LDBennett Posted January 25, 2023 Share #1 Posted January 25, 2023 Advertisement (gone after registration) I have a 50mm F3.5 Elmar that came on a converted Model I (to Model III). The lens has no serial number on it anywhere. Is that normal for a camera lens on a Model I? I have no information on this camera except that the top plate is in the 59,000 range which would have made it originally a Model I. But the conversion is to a Model III (Black with brassing, slow speed dial, strap lugs, rangefinder, "O" lens mount, and a top plate marked in the 59,000 range. Can the lens be dated to the same period as a 1930 Model I? In a previous post about the camera (hidden serial number scratched out under the top plate, different than the later top plate serial number??). With help here I now understand about conversion but know nothing about the camera history (or actually exactly what the hidden number is???). I only recently noticed that the Elmar has no serial number at all even though I have owned this camera for 35+ years. It was bought to collect as an example of Barnack cameras many decades ago. Thanks for any info. I am just curious and trying to put together a probable history of the camera and lens. The hidden non-matching serial number adds to the mystery. I am not able to take the top plate off to re-reveal it (bad eyesight). LDBennett Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 25, 2023 Posted January 25, 2023 Hi LDBennett, Take a look here No serial Number 50mm F3.5 Elmar?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
TomB_tx Posted January 25, 2023 Share #2 Posted January 25, 2023 I also have a no-serial Elmar on a Model I converted to Model II (likely before the III was introduced). The body was originally 1929 from the serial, but I found the Elmar from a different source. Yes, it was common for lenses from the model I to have no serial, as they were permanently attached - until removed and remounted. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Geschlecht Posted January 25, 2023 Share #3 Posted January 25, 2023 4 hours ago, LDBennett said: I have a 50mm F3.5 Elmar that came on a converted Model I (to Model III). The lens has no serial number on it anywhere. Is that normal for a camera lens on a Model I? I have no information on this camera except that the top plate is in the 59,000 range which would have made it originally a Model I. But the conversion is to a Model III (Black with brassing, slow speed dial, strap lugs, rangefinder, "O" lens mount, and a top plate marked in the 59,000 range. Can the lens be dated to the same period as a 1930 Model I? In a previous post about the camera (hidden serial number scratched out under the top plate, different than the later top plate serial number??). With help here I now understand about conversion but know nothing about the camera history (or actually exactly what the hidden number is???). I only recently noticed that the Elmar has no serial number at all even though I have owned this camera for 35+ years. It was bought to collect as an example of Barnack cameras many decades ago. Thanks for any info. I am just curious and trying to put together a probable history of the camera and lens. The hidden non-matching serial number adds to the mystery. I am not able to take the top plate off to re-reveal it (bad eyesight). LDBennett Hello LD, Welcome to the Forum. Some 50mm f3.5 Elmars have their serial number engraved in the black ring around the front element. Leitz generally did not fill this engraving with a contrasting color & so, sometimes, the number is hard to see & to read. Best Regards, Michael Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDBennett Posted January 25, 2023 Author Share #4 Posted January 25, 2023 8 hours ago, Michael Geschlecht said: Hello LD, Welcome to the Forum. Some 50mm f3.5 Elmars have their serial number engraved in the black ring around the front element. Leitz generally did not fill this engraving with a contrasting color & so, sometimes, the number is hard to see & to read. Best Regards, Michael That was the first place I looked since noticing it on an internet photo....no serial number anywhere. Just yesterday I watched a repair video for this very lens. And it too had no serial number. The older repair guy stated that it probably was an early example since it had no serial number. My guess is that is the case with mine and it matches up with the 59000 series camera body and the rest of the evidence. That serial number on the camera would put it at a 1930 build . Thanks for commenting. LDBennett 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerzy Posted January 25, 2023 Share #5 Posted January 25, 2023 IA Leicas have fixed mounted lens, lens does not have own serial number. When camera was upgraded to a higher model (in your case III) lens received interchangeable mount and in many cases optics (with the ring where usually serial number is stamped) originates from original IA. But even if taking optics into new mount was not possible, the new optics does not have serial number to be in line with original. So it is not unusual to see later Elmars with no serial number P.S. I understand that tajking top cover off is not an option fro you but maybe posting some photos would work, both camera and lens 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDBennett Posted January 25, 2023 Author Share #6 Posted January 25, 2023 Jerzy: Thanks for the response. What you say makes sense. I was thinking along those lines but my detailed knowledge of these cameras is limited...but I am learning. The mount is a "O" lens mount so obviously a conversions was made. I did not really recognize that the Model 1 was a fixed lens. My reading should have revealed that but I apparently did not retain that info. It makes sense now. There is not much to be learned from pictures (difficult for me to do). I attempted to explain most aspect of the camera as it appears today. There is more to this camera then can be seen externally because of the hidden scratched out serial number under the top plate. I wish I could find the picture I took some 35+ years ago to see what that number was. It certainly was not the same as the serial number on the top plate. Oh well, a mystery for a future owner to solve after I am gone. LDBennett Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDBennett Posted February 2, 2023 Author Share #7 Posted February 2, 2023 Advertisement (gone after registration) Correction: The camera body serial number is 54432, not in the 59000 range. My serial number list that I found says 1930. And all the conversion items make it a clone of the Model III not a Model II. See some pictures here. LDBennett 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! Quote 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/363235-no-serial-number-50mm-f35-elmar/?do=findComment&comment=4668948'>More sharing options...
willeica Posted February 2, 2023 Share #8 Posted February 2, 2023 1 hour ago, LDBennett said: Correction: The camera body serial number is 54432, not in the 59000 range. My serial number list that I found says 1930. And all the conversion items make it a clone of the Model III not a Model II. See some pictures here. LDBennett 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! Check the actual physical length of the extended lens. It might be shorter than normal. I have two unnumbered 50mm Elmars which have been converted from 11 O'Clock to 7 O'Clock and both have shorter barrels. If you don't have another Elmar to compare it with, post the number here. Jerzy and I did a lot of measuring of 50m/5cm Elmars about 7 or 8 years ago and we have a lot of data about this. William 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
iphoenix Posted February 7, 2023 Share #9 Posted February 7, 2023 William, Sorry to interrupt, but where is the measurement taken from - the body when mounted, or the end of the lens's screw mount? Also, do you have the respective measurements to identify the earlier? I have a 1A in the 9000s converted to a 1C with a "no number" lens which is uncoated but after a CLA, has surprised me with its' quality. Kind Regards, David Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nitroplait Posted February 7, 2023 Share #10 Posted February 7, 2023 2 hours ago, iphoenix said: ..but where is the measurement taken from - the body when mounted, or the end of the lens's screw mount? Easy to see if you put them next to each other. Nickel one is the 1A converted unnumbered lens. Quite a difference: 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 Quote 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/363235-no-serial-number-50mm-f35-elmar/?do=findComment&comment=4675427'>More sharing options...
willeica Posted February 7, 2023 Share #11 Posted February 7, 2023 20 minutes ago, nitroplait said: Easy to see if you put them next to each other. Nickel one is the 1A converted unnumbered lens. Quite a difference: 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! Good illustration. I may have a similar photo somewhere. I can also quote some numbers. Will post again later. The measurement should be with the lens at infinity and with the front element fully extended and locked. It is from the back to the front ring. William Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pippy Posted February 7, 2023 Share #12 Posted February 7, 2023 (edited) On 2/2/2023 at 5:07 PM, willeica said: Check the actual physical length of the extended lens. I have two unnumbered 50mm Elmars which have been converted from 11 O'Clock to 7 O'Clock and both have shorter barrels. On this subject, William, how is it that short-barrrel (once Standardised) and long-barrel lenses can both work on a Standardised body? Would not the lens elements be placed slightly further forward (relatively speaking) in the long-barrel lenses? It would appear from nitroplait's photograph in post #11 that the front elements must be sited differently. As it happens, today, I was intending to check out how 'useable' some of my FSU lenses are with my Digi-M bodies so I might extend that experiment to include my un-numbered 11 o'clock and 'normal' Elmars. Philip. Edited February 7, 2023 by pippy 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nitroplait Posted February 7, 2023 Share #13 Posted February 7, 2023 Haven't put too much thought into this, but one would think it had to be a differen't optical design. The front elements are seemingly not in the same position. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
willeica Posted February 7, 2023 Share #14 Posted February 7, 2023 1 hour ago, pippy said: On this subject, William, how is it that short-barrrel (once Standardised) and long-barrel lenses can both work on a Standardised body? Would not the lens elements be placed slightly further forward (relatively speaking) in the long-barrel lenses? It would appear from nitroplait's photograph in post #11 that the front elements must be sited differently. As it happens, today, I was intending to check out how 'useable' some of my FSU lenses are with my Digi-M bodies so I might extend that experiment to include my un-numbered 11 o'clock and 'normal' Elmars. Philip. There was a lot of length variation even, in numbered lenses which were 7 O'Clock from the outset. Philip, you will know the number behind the infinity button. That would have been used to match the lens with an appropriate mount to give the 50mm focal length, not barrel length- see below, required for focus at the film plane and also full coverage on the negative. For earlier lenses without the number, the measuring would have been done in-house in Wetzlar. I took this photo a few years ago and I believe the two on the right were converted lenses. I cannot remember what I was doing with this photo as the lens on the left has a flat infinity knob and the photo may relate to that. 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! I hope I am making some sense, but you will see that the middle and right hand lenses are shorter than the one on the left. From the table which I was doing with Jerzy, barrel lengths varied from 29mm to 32.1mm. These were marked '1' and '7' respectively behind the infinity knob. The picture is quite complex, but the 29mm item was on a Standard that had been converted from a I Model A and the lens on that had been clearly shortened in the standardisation process. The numbers behind the infinity knob relate not to barrel length, but to focal length as follows. 0 50.5mm 1 49.6mm 2 not allocated 3 48.6mm 4 50.7mm 5 51.0mm 6 51.3mm 7 51.6mm 8 51.9mm Of course, focal length does not follow barrel length in exact proportion, but has to be measured separately. I am not a camera technician, nor do I know precisely what the technicians in Wetzlar were doing back in the 1930s When I say the situation is complex, I am not exaggerating. Perhaps Jerzy would like to add some comments. William 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! I hope I am making some sense, but you will see that the middle and right hand lenses are shorter than the one on the left. From the table which I was doing with Jerzy, barrel lengths varied from 29mm to 32.1mm. These were marked '1' and '7' respectively behind the infinity knob. The picture is quite complex, but the 29mm item was on a Standard that had been converted from a I Model A and the lens on that had been clearly shortened in the standardisation process. The numbers behind the infinity knob relate not to barrel length, but to focal length as follows. 0 50.5mm 1 49.6mm 2 not allocated 3 48.6mm 4 50.7mm 5 51.0mm 6 51.3mm 7 51.6mm 8 51.9mm Of course, focal length does not follow barrel length in exact proportion, but has to be measured separately. I am not a camera technician, nor do I know precisely what the technicians in Wetzlar were doing back in the 1930s When I say the situation is complex, I am not exaggerating. Perhaps Jerzy would like to add some comments. William ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/363235-no-serial-number-50mm-f35-elmar/?do=findComment&comment=4675675'>More sharing options...
pippy Posted February 7, 2023 Share #15 Posted February 7, 2023 (edited) 3 hours ago, willeica said: There was a lot of length variation even, in numbered lenses which were 7 O'Clock from the outset... Well this is getting more confusing rather than less-so. Hastily rattled-off snap but it serves to illustrate the point. Here are two Elmars. On the left is my un-numbered 11 o'clock Nickel which came with a 1930 Leica 1(a) to 1(c) conversion (Ser. No. 36750 with '7' stamped on underside of infinity-lock arm hence 51.6mm f/l). On the right is a regular example dating to c. 1935 (276268 no number at rear); 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! I'm way out of my depth here!............ Philip. EDIT : Hope this isn't going too far off-topic(!) but just for fun I was having a look at my '50 / f3.5 Elmaresque' FSU lenses and was interested to see that, just as with Leica, there were a number of variations in terms of engravings (front and rear); min. focus(?) and aperture range. AFAICT those FED lenses which were produced up until c. 1950/1951 were engraved 1 : 3,5 50m/m and the aperture scale was the same as a Black Scale Elmar and went to f18. Later examples (those which came to me with bodies post-1951) shared the modern range stopping at f16. All have min. focus marked as being 1,25 (Metres) except one of my 'f16' lenses which has a min. focus engraved as '1,2' however, as the comma has been omitted (it actually reads '12'), I suspect it is an engraving error... Front-ring Engravings, although keeping the same typeface, had a slightly different look; more 'bold' in weight and were in-filled in black whereas engravings on earlier lenses were not painted. Late lenses dropped the 'slash' from the 50mm designation and were 'coated' - mainly Amber/Purple. Markings at the rear of the lens mount are a crazy mix of stuff. The lens which came with my earliest body (c. 1936) has a simple '52'. My next lens (AFAICT!) has the groupings '56 11 73326'. By 1941 the list has expanded to become '147 K 1 149720'. This came with body #170672. Interestingly - if the last 6-digit group is the lens' serial number - body 139210 (c. 1940) came with '1 48 148980' which would represent a lens 260 examples after the other lens. By the time we get to the most recent (AFAICT!) lens the serial number is no longer stamped on to the rear of the ring but, instead, engraved on the front face of the mounting ring. I'll save the breakdown of the Industar 22 / Industar 50 'Elmars' for another time............ EDIT Part Two... Some homework for me to digest; http://ussrphoto.com/wiki/default.asp?WikiCatID=87&ParentID=2&ContentID=320 Edited February 7, 2023 by pippy Quote Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! I'm way out of my depth here!............ Philip. EDIT : Hope this isn't going too far off-topic(!) but just for fun I was having a look at my '50 / f3.5 Elmaresque' FSU lenses and was interested to see that, just as with Leica, there were a number of variations in terms of engravings (front and rear); min. focus(?) and aperture range. AFAICT those FED lenses which were produced up until c. 1950/1951 were engraved 1 : 3,5 50m/m and the aperture scale was the same as a Black Scale Elmar and went to f18. Later examples (those which came to me with bodies post-1951) shared the modern range stopping at f16. All have min. focus marked as being 1,25 (Metres) except one of my 'f16' lenses which has a min. focus engraved as '1,2' however, as the comma has been omitted (it actually reads '12'), I suspect it is an engraving error... Front-ring Engravings, although keeping the same typeface, had a slightly different look; more 'bold' in weight and were in-filled in black whereas engravings on earlier lenses were not painted. Late lenses dropped the 'slash' from the 50mm designation and were 'coated' - mainly Amber/Purple. Markings at the rear of the lens mount are a crazy mix of stuff. The lens which came with my earliest body (c. 1936) has a simple '52'. My next lens (AFAICT!) has the groupings '56 11 73326'. By 1941 the list has expanded to become '147 K 1 149720'. This came with body #170672. Interestingly - if the last 6-digit group is the lens' serial number - body 139210 (c. 1940) came with '1 48 148980' which would represent a lens 260 examples after the other lens. By the time we get to the most recent (AFAICT!) lens the serial number is no longer stamped on to the rear of the ring but, instead, engraved on the front face of the mounting ring. I'll save the breakdown of the Industar 22 / Industar 50 'Elmars' for another time............ EDIT Part Two... Some homework for me to digest; http://ussrphoto.com/wiki/default.asp?WikiCatID=87&ParentID=2&ContentID=320 ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/363235-no-serial-number-50mm-f35-elmar/?do=findComment&comment=4675798'>More sharing options...
Pyrogallol Posted February 7, 2023 Share #16 Posted February 7, 2023 Three of mine, different infinity catches. 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! Quote 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/363235-no-serial-number-50mm-f35-elmar/?do=findComment&comment=4675826'>More sharing options...
willeica Posted February 7, 2023 Share #17 Posted February 7, 2023 47 minutes ago, pippy said: Well this is getting more confusing rather than less-so. I will PM or email you, Philip. I can assure you that, confusing as these things may seem, the people in Wetzlar knew what they were doing back then. By memory, FED lenses seem to be a bit taller, but I'm not aware of what they used to overcome manufacturing variations, but they must have had some system. William Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pippy Posted February 7, 2023 Share #18 Posted February 7, 2023 2 hours ago, pippy said: ...By 1941 the list has expanded to become '147 K 1 149720'. This came with body #170672...If the last 6-digit group is the lens' serial number (then) body 139210 (c. 1940) came with '1 48 148980' which would represent a lens 260 examples after the other lens... Apologies but it was Brain-Fart Time yet again. That should read the first-mentioned (1941) came 740 units after the latter-mentioned '40 lens. I used to be good at Sums. Wonder what happened?............ Philip. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerzy Posted February 7, 2023 Share #19 Posted February 7, 2023 short barrel is related to IA Elmars that were converted to interchangeable, regardles 11 or 7 oclock, standarized or not and optical (inner) barrel was retained from original IA Elmar. Reason: on IA lens flange is mounted directly on the body while on IC (and later) interchangeable there is additional M39 flange on the camera body that adds the distance between optics and film plane. To compensate this additional flange, when optics has been retained it must have been moved closer to the end of lens and respectively lens barrel must have been shortened. When during conversion optics has been renewed Elmar stayed unnumbered but the optical barrel has another construction thatn in early lenses and regular barrel length were used. It is unkown to me if any optical element are different between fixed and interchangeable Elmars. Could be. Different story is with focal length group - difference is with the pitch of helicoid. I believe few years ago I showed comparision of pitch between two extreme focal length for Elmar. 1 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
willeica Posted February 7, 2023 Share #20 Posted February 7, 2023 9 minutes ago, jerzy said: short barrel is related to IA Elmars that were converted to interchangeable, regardles 11 or 7 oclock, standarized or not and optical (inner) barrel was retained from original IA Elmar. Reason: on IA lens flange is mounted directly on the body while on IC (and later) interchangeable there is additional M39 flange on the camera body that adds the distance between optics and film plane. To compensate this additional flange, when optics has been retained it must have been moved closer to the end of lens and respectively lens barrel must have been shortened. When during conversion optics has been renewed Elmar stayed unnumbered but the optical barrel has another construction thatn in early lenses and regular barrel length were used. It is unkown to me if any optical element are different between fixed and interchangeable Elmars. Could be. Different story is with focal length group - difference is with the pitch of helicoid. I believe few years ago I showed comparision of pitch between two extreme focal length for Elmar. Thanks Jerzy. One of the ones which I showed was from a converted I A. The other one was bought separately at an auction without a camera, but may have come from a similar source. I don't believe the optical elements varied as result of the move to interchangeable, but there may have some slight changes earlier with the change from Goerz to Schott glass. I think we had a recent thread here where this was touched on. Re your last point. To be certain about it, did they compensate for the marked different focal lengths by having a range of helicoids or am I picking that up the wrong way around? William Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.