled lens. I have never seen such a lens but I do have an uncoupled Old Delft 3.5cm  lens, called the prototype for the Old Delft 3.5cm f3.5 coupled lens.

I might add that I happen to have a 35mm f2.8 lens made for the Minox 35 pocket camera and adapted to an ltm .mount uncoupled as well. I looked at some old photos today taken with that lens and they are quite flat. 

Are uncoupled lenses inherently different as to field curvature?

[wlaidlaw]

The 65mm/f3.5 Elmar Visoflex lens was supposedly made for reprographics work as well. I used to use mine quite a lot when I did some museum archival work. I had the black version 2, which seemed to have a very flat focus field. Sadly it was stolen by a bunch of school kids who were allowed into the work area of the museum. At the time I could not find another Version 2 for sale in the UK so bought a chrome Version 1, which is nothing like as good and has noticeable field curvature. It has therefore sat in a drawer, pretty much unused since I bought it. I swapped to using my 75mm/f2,5 Summarit, whose flat rendition made it very suitable for technical photography. As I don't do museum/archival/technical photography any more, I have supplanted my 75 Summarit with a 7Artisans 75/1.25, the poor man's 75 Noctilux. 

At the moment, while I am waiting for my 100/2.8 APO Macro-Elmarit-R and ELPRO to make their way from New Zealand to the UK (seems to have stuck in the Indian Ocean), I am using an old Novoflex LTM/LTM bellows with LTM/M ring and M to L adapter plus a Schneider-Kreuznach Componon S 50/2.8 reprographics lens for macro work with my digital CL. I can get close to 0.5:1 magnification ratio. The Componon S, which I bought for slide digitisation with a Leitz BEOON copying stand, seems to have a very flat field and high resolution at its optimum f5.6. 

Wilson

Edited April 1, 2020 by wlaidlaw

[mickjazz]

Wilson.  I have that componon lens. Came with a leica 1f from the big auction site. I took it off and put it in a drawer. You can't use those enlarger lenses for general photography,  can you. I thought they were only for reproductive copying etc. 

.M

[wlaidlaw]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 hour ago, mickjazz said:

Wilson.  I have that componon lens. Came with a leica 1f from the big auction site. I took it off and put it in a drawer. You can't use those enlarger lenses for general photography,  can you. I thought they were only for reproductive copying etc. 

.M

Mick, 

You need to put the Componon in a focusing Bellows for macro work (see photo below for my set up. The Novoflex bellows has coarse slide and micrometer fine focusing - the knurled alloy knob under the lens) or in a focusing stand like the Leitz BEOON for slide copying/scanning. I use the Componon in the BEOON all the time with my SL601 for scanning films. I found this produces far sharper results than I can get from either my Epson V700 Perfection or my Plustek Opticfilm scanner and much quicker as well. The Componon works better than any of my 50mm Leica lenses.  I can scan a whole 36 image film to 6000 x 4000 DNG RAW images in 2 to 3 minutes. I tend to use either B&W or colour reversal, as I have never got really 100% satisfactory colours from scanning negatives. I know it can be done with software called Color Perfect but this is the world's most user unfriendly software. If being on a 12 week lock-in does not drive you bananas, a morning trying to use Color Perfect will complete the job. I was recommended by another forum member for the BEOON, to use either the Schneider Componon S 50/2.8 or the Rodenstock APO Rodagon N 50/2.8, which might be a tiny fraction better than the Componon S but is six times the price. 

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!

Edited April 1, 2020 by wlaidlaw

[luigi bertolotti]

13 hours ago, mickjazz said:

Luigi 

The LHSA article from February 2019 was in regard not to an Elmar enlarger lens, but to a 3.5cm close focus uncoupled lens. I have never seen such a lens but I do have an uncoupled Old Delft 3.5cm  lens, called the prototype for the Old Delft 3.5cm f3.5 coupled lens.

I might add that I happen to have a 35mm f2.8 lens made for the Minox 35 pocket camera and adapted to an ltm .mount uncoupled as well. I looked at some old photos today taken with that lens and they are quite flat. 

Are uncoupled lenses inherently different as to field curvature?

Uh... sorry, I missed  the cm after 3,5 🙄 .. and thought to the Elmar 5 3,5...  : there was, indeed, the "short focus" Elmar 3,5 cm... it was uncoupled, focused to 0,5 meters... and there was a proper accessory rangefinder for it... ("long" - FODIS-FOFER style) ,; I remember that there was some discussion in the Forum about this rare version... I haven't idea if it was simply an "extended helicoid" Elmar or also the optics were recomputed for a better flat field correction; it's an interesting question... about a lens on which informations do not abound... 

[mickjazz]

The author made a  point that Eisenstaedt and Gene Smith shot with it.

I'd like to see that lens. i asked Leica Shop if they've had one  

 

M

[Jul]

I can't tell about the flat field and the coupling because I have yet to try one. Those I have seen (only online) are not standardized, they all had a 3 digit number instead of a "0" on the barrel at the focus knob level. It does not mean that standardized ones do not exist, just that I never saw one. The Leica Shop does not have one, Meister Camera Hamburg had one not so long ago (#308 if I remember correctly), it is not listed anymore.  

[Jul]

You have one here:

https://www.ebay.de/itm/818-Early-Nickel-Leica-Elmar-3-5-35mm-3-5cm-Leica-LTM/143529868063?hash=item216b0bfb1f:g:RdAAAOSwvzFeBgg6

[willeica]

There are a number of early variants, but the close focus model was only produced with an uncoupled and non-standardised metric scale with focus down to 0.5 metre (metre scale only). This would have been for the non-standardised I Model C. As Luigi says, there was a special rangefinder (hard to find) for this. The 50mm close focus lenses on the earlier I Model A were generally in a feet scale. I am open to correction on this, but I have not seen one with metre scale.

The eBay lens linked above appears to be one of the 0.5m uncoupled and non standardised models. However, the front rim appears to be badly warped, probably reducing the possibility of achieving a flat field.

William

Edited April 1, 2020 by willeica

[mickjazz]

Here's the LHSA article. 

https://lhsa.org/2019/02/an-unusual-35mm-f-3-5-elmar/

The lens shown is in feet and is chrome, looks like any other except for the scale numbers past 3,5 . Article states focus lever at 12 o'clock mounted on the body.

I saw the lens in Ukraine,  hard to tell from the back if it had a cam, probably not. And it's a nonstandard anyway. 

The one shown in the article looks like a mid 30's lens. Maybe built them special order. Money talks.

M

[willeica]

23 minutes ago, mickjazz said:

Here's the LHSA article. 

https://lhsa.org/2019/02/an-unusual-35mm-f-3-5-elmar/

The lens shown is in feet and is chrome, looks like any other except for the scale numbers past 3,5 . Article states focus lever at 12 o'clock mounted on the body.

I saw the lens in Ukraine,  hard to tell from the back if it had a cam, probably not. And it's a nonstandard anyway. 

The one shown in the article looks like a mid 30's lens. Maybe built them special order. Money talks.

M

Van Hasbroeck mentions an uncoupled, but standardised, model, but not whether it was close focus or had a 12 O'clock mount. It also appears to be pre the chrome models. If Dick Gilcreast has this lens, his LHSA colleague Jim Lager will know about it. Jim also met Eisenstaedt (who is said to have used such a lens) and photographed some of his gear. Generally feet scale models were 3.5 feet closest focus for normal models and 1.5 feet for the close focus models. I have never seen a lens marked down to 2 feet before. I will ask Jim if he can throw any light on this. My feeling is that it is either a special edition, not generally available, or a specially modified item. It is definitely not standard production as Dick more or less says in his article.

William

[alan mcfall]

For approximately two years, between 1930 and 1932, there were quite a few changes or viaritations in the newly introduced 35mm wide angle Leica lens.  For me, the listing  by Van Hasbroeck. p. 207 gives the most comprehensive description of encountered variations.  I have not seen anywhere, a variation of the lens cell formula that would support the "flat field" photo effects. But, if this effect is consistently seen in a lens, then something must be different. I suspose some high profile photographers could have had modification made by Leitz or others, but it does not seem likely to me.  Complicating things, is the possiblility that a given encountered lens has had features changed/upgraded by Leitz or others. Knowing exactly how a lens was shipped would need specific factory records that may not exist. Even  feature changes internal at Wetzlar may not be temporal sequential. Existing parts may have been used, or  assembeled lenses may have been commanded to use the new feature parts.

Some of the variations may be listed, but as always, especially with those not yet disclosed, may be missed. Many of the changes would have occurred at nearly the same time as those in the standard angle 50mm lens.

Lens flange diameter:   45m( early) and  47mm (late)

Focal length engraving:   35mm (early) and 3,5cm (late)

Standardization of lens-film distance:  Non-standard( 1930/early), Standardized (1931, "o" on lens mount)

Serialized:  5 digit or 3 digit compability number ( intended for non standard cameras), No serial, but standardized ( leitz had not yet started 6 digit lens serials).  Serials started at 144401 for the 35 Elmar.

Close focusing distance:  0,5m or less than 2 feet marked. Normally 1m.

Rangefinder coupling:   None (early before 1932),  heavy cam, ring cam.

Infinity lock:   None (early), pin, flat or mushroom button.  Normally the pin style is earlier and the mushroom later. The flat seems to be more of a parallel  to the mushroom rather than an intermediate vairiation and not often seen.

Depth of field scale: No or yes.   No has been reported, I have not seen one, must be very rare.

Infinity position: 11 O'clock (early),  7 O'clock (later likely at the time of the model III, 1933)

Here is a photo of some of my earliest 35 Elmars.    From the left:

1.  Uncoupled, 45mm flange, compatability number 751, engraved 35mm, close focus to 0,5m, no "o" mark, no infinity catch. Likely original, not upgraded.

2.  Uncoupled,  45mm flange, no serial number, engraved 3,5cm, close focus to under 2 feet (19 inches), has "o" mark, no infinity catch.  Likely original, for  standard camera before 6 digit lens serials.

3. Ring coupled, 47mm flange, no serial number, 3,5cm, focus to 1m, has "o" mark, mushroom infinity catch.  Likely upgraded with coupling and infinity   lock.

4.Heavy cam coupled, 47mm flange, serial 143513, focus to 1m, has "o" mark, mushroom infinity catch. Likely original 1932 lens for coupled camera. This might suggest that the introduction of lens serials and rangefinder coupling were about the same time.  Or, the mushroom latch may indicate that this very early serial lens was upgraded. It does retain the 11 O'clock infinity thorgh.

5. Ring coupled, 47mm flange, serial 155102, focus to 1m, has "o" mark, mushroom infinity catch, at 7 O'clock. Likely original for early model III.  

Sorry I could not shed more light on the "flat field"observation. All corrections or theories appreciated.

 

   

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 April 2, 2020 by alan mcfall
typo

[Pyrogallol]

I have an early one that focuses down to about 18 inches, discussed in a previous topic.

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!

 

 

 

[willeica]

1 hour ago, Pyrogallol said:

I have an early one that focuses down to about 18 inches, discussed in a previous topic.

Thanks for reminding us of this. I think that we concluded that your lens which is a combination of a coupled nickel lens and narrow close focus chrome mount was a later conversion, perhaps done by a skilled craftsman. It may have been a work around which was know during the 1930s. The narrow mount might also have helped with the use of the lens on the III series with a slow speed dial. It could also have been a factory conversion, but I have seen nothing in writing to confirm that this was available. I agree with Alan that there is no evidence of a different optical formula. The close focus aspects appear to have been handled through the mount.

William

[Jul]

No idea if there was a special Elmar 35mm to be fitted to a BEINS but if there was one, this is where a flat field 35mm Elmar would have proven useful or maybe the recommended way to use the BEINS was just "well stopped down" with any 35mm Elmar ? I did not find the BEINS's leaflet documentation, but maybe someone here has it and could enlighten us.

[willeica]

I have just checked and my early nickel 3.5cm/35mm Elmar will fit in my BEVOR close up device, from the relevant late 1920s and early 1930s period, shown here with a I Model C and 50mm Elmar from 1931. The crocodile boxes are for the Elpro, Elpik and Elpet close up lenses. I have just checked and I find that one of my Elpik close up lenses will fit on the 35mm Elmar, although the table of measurements for the close up lenses in Laney's book only shows figures for the 5cm Elmar and the 5cm Hektor. I suspect that the 50mm/5cm lenses were used far more often than the 35mm lenses for close up work.

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!

William

 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[wlaidlaw]

23 minutes ago, willeica said:

I have just checked and my early nickel 3.5cm/35mm Elmar will fit in my BEVOR close up device, from the relevant late 1920s and early 1930s period, shown here with a I Model C and 50mm Elmar from 1931. The crocodile boxes are for the Elpro, Elpik and Elpet close up lenses. I have just checked and I find that one of my Elpik close up lenses will fit on the 35mm Elmar, although the table of measurements for the close up lenses in Laney's book only shows figures for the 5cm Elmar and the 5cm Hektor. I suspect that the 50mm/5cm lenses were used far more often than the 35mm lenses for close up work.

William

 

I also have a similar set but in a home made wooden box. It came in a large cardboard box of assorted Leica stuff I bought in a sale, that I suspect had been dumped there as unsaleable or of no value. Sadly they then appear to have been left in a damp cellar for some years. The MOOLY and SCNOO that were in there and were my main reason for buying the box, have proved to be irreparable. I have thrown most of the stuff away. The close up set is just about the only usable item I got out of the box but as I only paid £40 for the whole box, no great loss. 

Wilson