Question re the Elmar 50mm F3.5/ F2.8 LTM Lenses

[Ray Vonn]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi All,

I understand that these lenses are different beasts in terms of rendering. To any owners of both these lenses - is that right? And if so, can you explain, in your opinion, what these differences are?

 

Thanks

[a.noctilux]

Hello Ray,

I can only comment on the impressive 3.5/50mm or 5cm Elmar.

I never like the 2.8/50 Elmar that I had some decades ago, replaced with Summicron 50mm when I could,

The 'turning' when focus was one of the not-user-friendly ( I didn't know the even less friendly 3.5/5cm by then)

maybe now I may like the 2.8/50 Elmar as the 'rendering' was smooth and lovely ( Kodachrome different from Summicron ! ).

 

I took opportunity when I bought Leica Standard which came with Elmar 3.5/5cm to learn to like the lens.

Now I use three Elmar 3.5 of different periods from 1930 to 1950.

They are something to learn to know, as even not coated (1930 ) the classic 'rendering' is second to none.

On monochrom sensor (and film... ) no other lens can do the gentle smoothness 'not too sharp"

like here

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!

 

with push-on 'Gr' green filter

( clic on the image for better viewing)

[105012]

What you say about the ‘gentle smoothness’ is so true, yet sharp. I have been looking back through my archives and the Elmar 3.5/5cm pictures have this quality.

 

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!

[spydrxx]

Irwin Puts describes the differences at various apertures. He thought the 2.8 really stretched the design characteristics because the tube size became a limiting factor, and that the succeeding rigid version of the Summicron was a much better lens. The 2.8 introduced a different glass to reduce aberations created by increasing the aperture by one stop,, and often has a coated lens. The 3.5 wide open had better contrast than the 2.8, but that difference disappeared by f/4. I no longer own a 2.8, but really love my 3.5. It is compact and sharp when needed, good tonal rendering. If I was considering a 2.8, I'd instead go for a Summicron. IMHO much better overall performance.

[rtai]

Unless you intend to use the Elmar on a screw mount body I recommend the M version of the 50mm f3.5 Elmar. It takes 39mm filters and with more convenient access to the apertures. Also the M version is more solid and the design is same as the Red Scale ltm. In any case I recommend the 3.5 version of any vintage. 

[Ray Vonn]

@a.noctilux, @105012, @spydrxx and @rtai

Thank you so much.  I did worry whether this seemingly small matter would be answered at all by other forum members compared to other pressing issues (those wide open lux shots aren't going to be posted on their own!).  Really really appreciated.

 

[Jul]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The 2.8 LTM is the same as the M version produced in the fifties/sixties
and sports a 15 blade aperture which stays perfectly round. Here is a
test sample on the SOMKY-M straight from the scan.

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!

[105012]

For anyone who has the 3.5/5cm, there is a rather wonderful FISON-styled hood from Japanese company Flashback which allows aperture setting simply by rotating the hood.

[a.noctilux]

In use, the 'not friendly' aperture settings on 3,5/5cm is not a problem anymore for me.

As I know the rendering well, I consider the Elmar as two apertures lens set once for the day, mainly if I fancy to use colored filter.

So F:4,5 or 6,3 for older and/or F:4 or 5,6/8 (= F:6,3 it's sweet spot) for newer Elmar 50mm.

[105012]

I agree and also found changing it once or twice in a day not a big deal, but that hood is so cool with it's original FISON-style and black paint! Besides, the coating on my red scale is original and in great condition, so it is nice to have the extra protection (and flare reduction), plus of course the easy changing aperture 😀  (I also have the original FISON, but that is now in a plastic bag in a drawer).

[a.noctilux]

As other LTM fan, on the 3.5/5cm I used FISON of course, then the VALOO ( found a bit big/front heavy ) even the heavier FIKUS .

they are nice to have (and use once in a while), but for me nude Elmar is so compact (collapsed ! ) and so light I can not refuse to use it 'nude' (or with colored filter for mono).

[105012]

I also used my Elmar 'nude' for most of the time until I got the Flashback hood (ELFAS? 😀), and I like it very much 'nude'. But, for now, the ELFAS is always on, the ELFAS is tiny and the ELMAR is still very small even ELFAS equipped...

[a.noctilux]

Interesting,

what it is ELFAS ?

Having a long search for ELFAS, nothing in my archive ☹️ between ELDIA and ELGAM.

[105012]

ELFAS is my made-up code name for the Flashback super-FISON! 😀

Here is a picture of the ELFAS. In real life seems smaller!

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!

[shirubadanieru]

I have currently the 50mm f3.5 and had the f2.8 previously. I think both lenses are amazing! The f2.8 wide open is a bit softer than the Elmar f3.5 wide open, that also means that the bokeh is slightly better (more dreamy). That being said the f2.8 aperture rotates with the lens, which annoyed me a bit, and the lens is not as light nor as compact as the elmar f3.5. The f3.5 really disappears when you collapse it and weighs around 120g, vs the f2.8 which weights almost the same as the summicron 50mm f2. 

What amazes me the most about the elmar 50mm f3.5 is that it’s much more resistant to flare than you’d expect, even when uncoated (I’m using a nickel version from 1934), and it is quite sharp in the center. If you do want an even sharper f3.5 go for the red scale version (the final version) and you’ll be amazed by how sharp it is in the center, truly amazing! 

It’s a lens that amazes me because its design is over 100 years old…and it makes the camera so compact, I couldn’t recommend it more. The f2.8 is a lovely lens too though and of course half a stop brighter, so if you shoot portraits often this might be a better option just for that extra bokeh. 

They are also not expensive lenses so you can always get both and use them for a while to see which one you prefer. 

Edited December 24, 2021 by shirubadanieru

[shirubadanieru]

Here’s some shots I recently took with the Elmar f3.5 *first one is on the M9, the other two are on film. The first one I was shooting it really straight against the sun, wide open, and it produced a lovely flare in my opinion. The other two shots I believe were shot at f6.3~f9. (Click on the pictures to see a better resolution version of them)

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!