40mm f/2.8 Elmarit-C ?

[MarkP]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Apart from my M film and digital systems, I also have a CL (film), 2.0/40 Summicron-C and 4.0/90 Elmar-C.  

II didn't know about the 2.8/40 Elmarit-C which I just discovered in L-Wiki . It is rare and very expensive ($3.5-4.5K AUD on eBay) so I presume a collector's piece.

Does anyone have any knowledge about or experience with this lens?

[Advertisement]

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

[oekoek]

 

 

Apparently there where about 400 copies made and never officially released, very interesting for collectors i suppose. There is one for sale here

https://www.leicashop.com/classic/at/en/lcc/Leica-Elmarit-C-11541-2-8-40mm/33248-6

 

 

[pippy]

37 minutes ago, MarkP said:

Apart from my M film and digital systems, I also have a CL (film), 2.0/40 Summicron-C and 4.0/90 Elmar-C.  

II didn't know about the 2.8/40 Elmarit-C which I just discovered in L-Wiki . It is rare and very expensive ($3.5-4.5K AUD on eBay) so I presume a collector's piece.

Does anyone have any knowledge about or experience with this lens?

Forum member Matlock has one and talks a little bit about it in the thread in this link. Go to post #221 at the top of page 12 (which should be right here);

https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/322241-voigtlanderthe-best-leica-lenses-in-the-world/page/12/?tab=comments#comment-4255985

Philip.

[Matlock]

I use one on my M10-D as it is so tiny. The performance is nowhere nears as poor as some would have you believe. Filter size is 39x0.75 not E39 (39x0,50) so be aware of that if you decide to get one. I bought mine several years ago before the prices started to get silly.

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!

[oekoek]

It looks like it is based on the 35/2 v2, with the tab on the aperture ring.

[MarkP]

If it performs at all like the 2.0/40 Sumicron-C then it's performance should be quite reasonable.

[a.noctilux]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

26 minutes ago, oekoek said:

It looks like it is based on the 35/2 v2, with the tab on the aperture ring.

Not same type of lens this is only the outside, but inside different lens construction, seen in this Marco Cavina article

http://www.marcocavina.com/articoli_fotografici/Leitz_piccole_bugie/22.gif

 

http://www.marcocavina.com/articoli_fotografici/Leitz_piccole_bugie/21.gif

[MarkP]

17 minutes ago, a.noctilux said:

Not same type of lens this is only the outside, but inside different lens construction, seen in this Marco Cavina article

http://www.marcocavina.com/articoli_fotografici/Leitz_piccole_bugie/22.gif

 

http://www.marcocavina.com/articoli_fotografici/Leitz_piccole_bugie/21.gif

Very helpful - thank you.

[M9reno]

There is more info on this lens in this thread:

 

 

[lookbook]

... if a lens (or other things) has not been produced very often, that does not mean it is very good !!

"There are strange stories: Leitz developed an Elmar-C lens for use on the small and compact Leica CL camera, which was offered between 1973 and 1976 as a "joint venture" between Leica and Minolta, each under its own brand name as Minolta CLE and Leica CL respectively. Leitz contributed "development and design" to this collaboration while Minolta manufactured the cameras in Japan. The lenses were to be produced independently by each of the two companies according to Leitz's specifications. And so Leitz, as a premium optics manufacturer, developed the Elmar-C 40mm 2.8 lens as a standard lens for these cameras and sent the first prototypes to Minolta. Minolta was not very happy with this lens, as it did not meet their own requirements for a high-quality lens. Leitz improved and developed the wonderful Summicron-C 40mm 2.0, which was then produced as a standard lens.

In the meantime, however, Leitz had already produced 400 of these prototypes, which, due to the new decision, were not to be sold and were instead given to Leitz employees. This is how the rare and unusual pieces came onto the collector's market and have since fetched some fantastic prices. No one knows how many specimens still exist or are gathering dust in some display case because the rarity (and "value") of the Elmar lenses is not recognised.

You should not buy this lens for any other use than as a collector's item, because the optical quality, as described above, is not a reason to buy it".*

*https://www.klassische-kameras.de/leitz-elmarit-c-40mm-2-8/

 

Edited September 6, 2021 by lookbook
!!!

[Matlock]

1 hour ago, lookbook said:

... if a lens (or other things) has not been produced very often, that does not mean it is very good !!

"There are strange stories: Leitz developed an Elmar-C lens for use on the small and compact Leica CL camera, which was offered between 1973 and 1976 as a "joint venture" between Leica and Minolta, each under its own brand name as Minolta CLE and Leica CL respectively. Leitz contributed "development and design" to this collaboration while Minolta manufactured the cameras in Japan. The lenses were to be produced independently by each of the two companies according to Leitz's specifications. And so Leitz, as a premium optics manufacturer, developed the Elmar-C 40mm 2.8 lens as a standard lens for these cameras and sent the first prototypes to Minolta. Minolta was not very happy with this lens, as it did not meet their own requirements for a high-quality lens. Leitz improved and developed the wonderful Summicron-C 40mm 2.0, which was then produced as a standard lens.

In the meantime, however, Leitz had already produced 400 of these prototypes, which, due to the new decision, were not to be sold and were instead given to Leitz employees. This is how the rare and unusual pieces came onto the collector's market and have since fetched some fantastic prices. No one knows how many specimens still exist or are gathering dust in some display case because the rarity (and "value") of the Elmar lenses is not recognised.

You should not buy this lens for any other use than as a collector's item, because the optical quality, as described above, is not a reason to buy it".*

*https://www.klassische-kameras.de/leitz-elmarit-c-40mm-2-8/

 

There are all sorts of stories regarding this lens, all slightly different. Urban Myths I think. It is not a bad lens so if you see one at a reasonable price, go for it.

[MarkP]

3 hours ago, M9reno said:

There is more info on this lens in this thread:

 

 

Thanks for that link as I couldn't find a thread on this lens when I searched.

[MarkP]

1 hour ago, lookbook said:

... if a lens (or other things) has not been produced very often, that does not mean it is very good !!

"There are strange stories: Leitz developed an Elmar-C lens for use on the small and compact Leica CL camera, which was offered between 1973 and 1976 as a "joint venture" between Leica and Minolta, each under its own brand name as Minolta CLE and Leica CL respectively. Leitz contributed "development and design" to this collaboration while Minolta manufactured the cameras in Japan. The lenses were to be produced independently by each of the two companies according to Leitz's specifications. And so Leitz, as a premium optics manufacturer, developed the Elmar-C 40mm 2.8 lens as a standard lens for these cameras and sent the first prototypes to Minolta. Minolta was not very happy with this lens, as it did not meet their own requirements for a high-quality lens. Leitz improved and developed the wonderful Summicron-C 40mm 2.0, which was then produced as a standard lens.

In the meantime, however, Leitz had already produced 400 of these prototypes, which, due to the new decision, were not to be sold and were instead given to Leitz employees. This is how the rare and unusual pieces came onto the collector's market and have since fetched some fantastic prices. No one knows how many specimens still exist or are gathering dust in some display case because the rarity (and "value") of the Elmar lenses is not recognised.

You should not buy this lens for any other use than as a collector's item, because the optical quality, as described above, is not a reason to buy it".*

*https://www.klassische-kameras.de/leitz-elmarit-c-40mm-2-8/

 

* that is what I suspected.

 

Thanks all. 
Interesting information. 

 

 

Edited September 6, 2021 by MarkP

[lookbook]

vor 2 Stunden schrieb Matlock:

There are all sorts of stories regarding this lens, all slightly different. Urban Myths I think. It is not a bad lens so if you see one at a reasonable price, go for it.

... I am a merchant by profession - of course I would buy it if it was sold at a "reasonable" price!!!
But I wouldn't keep it!

[M9reno]

I find the C lenses historically interesting.  As the Cavina article (link above) points out, the Elmar-C 90mm, which is an excellent performer, has a design foreshadowing the current Macro-Elmar-M 90mm — a lens that Puts praised, despite its small maximum aperture of f4, as the best performer among all current Leica 90mm lenses. That is saying a lot!

But whereas the Elmar-C 90 looks forward to the future, the Elmarit-C 40mm looks back.  True, 40mm was a new focal length for a Leica camera, but the lens had venerable Wetzlar ancestry.  As countless Leica tourists who have tried to replicate Barnack’s shot of the Eisenmarkt with a 50mm have discovered, finding their angle of view too narrow, Barnack used a 42mm Summar in the Ur-Leica.   And in the early 30’s there was the little 35mm EKURZ, the first wide-angle lens in Leica history, and a classic Tessar type.  By the 1950’s, Leica had long given up this design for its 35mm lenses (Summaron and Summicron).  Imagine attempting to reintroduce it in the 1970s!  To my eyes, the Elmarit-C has the fingerprint of a very classic Leica rangefinder lens - think a 50mm collapsible Elmar redesigned as a 40mm, sharp in the center but falling off towards the corners, and you get the idea.  Ultraportable, too.

So, caught between the focal lengths of 35mm and 50mm, the new CL’s 40mm was a lens that was bound within a rich Leica history.  Perhaps this was what the Elmarit’s designers were thinking when they designed the lens as part of their new Japanese partnership. For them, the Leica CL was not meant to be a top-of-the-line Leica M5.  With their little Japanese-hybrid camera they could afford to dust off a charming piece of Leica history for amateur use. A little nostalgic, perhaps a tad eccentric, but what could go wrong?

Clearly Minolta wanted something very different from the Leica/Minolta CL  So liberated from tradition was Minolta that what it wanted was the Minolta CLE, the first auto-exposure rangefinder, preceding the Leica M7 by decades.  I see Minolta’s rejection of the Elmarit-C as the result of this difference in aims between Leitz and Minolta, not at all a reflection of the lens’ optical quality, which is excellent.

Edited September 6, 2021 by M9reno

[lookbook]

vor 30 Minuten schrieb M9reno:

I find the C lenses historically interesting.  As the Cavina article (link above) points out, the Elmar-C 90mm, which is an excellent performer, has a design foreshadowing the current Macro-Elmar-M 90mm — a lens that Puts praised, despite its small maximum aperture of f4, as the best performer among all current Leica 90mm lenses. That is saying a lot!

But whereas the Elmar-C 90 looks forward to the future, the Elmarit-C 40mm looks back.  True, 40mm was a new focal length for a Leica camera, but the lens had venerable Wetzlar ancestry.  As countless Leica tourists who have tried to replicate Barnack’s shot of the Eisenmarkt with a 50mm have discovered, finding their angle of view too narrow, Barnack used a 42mm Summar in the Ur-Leica.   And in the early 30’s there was the little 35mm EKURZ, the first wide-angle lens in Leica history, and a classic Tessar type.  By the 1950’s, Leica had long given up this design for its 35mm lenses (Summaron and Summicron).  Imagine attempting to reintroduce it in the 1970s!  To my eyes, the Elmarit-C has the fingerprint of a very classic Leica rangefinder lens - think a 50mm collapsible Elmar redesigned as a 40mm, sharp in the center but falling off towards the corners, and you get the idea.  Ultraportable, too.

So, caught between the focal lengths of 35mm and 50mm, the new CL’s 40mm was a lens that was bound within a rich Leica history.  Perhaps this was what the Elmarit’s designers were thinking when they designed the lens as part of their new Japanese partnership. For them, the Leica CL was not meant to be a top-of-the-line Leica M5.  With their little Japanese-hybrid camera they could afford to dust off a charming piece of Leica history for amateur use. A little nostalgic, perhaps a tad eccentric, but what could go wrong?

Clearly Minolta wanted something very different from the Leica/Minolta CL  So liberated from tradition was Minolta that what it wanted was the Minolta CLE, the first auto-exposure rangefinder, preceding the Leica M7 by decades.  I see Minolta’s rejection of the Elmarit-C as the result of this difference in aims between Leitz and Minolta, not at all a reflection of the lens’ optical quality, which is excellent.

 

minolta got a very good 40 for the cl!
It was not the Elmar!

Collectors now also have a 40
It is not a very good lens but one that minolta rejected : )

The collectors can be very happy with the Elmar that never went into production because of lack of quality.
Those interested in photography can be satisfied with the much better Summichron at a moderate price.

[M9reno]

I agree that we are all happy!

😄

But the idea that the Elmarit C is not a very good lens is wrong!  It’s like saying that pre-Karbe, pre-ASPH lenses are not very good.

The Elmarit-C just did not happen to fit with Minolta’s plans: not a classic look for them.  What they wanted was a modern Summicron… and autoexposure down the line.

[Matlock]

8 minutes ago, lookbook said:

 

minolta got a very good 40 for the cl!
It was not the Elmar!

Collectors now also have a 40
It is not a very good lens but one that minolta rejected : )

The collectors can be very happy with the Elmar that never went into production because of lack of quality.
Those interested in photography can be satisfied with the much better Summichron at a moderate price.

Minolta did not reject the Elmarit 40mm, as all Minolta branded CLs were equipped with Minolta M Rokkor lenses not Leica. I wonder how these stories are believed by so many people. Also you keep quoting the Leica 40mm 2,8 as an Elmar it was not, it was an Elmarit.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[lookbook]

vor 16 Minuten schrieb Matlock:

Minolta did not reject the Elmarit 40mm, as all Minolta branded CLs were equipped with Minolta M Rokkor lenses not Leica. I wonder how these stories are believed by so many people. Also you keep quoting the Leica 40mm 2,8 as an Elmar it was not, it was an Elmarit.

True!
 

vor 5 Stunden schrieb lookbook:

Leitz developed an Elmar-C lens for use on the small and compact Leica CL camera, which was offered between 1973 and 1976 as a "joint venture" between Leica and Minolta, each under its own brand name as Minolta CLE and Leica CL respectively. Leitz contributed "development and design" to this collaboration while Minolta manufactured the cameras in Japan. The lenses were to be produced independently by each of the two companies according to Leitz's specifications. And so Leitz, as a premium optics manufacturer, developed the Elmar-C 40mm 2.8 lens as a standard lens for these cameras and sent the first prototypes to Minolta. Minolta was not very happy with this lens, as it did not meet their own requirements for a high-quality lens. Leitz improved and developed the wonderful Summicron-C 40mm 2.0, which was then produced as a standard lens.

 

[pippy]

2 hours ago, M9reno said:

......the idea that the Elmarit C is not a very good lens is wrong!...

Having just had a really good look at the test frames in the Marco Cavina link posted by Arnaud (post #7) it looks like the 40mm f2.8 is actually quite a good performer from about f4 down to at least f8. It would be interesting to try one out in direct comparison to my trusty old 40mm f1.4 Voigtlander Nokton.

I've sort-of been tempted by the regular Summicron version (or, for that matter, the Rokkor) but prices for good ones seem to have doubled in the last year or so which makes me think I've missed that particular boat. It's not as if I really need another 40 but, still, nice little lenses all the same.

Philip.

Edited September 6, 2021 by pippy