Jump to content

Leitz Thambar 90mm f.2.2 on M9..?


Overgaard

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 58
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Ehm... VERY particular lens... I will try to find a M8 pic taken with it... (I made, 2 years ago, a number of shots with "super oldies" : Thambar, Hektor 73, Elmar 105, Hektor 50, Elmar 90 "fat"... 73 was the only with a certain flavor...) In general, is CONTRAST (lack of) that strikes you with those venerable glasses...

Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember a Leica session with the former importer of Leica in Holland, ODIN, when one of the partcipants had a brand-new Apo-Summicron ASPH 90/2 (M). Erwin Puts put our lenses on the collimator (if that is what is was called) and that particular super duper, just on the market, Apo Summi was totally out of whack. Spectacularly so. We dubbed it the Apo-Thambar, and the owner was not amused :eek:

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Interesting series : many have indeed the typical Thambar look: but I think the IR paysage in the third link isn't Thambar-taken ... too sharp the mountain and no flare (but I haven't experience with IR, maybe flare is absent by definition ?)

Link to post
Share on other sites

In the late 1950's my father arrived home one day proudly bearing a second hand Thambar, which he had bought at Lizars in Aberdeen (one of the first ever photographic dealers dating from the 1840's and still going, I am pleased to say). He was not amused after explaining to my brother and I what it was for and we doubled up laughing, asking why on earth he needed to buy it, when the Summar he insisted on using all the time, was just as soft. He had not helped by using it for years for enlarging as well as on his IIIC. When in 1962, the family clubbed together to buy him a Contarex for his 60th birthday, we gently prised the Summar out of his hands and sent it to Wallace Heaton, prior to their descent into being a branch of Jessops, for a total rebuild and coating of the front element, with the end result being much better. I don't know what happened to the rarely used Thambar but I suspect my mother just binned it or gave it away after my father died in '76.

 

Wilson

Link to post
Share on other sites

I suspect my mother just binned it or gave it away after my father died in '76.

 

Wilson

 

Great story! It's definitely a lens that you can either work magic with - or it's going to be a "faulty lens" that will be given away to charity one day (who will in return bin it).

 

Did you ever see anything great made with it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a more or less mint copy of the Thambar but have not tried it out on the M8. I do not have a M9.

What I can say is that I took quite a lot of portraits with the Thambar using Kodachrome 25 on an M5 and an M6.

Since the results should be more or less in line with what is achievable on the M8/M9, here they are.

1. The results are more or less unpredictable. Best practice is to shoot many times and pick the one you like best.

2. Shots against the light are generally more effective than with the light behind you.

3. The most pleasing results to my taste were with center filter at medium apertures. With luck portraits took on the "dreamy" look that the lens is famous for.

4. I never used the Thambar for anything e3xcept portraits.

The Thambar behaves differently from the Imagon (I have a copy made for the Visoflex). According to memory, the Imagon tended to be softer overall, while with the Thambar I had the impression of a diffused image over a sharper one.

If and when I get my M9, I would like to try both lenses.

Teddy

Link to post
Share on other sites

Great story! It's definitely a lens that you can either work magic with - or it's going to be a "faulty lens" that will be given away to charity one day (who will in return bin it).

 

Did you ever see anything great made with it?

 

Thorsten,

 

After playing around with the Thambar for the first week or so after my father bought it, I think it was quietly put away in a drawer and forgotten. I certainly never recall seeing it on either his IIIC or IIF after that. I would not have any results of it, as from about 1950 onwards my father only took colour transparencies with his Leicas, using a Super Ikonta V for black and white and very occasionally a Contax II for colour prints. All of the transparencies were inserted into special aluminium holders for use in some long defunct automatic projector (Balomatic rings a bell). Again my mother threw them all out in the 1970's, when the projector broke. I do have albums with a lot of his black and white stuff plus the odd colour print.

 

Wilson

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here I found two M8 shots made just for comparision... Thambar with spot filter on, ALMOST wide open (2,6... at 2,2 with such a lighting situation is at all terrible), the other with Elmar 90 3 elements at f4 (or 5,6) - outstanding lens for its age. The model isn't so significant (myself...:o) and, above all, as I said before this is not a picture in which Thambar can still give its "special taste" : it needs a portrait with direct light, wihich typically accentuates skin's details/signs/"texture" ... Thambar takes care of and attenuates pleasantly those elements... with diffuse light, its low contrast simply dominates the picture.

M8 640 ASA, BW converted in Lightroom... no need to specify which one is the Thambar... :)

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

Luigi,

 

Just for interest, I took your Elmar and ran it through photoshop - lens blur layer mask 107mm focal distance, Octagon iris 14mm radius and 26 blade curvature. Comes out quite similar to the Thambar I think?

 

Wilson

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

Wilson,

 

No disrespect or offence intended but with your version I start to feel ill if I look at it for too long but Luigi's doesn't have that effect.:o I think it's something to do with my brain trying harder and harder to bring the photo into focus, which I don't get with Luigi's shot.

 

Pete.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Luigi,

 

Just for interest, I took your Elmar and ran it through photoshop - lens blur layer mask 107mm focal distance, Octagon iris 14mm radius and 26 blade curvature. Comes out quite similar to the Thambar I think?

 

Wilson

 

I think is the first time someone works on MY face... :)... funny: yes, resembles someway the Thambar... but lights in my eyes went away... logical, without a Thambar to admire in front of you... :p

 

Found another M8 comparision (color, the Thambar pic was added contrast to in PS - no other PP) : the bokeh of the Thambar is really a strange impressionism (f 4,5, with spotfilter); other pic with Summarex 85 at f 4. Here, too, no need to specify which lens ;).

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

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...