Film Hunter Posted October 10, 2022 Share #1  Posted October 10, 2022 (edited) Advertisement (gone after registration) Hello all i have a Leica ii converted to iiia unfortunately i wish to not to be converted and i wonder about this elmar have a nice serial number 138000 or 168000 i can not decipher the serial number , i have around 5 other elmars and it's a bit different the writing is smaller and lightier.  Any ideas what i have here? And where to fix the separation in Europe a good service? Thank you so much and stay safe! 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 October 10, 2022 by Film Hunter Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/339897-strange-leitz-elmar-5cm-35-from-a-leica-ii-converted-to-iiia/?do=findComment&comment=4529206'>More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted October 10, 2022 Posted October 10, 2022 Hi Film Hunter, Take a look here Strange Leitz Elmar 5cm 3.5 from a Leica ii converted to iiia. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
romanus53 Posted October 10, 2022 Share #2  Posted October 10, 2022 As it has an IR-Index it might be converted or remounted after appr. 1935. The number is hard to decipher but both are close to 1933 and should match the body. I wouldn't invest in fixing the glas as you have already enough 😉. Shure it is separation in the cemented cell in the back? looks like some other "defect" on front, is it coated? 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Film Hunter Posted October 10, 2022 Author Share #3  Posted October 10, 2022 Thank you , it's a pleasure to be a member of this forum. I have learned a lot here. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Film Hunter Posted October 10, 2022 Author Share #4 Â Posted October 10, 2022 The body is made around 1932 serial number 77xxx Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
willeica Posted October 10, 2022 Share #5  Posted October 10, 2022 This could be 160000 or 163000. I'll mention 2 50mm/5cm Elmar batches from 1933 that could be relevant 156501 -160000 163001 - 165000 163000 is supposed to be for a Mountain Elmar, but sometimes you will find items at the edge of batches which are from different model ranges. There are many variations of the 50mm/5cm Elmar, at least 25 and probably more. It is hard to find people who will work on lenses. Leica Classics in Wetzlar will probably quote you a price, but you would probably be able to buy another one for that price or even for less. William  Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
frame-it Posted October 10, 2022 Share #6  Posted October 10, 2022 it could be 163000 or 168000, but after adjusting the pic it looks like 138000?? 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!  Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!  ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/339897-strange-leitz-elmar-5cm-35-from-a-leica-ii-converted-to-iiia/?do=findComment&comment=4529331'>More sharing options...
Film Hunter Posted October 10, 2022 Author Share #7 Â Posted October 10, 2022 Advertisement (gone after registration) Thank you guys i have tried with a magnifier and it looks the same ,138 or 168 i dont know, all this photos are with my phone and a magnifier ( i used a projection lens )Â Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wizard Posted October 10, 2022 Share #8 Â Posted October 10, 2022 vor 2 Stunden schrieb frame-it: ... it looks like 138000 That's what I would say, too. And the glass defect does not look like separation to me (Elmar 5 cm lenses are not known for that problem anyway). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerzy Posted October 10, 2022 Share #9  Posted October 10, 2022 separation in Elmar 5cm happens rare but is possible as well. This is how the rear group in my Elmar was. Warming up the rear group to 90C and pressing both lenses together helped to distribute canada balsam between the lenses. But you need to disassembly the lens and it does not always work. Alternative is to remove cemented group from the mount, separate completly, clean and re- cement. Pretty complex task. 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! 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/339897-strange-leitz-elmar-5cm-35-from-a-leica-ii-converted-to-iiia/?do=findComment&comment=4529485'>More sharing options...
nitroplait Posted October 10, 2022 Share #10  Posted October 10, 2022 12 minutes ago, jerzy said: This is how the rear group in my Elmar was. 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! Very organic looking - quite fascinating. I understand why some may mistake it for fungus. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wizard Posted October 10, 2022 Share #11 Â Posted October 10, 2022 vor 1 Stunde schrieb jerzy: This is how the rear group in my Elmar was. Jerzy, are you sure that this was separation? I have seen separation in lenses several times, and it never looked like this, not even close. This looks like some sort of fungus to me. Of course, if you heat up the lens group and then press the lens elements together, you will re-shift the still existing Canada balsam, which has softened due to the elevated temperature, into those regions were fungus has 'eaten' the balsam. But that does not mean those structures have been caused by normal lens separation. Lens separation is a mechanical process, and it will in my view not be able to form such organic looking structures. Â vor 1 Stunde schrieb nitroplait: Very organic looking - quite fascinating. I understand why some may mistake it for fungus. As explained above, I would be very, very surprised if it were not fungus. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerzy Posted October 10, 2022 Share #12  Posted October 10, 2022 (edited) vor 4 Stunden schrieb wizard: Jerzy, are you sure that this was separation? yes, I am pretty sure. I do not know what was a reason, but I believe that canada balsam dried out on some spots therefore such unusual pattern. Here is another example of separation, this time Summar - notice round spots, again, canada balsam dried. On the right photo lens group is separated 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! from my experience fungus may developes another pattern and what I observed it developes on the surfaces that have air contact. Here is example of M3 rangefiner, fungus was on the prism, behind the first lens (there is approx 2mm air distance between prism and the front lens  Edited October 10, 2022 by jerzy 2 Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! from my experience fungus may developes another pattern and what I observed it developes on the surfaces that have air contact. Here is example of M3 rangefiner, fungus was on the prism, behind the first lens (there is approx 2mm air distance between prism and the front lens  ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/339897-strange-leitz-elmar-5cm-35-from-a-leica-ii-converted-to-iiia/?do=findComment&comment=4529781'>More sharing options...
zeitz Posted October 10, 2022 Share #13 Â Posted October 10, 2022 4 hours ago, wizard said: I would be very, very surprised if it were not fungus. I have never seen fungus develop between the elements of a cemented pair. Â Particularly since the pattern is in the center and does not start along an edge of the interface. Â But I have been surprised before, especially how fungus can get to the most difficult to reach surfaces and leave other surfaces clean. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wizard Posted October 11, 2022 Share #14  Posted October 11, 2022 vor 12 Stunden schrieb zeitz: I have never seen fungus develop between the elements of a cemented pair. Well, Canada balsam is an organic substance to start with. Perhaps a tiny amount of fungus spore was part of the substance when it was processed at the time, and just needed the right environmental conditions to grow. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted October 12, 2022 Share #15 Â Posted October 12, 2022 On 10/10/2022 at 12:20 PM, Film Hunter said: Thank you guys i have tried with a magnifier and it looks the same ,138 or 168 i dont know, all this photos are with my phone and a magnifier ( i used a projection lens )Â Why not 133000 ? Would match fine :Â 130248Â 133506-Elmar 5 cm 1:3.5 Â Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now