Let's see your non-Leitz cameras fitted with Leitz lenses

[dkCambridgeshire]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Here is my Nagel "74" ( 'LIBRETTE' ?? ) c. 1930? 6x9 format fitted with Leitz Elmar 10.5cm f4.5 ... I'm wondering if this is the medium format 105mm Elmar lens subsequently adapted to be the basis of the 105mm f6.3 LTM Mountain Elmar? Apologies for my reflection in the lens close-up pictures.

 

 

 

 

 

Sorry I do not have any photos taken with the camera yet.

 

Cheers

 

dunk

[luigi bertolotti]

FINE !!! I seem to have red somewhere that those Nagels are the only non-Leica cameras with Leitz lenses (apart Panasonics of course... ) ; indeed,(see Van Hasbroek) Leitz produced also photographic lenses sold for use on universal plate cameras in the first decades of '900 , but this is a different case, for it's clearly an "integrated" item, not a camera on which you can mount "any" lens you like.

 

Regarding the Mountain Elmar... it's an intriguing question but I think there is not such a relation with THIS 105 4,5 and the 105 6,3 "Alpine".. apart the obvious fact that they are both of the Elmar 4-element design type (which in turn was very similar to Zeiss Tessar ...a well-known story of patents etc...); I say this for, years ago, I made a rough in-house test to verify if the Alpine Elmar does cover a 6x9 size and my finding was that it DOES NOT cover it (indeed, a rough test... mounted the Alpine on a 6x9 Meopta enlarger and tried to focus a 6x9 neg on the base... center image ok, but borders not). It's someway strange for 105 6,3 was a typical set for "cheap" 6x9 foldings... I had a very simple Italian made camera of the '30s which belonged to my mother ("Impero"... 25-50-75 shutter and no more) and mounted a simple triplet 105 f 6,3 engraved "K. Ludwig Dresden": using 120 color film, it was even worse than the Lubitel 66...

[dkCambridgeshire]

FINE !!! I seem to have red somewhere that those Nagels are the only non-Leica cameras with Leitz lenses (apart Panasonics of course... ) ; indeed,(see Van Hasbroek) Leitz produced also photographic lenses sold for use on universal plate cameras in the first decades of '900 , but this is a different case, for it's clearly an "integrated" item, not a camera on which you can mount "any" lens you like.

 

Regarding the Mountain Elmar... it's an intriguing question but I think there is not such a relation with THIS 105 4,5 and the 105 6,3 "Alpine".. apart the obvious fact that they are both of the Elmar 4-element design type (which in turn was very similar to Zeiss Tessar ...a well-known story of patents etc...); I say this for, years ago, I made a rough in-house test to verify if the Alpine Elmar does cover a 6x9 size and my finding was that it DOES NOT cover it (indeed, a rough test... mounted the Alpine on a 6x9 Meopta enlarger and tried to focus a 6x9 neg on the base... center image ok, but borders not). It's someway strange for 105 6,3 was a typical set for "cheap" 6x9 foldings... I had a very simple Italian made camera of the '30s which belonged to my mother ("Impero"... 25-50-75 shutter and no more) and mounted a simple triplet 105 f 6,3 engraved "K. Ludwig Dresden": using 120 color film, it was even worse than the Lubitel 66...

 

 

Thanks for information Luigi. The Leica Pocket Book 7th Edition suggests the Mountain Elmar "started life as a medium format lens with 1:4.5 as maximum aperture" ... so perhaps their statement is incorrect? There are several Nagel cameras with Leitz lens options but I have not seen any listed with the 105mm ie not in my books.

 

Look forward to seeing the weight of your 28mm lens.

 

Cheers

 

dunk

[lars_bergquist]

The original 13.5cm Elmar was very clearly an ex-plate-camera lens remounted. The 10.5cm lens was probably 'throttled down' to 6.3 in order to improve the performance, which was nevertheless inadequate, according to people who have tried the lens.

 

It is often thought that restricting a larger format lens to the 35mm format would improve definition very much. But we should remember that 9x12cm plate negs were very seldom enlarged, and the same is actually true for 6x9 roll film. This is how I remember it! So the degree of correction was not terribly high. The 'Leica format' demanded entirely different standards because it was always enlarged. This insight was behind the introduction by Leitz in the late 1920's of the present 1/30mm circle of confusion standard for the computation of depth of field. The Zeiss standard until well after the introduction of the Contax line in 1932 was 1/1000 of the focal length -- ANY focal length -- a reasoning that was predicated on the expectation that the negative would always be printed contact. Most other manufacturers, even including Kodak (Retina!) used 1/10mm far into the 1950's.

 

The old man from the Age of Max Berek

[Tullahoma]

This may not be what the originator intended, but it fits the title. I currently use an Elmarit-R 2.8/28 with an adapter on my Olympus E-510 DSLR. It works great, and brings Leica lens quality to a reasonably priced digital camera.

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!

[Robert J]

I've also seen a Zeiss Ikon kolibri camera fitted with a 5cm f3.5 elmar lens.

[dkCambridgeshire]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Not many other Nagel cameras showing up here ... I think there are a few more Nagel models with Leitz lenses ... maybe three?

 

Thanks Robert ... has anyone a Kolibri camera with a Leitz lens they can post a photo of here?

 

Cheers

 

dunk

[fWord]

Canon 1Ds MKI with Telyt 400/5, using an M39-EOS adapter: