Elmar from Leica 1? A few questions.

[Don'tknowmuch]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

New thread, and more concise... Possibly...

I have a Leica 1 with a pristine uncoated Elmar 50mm f3.5 on it. In the context of another thread (Ravilious) an Elmar for sale has been pointed out to me (thanks for link, Chris) that, in all honesty, looks old and my one looks as good as new! The lens on my 1 has the appearance of being removable as it unscrews in its focussing, but is stopped by a small peg; there for that purpose and to indicate the close focus limit. My guess is that the lens does unscrew completely given a bit of understanding, but I don't know how.

I have some questions and hope you have enough patience to help if you can.

First question; is it possible to take my Elmar off my 1 and use it on an M2?

Second question; are LTM lenses on an M2 rangefinder-coupled, or is that what M mount lenses are all about as an advance on LTM's?

Third question; does anyone know if any uncoated Elmars have iris adjustment on barrel? (If so then it becomes possible to alter f-stops without removing hood.)

If anyone can help I'd be very grateful.

I'm very close to moving onto the buying of a camera. I could stick with the Leica 1 but find the loading of the film a bit random and have wasted whole unexposed rolls before now. I could get a shoe viewfinder for it and keep my glasses on. But I don't know if a CLA would actually work and it's quite a lot off an M2 budget getting a CLA sorted, buying a viewfinder and then finding it hasn't done the trick (the shutter timings are wonky and I get dark sides to some images). So I think an M2 would be easier and I could then also access the odd M lens if and when I wanted to andhopefully keep my glasses on to focus!

Anyway - I tend to ramble and I'm sorry about that. If anyone can help with above questions it would help me to take the next step.

Thanks in advance,

Jim.

[earleygallery]

Hi

 

If you have a Leica 1a then no you can't remove the lens, its fixed and matched to the body. The focus 'screw' you see is not the same as the thread mount on later cameras (has yours got the infinity lock lever on the front of the camera body?).

 

Later models had interchangeable lenses but they were matched to the body and couldn't be used on another body, and the next model which had fully interchangeable lenses has a 0 marked on the body mount.

 

The LTM lenses to couple to the rangefinder of the M cameras when mounted with an LTM/M adaptor.

 

Late model 5cm Elmars did have a more standard aperture ring, but are larger/heavier than the original design (optically the same, and there is a 2.8 version).

 

Hope this helps.

[Erik van Straten]

With a little practice, amazing results can be obtained from a Leica I with Elmar...

 

Erik.

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!

[Don'tknowmuch]

Thanks for replies. I have already posted a picture of my 1 as, at the time, I didn't know what it was, and still don't really know much about it. Because it doesn't hurt I'll attach another picture of it and maybe someone can advise me about it?

The more I think of it the more I think I might get a CLA done and try to get used to the loading of film which I find really difficult. It does seem a bit weird to spend out on a new body when I've got one with an uncoated lens like I want. With an M2 I'd be tied to a meter anyway, and although I would prefer a wider angle lens it would be pretty cool to persevere with it and hopefully get good results. I generally take thought-about landscapes so the quick-fire rangefinding of a later M model may be wasted on me a bit. I would have to take my specs off each time I wanted to frame a photo though, and that's one issue that I hoped an M2 would help me with. Advice?

One further question, then; in anyone's opinion is a CLA likely to sort out the shutter blinds issue? The lens, f-stops and focussing is wonderfully smooth, and the wind on (once I get the **** film in) works well, so it's just the shutter that needs sorting out I think.Thanks again, Jim.

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!

[ChadHahn]

I don't know if the film loads like a later Barnak camera but if it does, you need to cut a longer leader on the film. If you cut from where the end of the film starts to widen back up straight back about four inches and then down to the bottom to make a L shape it makes the film easier to load.

 

Chad

[JBA]

Why would you be "tied to a meter" with the M2? It does not contain a built-in meter, in case you were under that impression.

 

Also, I'm not sure I follow your thinking about not needing the M's rapid fire capabilities or about needing to take your specs off when framing a photo. An M2 with an Elmar and adapter would be an outlay of cash, so perhaps you're just trying to talk yourself out of new equipment in favor of the CLA.

[earleygallery]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Yes that's a 1a with a fixed lens.

 

A CLA should sort out any issue with the shutter. Loading an M2 isn't that much different from an LTM camera, as has been said you need to trim the leader so the short narrow section is longer - the length of the spool to spool chambers so it clears the shutter gate when loading.

 

An M2 and later edition Elmar will certainly be more useable and practical IMO, but that does look like a very nice example of a 1a so I'd be reluctant to part with it!

[Don'tknowmuch]

Thanks for replies.

Sorry, I thought it was clear what I meant. "Tied to a meter" - I meant that if I bought an M2 I'd still have to carry a meter about with me as I do now, the point being that in this respect I'd have made no gain.

Secondly; yes; that's exactly my point; if I can talk myself into not spending out on an M2 and a lens I'd be a few hundred pounds richer. I was asking for advice about how much more usable an M2 would be; and it appears from your answers that I might well regret not going for an M2. It's not that I don't want to spend out on an M2, it's that I want to make sure there is a gain from so doing. Plus I'm aware that the body doesn't take the photograph, and that the lens I already have on my 1a is the bit I'd have to buy again to get to where I already am...

Cutting the film leader; I do cut the leader back, but I thought the back panel of an M2 opens up which must allow a bit of judicious steering of film into the right place if that's required. I also thought that the larger finder on an M2 might allow me to keep my glasses on when looking through it.

I apologise for this public dithering and am grateful for all help. It's all going in and one day I'll make up my mind and go one way or the other, but I can't afford to waste money and want to make the right decision when the time comes.

Jim.

[Shootist]

Well a M2/3/4/5/6/7 is a totally different camera then what you have now. You can actually focus it on your subject. Film loading is much improved and even more so with a M4/5/6/7. You have the option of changing lenses and with a M bayonet mount camera you can use all the older LTM lenses made for the type II/III cameras with a adapter.

 

The one thing you may need with any M# camera is a correct diopter lens so you wouldn't need to wear your glasses. But there is nothing stopping you from wear them if you chose to. The only limitation may be you might not see all of the widest framelines with your glasses on.

 

No one has ever waisted any money on buying a Leica M of any #. That is if you get one that works correctly and you keep it that way. There are some clunkers out there that the sellers think are worth big dollars.

[guywalder]

(once I get the **** film in)

 

Jim, so your avatar is a picture of you loading film ?

[earleygallery]

I can't afford to waste money and want to make the right decision when the time comes.

Jim.

 

Jim assuming you have the cash or credit card then don't hesitate. If you buy a decent M2 in good working order, it will still be worth whatever you pay for it if you decide its not for you and want to sell it again. There's almost no risk of losing out (as long as you pay a fair price in the first place and not silly money for a true mint or 'collectable' example).

[Don'tknowmuch]

Yes; you're right about the photo of me. That's why I have my shoes off so that I can get my toes in there as well! (Actually polishing my shoes).

OK - thanks again. During today I had already kind of made up my mind about the M2. In fact I phoned Ffordes here in the UK about it and they have a usable though not super-tidy f3.5 Elmar that I might get (but see below). Their only M2 now is a distinctly shabby one for £345 or so, so I think I'll pass on that one and look into Europe where there may be more to choose from. Unless anyone's got any UK places I could try? I would prefer not to go the ebay route as I don't really know anything about Leicas and with a shop one can take/send it back if necessary and it would have been checked over at least and CLA'd at best. Also, I guess, if I came to want to sell it it would help that I had bought it in that way.

Incidentally the relative silence here about which lenses are uncoated now doesn't surprise me as the people in Ffordes and Robert Whites (also phoned but less helpful) had to go and get several lenses they thought were really old to look at, and all bar the Elmar were visibly coated.

Oh; a question; I have read that not all LTM lenses will lock into a rangefinder mechanism. I know they all need the adapter, but apparently some "very early" Elmars and Hektors don't have barrels that couple to M rangefinders. Now; this is a problem for me. Imagine if I spent out on an M2 and then found that I had bought a lens that didn't focus through the rangefinder. Anyone got any comments?

Sorry about this; whenever I log on to just say thanks I end up asking another series of questions. But I guess we all don't mind chipping in if we can help. Don't we?

Thanks to all.

Jim.