dpitt Posted January 29, 2023 Share #1 Posted January 29, 2023 Advertisement (gone after registration) I have some of these old lenses with goggles, so I know the concept. AFAIK there were 4 reasons for Leica to fit goggles to a lens: Lenses wider than 50mm on M3 can only be used when goggles modify the magnification of the finder so the 50mm frame fits the wideness of the lens. They also correct the RF system with an equal amount to focus properly. These lenses have goggles that are not removable. The Leica Summicron DR 50 mm can be used without goggles between 1m and infinity. They need goggles to focus when you go closer than 1 m. The Elmarit 1:2.8/135 uses goggles to magnify the the finder so the 90 mm is used as 135mm. So it can be used on the M2 which does not have a 135 mm frame. Also focusing is easier and more accurate. The Leica Summaron 1:3.5/35 seems to be an exception.It brings up the 50mm frame. And it needs the goggles to focus properly at any range. What was the purpose of making the goggles removable? Where you supposed to zone focus only when the goggles are removed? Can some of you shed some light on use case number 4? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 29, 2023 Posted January 29, 2023 Hi dpitt, Take a look here Leica Summaron 1:3.5/35 with goggles, why removable?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jaapv Posted January 29, 2023 Share #2 Posted January 29, 2023 To fit it into a camera bag. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
williamj Posted January 29, 2023 Share #3 Posted January 29, 2023 Is number 4 an M lens or is it LTM. If LTM I could understand that you’d need to remove the goggles when it was mounted on your Barnack camera. If it is an M lens made from an LTM design then perhaps they carried through the design and just changed the mount. That would be my guess but I don’t know for sure. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 29, 2023 Share #4 Posted January 29, 2023 That lens is an M lens. The goggles can only be removed with the lens locked at infinity, at which distance it is accurate. Focusing remains locked with the goggles removed. There was a special camera bag with this configuration which allowed the goggles to be stored separately. There was no optical reason to make the goggles removable. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dpitt Posted January 29, 2023 Author Share #5 Posted January 29, 2023 52 minutes ago, jaapv said: That lens is an M lens. The goggles can only be removed with the lens locked at infinity, at which distance it is accurate. Focusing remains locked with the goggles removed. That is new to me. Somehow, I managed to remove them when not locked. An hour ago, I removed the goggles and was able to turn the focus ring. I can not really reproduce it, because when I tried just now it is not removable unless I set it to infinity. After removing it stays locked at infinity. Thanks Jaap, for clarifying. For me it seems like a very complex construction, just to make storage easier. Certainly because this lens is not as hard to store as the goggled 135mm. If I press the little button on top, I can unlock the lens and I could use it in zone focus mode without goggles. Maybe that use was intended too. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 29, 2023 Share #6 Posted January 29, 2023 Yes, the locking mechanism can be broken or gummed up. Maybe your idea of pressing the locking pin for use on the M1 was on Leica’s mind. But I rather doubt it. They produced a number of dedicated inserts for their Kombitasche. The one for the Summaron 35 3.5 set had a pouch to store the goggles in. The lenses locked into the rear-lens cap type holders, there were spaces for film cassettes, filters, etc. And, of course, a fitted space for the camera. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pippy Posted January 29, 2023 Share #7 Posted January 29, 2023 (edited) Advertisement (gone after registration) 12 hours ago, dpitt said: The Leica Summaron 1:3.5/35 seems to be an exception.It brings up the 50mm frame. And it needs the goggles to focus properly at any range. What was the purpose of making the goggles removable? Where you supposed to zone focus only when the goggles are removed? Can some of you shed some light on use case number 4? Not sure about the exact question you are asking and I'm VERY far from being an expert on these matters but, FWIW, here is one possible explanation if I understand you correctly. Initially there were two versions of the M-mount 35mm f3.5 Summaron released; goggled and non-goggled. When these were introduced (1954) there was only the M3 onto which they could be fitted so the concept of '35mm framelines' wasn't yet on the horizon as those only became a reality with the M2 therefore none of these early lenses could possibly bring up non-existent 35mm Frame-lines; no such '35mm framelines' lens-mount-profile existed. The non-goggled version of the lens focuses accurately(*) but, of course, doesn't show the 35 f-o-v through the OVF. I don't have any experience with the goggled version but it could be that, similar to the later f2.8 goggled 35mm Summarons, such lenses were never intended to be used without the 'specs' and these optical aids could be removed from the lenses when the situation required it - possibly when the lens-body unit was used with a Visoflex or other such focussing device? It might be a good idea to ask to have this question moved to the Collectors and Historica subforum? There are many threads discussing the various 35mm goggled/non-goggled lenses. Philip. * FWIW I bought a 1954 non-goggled Summaron in 1980 (which I still own and use) but until I joined this Forum couldn't understand why it didn't bring up the 'correct' framelines... Edited January 29, 2023 by pippy 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 30, 2023 Share #8 Posted January 30, 2023 The removable goggle version does not focus accurately without the goggles. In fact, it does not focus at all as it is locked on infinity, unless, as noted, you press the small locking pin on the goggle mount. If you do so, it will focus inaccurately as it has a different focusing cam. The shortest lens that can be used on the Visoflex is 65 mm. (Elmar 65/3.5 V ) https://www.budget-camera-store.com/index.php/products/leica/leica-visoflex-lenses/leitz-65mm-f3-5-elmar-chrome-box-33.html Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 30, 2023 Share #9 Posted January 30, 2023 18 hours ago, pippy said: It might be a good idea to ask to have this question moved to the Collectors and Historica subforum? There are many threads discussing the various 35mm goggled/non-goggled lenses. Umm.. the thread IS in the Collectors and Historica forum. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jc_braconi Posted January 30, 2023 Share #10 Posted January 30, 2023 The lenses with googles for M3 can be used without the googles on a reflex camera with after market adapted rings. the Summaron the Summicron and the Summilux can have the complete googles M ring removed and next you can find the 39 thread dia. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dpitt Posted January 31, 2023 Author Share #11 Posted January 31, 2023 (edited) 14 hours ago, jc_braconi said: The lenses with googles for M3 can be used without the googles on a reflex camera with after market adapted rings. the Summaron the Summicron and the Summilux can have the complete googles M ring removed and next you can find the 39 thread dia. Thanks. So that would mean I can use my goggled Summicron v1 8e (M) on my IIIF? Of course stil with the limitation that the focusing cam does not work... That would be an issue with the Summicron because I would use it wide open. The Summaron (mine at least) however is very soft wide open, so I think I will use it more as a F5.6 lens and use estimated zone focus or hyperfocal distance on my digital M's. The only downside is it brings up the 50mm frame lines and that is not correct when using it without goggles. Edited January 31, 2023 by dpitt Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wizard Posted January 31, 2023 Share #12 Posted January 31, 2023 vor 14 Stunden schrieb jc_braconi: the Summaron the Summicron and the Summilux can have the complete googles M ring removed and next you can find the 39 thread dia. Are you sure that is true for all of those lenses? I thought this was only true for early version of those lenses, and was later changed to true M-mount, that is, those lenses no longer have a 39mm LTM thread. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pippy Posted January 31, 2023 Share #13 Posted January 31, 2023 16 hours ago, jaapv said: Umm.. the thread IS in the Collectors and Historica forum. OOPS!........... For some reason I thought I was still in the 'M Lenses' sub-forum. Apologies! Philip. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 31, 2023 Share #14 Posted January 31, 2023 15 hours ago, jc_braconi said: The lenses with googles for M3 can be used without the googles on a reflex camera with after market adapted rings. the Summaron the Summicron and the Summilux can have the complete googles M ring removed and next you can find the 39 thread dia. My Summaron 35/3.5 locks at infinity with the goggles removed - just clicked on, no mount removal- and has a native M mount. I think you refer to lenses with fixed goggles. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jc_braconi Posted January 31, 2023 Share #15 Posted January 31, 2023 I confirm that I have a Summicron that came from one from a M3 model and that have the LTM 39 on it after removing the googles, so I use it on a Sony Alpha ii with a ring LTM 39 to M and a Metabone ring (M to Sony) in between without looking at the distance. Just looking at/in the viewfinder. Hoping that ask to the different questions above. JAAPV your 3.5 /35 have not a rear part removable, I was speaking of the 2.8/35 Summaron. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Geschlecht Posted February 1, 2023 Share #16 Posted February 1, 2023 (edited) Hello Everybody, The 35mm f2.8 Summaron, 35mm f2 Summicron & 35mm f1.4 Summilux lenses with FIXED "goggles" have a differential cam system devised by the Wizards of Wetzlar so that: When the roller connected to the rangefinder inside the camera body is moving from the Infinity position to the 1 meter position: The mechanism inside the lens mount is moving the lens mount (And the optics of the lens itself.) from the Infinity position to the 65 centimeter position. This movement of the optical unit from Infinity to 65 centimeters is what is indicated on the lens barrel. At the same time the frames for the various lenses & the rangefinder in the range/viewfinder are going from the top left to the bottom right. This measures from Infinity to 1 meter with the range/viewfinder of an M3. Which was the only "M" camera that there was being made in 1954 when the original 35mm f3,5 Summaron lenses were first made for "M" cameras. The first 35mm f3.5 Summaron lenses use an add on viewfinder SBLOO/12010. Which arrived at the same time as the 35mm f3.5 Summaron: 1949. There are also earlier viewfinders made by Leitz that show the field of view of a 35mm lens. Because the M3 has no 35mm frame: The early 35mm f3.5 Summaron lenses with NO "goggles" are designed to be used with the 50mm frame lines & with the SBLOO/12010 viewfinder in the accessory shoe. The accessory shoe can also, alternatively, hold a small flash. In 1956 an "M" version of the 35mm f3.5 Summaron was made available that has removable "goggles" which expand the angle of view seen in the range/viewfinder 1.5X. The lens that comes with these "goggles" activates the 50mm frame lines. When the M2 (1957) became available: The 35mmf3.5 Summaron without "goggles" was reconfigured (1958) to bring up the 35mm frame lines of the M2. This lens was in regular production with a screw mount from 1949. Altho some were made before that in 1946. They were in regular production with a bayonet mount from 1954. And with "goggles" from 1956. All 3 types ended production in 1960. Best Regards, Michael Edited February 1, 2023 by Michael Geschlecht 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted February 1, 2023 Share #17 Posted February 1, 2023 (edited) Looking at my Summarons googled, I noticed this small difference in the front assembly of the goggles between the two variants (black paint / black crakcle finishing) : is it normal ? Btw, the screw button securing the goggles, in the black crackle item does not enter its receptacle... but engages correctly and goggle is firm: diameter of the heads is the same (11 mm) , width of the receptacle not... an oddity 🤔 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 February 1, 2023 by luigi bertolotti 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/364070-leica-summaron-13535-with-goggles-why-removable/?do=findComment&comment=4667199'>More sharing options...
jc_braconi Posted February 2, 2023 Share #18 Posted February 2, 2023 Ciao Luigi Do you think that your shining paint one is missing that little piece/bar in front of the slit the screws are already present them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted February 2, 2023 Share #19 Posted February 2, 2023 Ciao JC, you are right, I think... probably the small plate is simply missing in my item... 🤒 btw, the two screws, though serrated, are a bit elevated over the black surface... just the thickness of the plate... and in the meantime found some pics of other painted items, with the plate : damn, I did not notice when bought mine... and am disturbed... is not complete... 🙄 and surely a part trivial, but not easy to find,,, 😁 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jc_braconi Posted February 2, 2023 Share #20 Posted February 2, 2023 I think this plate can be made easily with a piece of stainless steel but in my opinion it is cosmetic and serves only to hide the slit 1 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