My "new " screw mount 50 Elmar

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Leica Photography : One Thread

I picked up a nice clean old 50 f3.5 coated Elmar a week or so ago. It had spent most of the last 25 years as an enlarging lens of all things. No fog, and very few cleaning marks. I just got the first shots I took with it back, and I am surprised at the quality. I wasn't expecting much from this dimunitive 50 year old lens, and I am really surprised at the contrast, sharpness, and especially the color reproduction. I compared a few shots with the Elmar and my current 50mm Summicron, and the difference was not as dramatic as I expected, especially at 5.6 and 8.0. I think it may be even better than the old 50mm collapsible Summicron I used to have. I was also expecting problems with flare in the photos shot outside in bright light, but it wasn't a problem.

I love the way it looks on the M3 body, and I found a correct old chrome cap this week to complete the package. The M camera seems so much smaller and is even more inconspicous with that lens on there. Anyone who likes to travel light or just appreciates retro stuff would enjoy using this lens. Most fun purchase per dollar I've probably made in my M system.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), June 01, 2001

Answers

"Real Leicamen shoot Elmars."

-- Bill Mitchell (bmitch@home.com), June 01, 2001.

Wow, I'm a Leicaman ;-) Though mainly a 35mm kind of guy (I've bored everyone here countless times with my IIIg/35 Asph story), I use a collapsible 50 Elmar quite a bit. It holds up well with two caveats: 1) don't get into a flare situation 2) F5.6 or smaller for real sharpness (though looking at a lot of Bressons photos, sharpness ain't necessarily all it's cracked up to be). I was going to trade it for the Voigtlander 50, but did'nt think the tradeoffs were worth it. The Elmar has great bokeh, and when it's collapsed, the camera truly fits in a jacket pocket.

-- Bob Todrick (bobtodrick@yahoo.com), June 01, 2001.

Elmar 50/3.5 was my first Leitz taking lens and enlarger lens for more then twenty years. It captured for me great memories in Singapore, Hong Kong, and Beijing, in the magnificent Summer Palace, or in the pine forest in my favourite West Hills, or in the West Lake in Hangzhou. IIIf + Elmar 50/3.5 made a very compact package.

-- martin tai (martin.tai@capcanada.com), June 01, 2001.

I cannot think of any lens name more faminine than "Elmar". "cron" "lux", sound techy.

"Contessar " (Zeiss Ikon camrea ) is nice too.

-- martin tai (martin.tai@capcanada.com), June 01, 2001.


"Elmar" a feminine-sounding name? Martin, it's a male first name in German! (Although one rarely used today, most German with that name were born more than 50 years ago.) Oskar Barnack is turning in his grave :-) !

-- Oliver Schrinner (piraya@hispavista.com), June 01, 2001.


I picked up a beat up cosmetically 50/3.5 Elmar on ebay for $ 100 for my IIIc. but the glass is comparable to yours, clear with only minimal wipe marks. What I like best is that the lens is so simple and basic in design.I had to take it apart and lubricate it because it was so stiff it would unscrew from the camera when focusing. All I had to do was take out the stop pin when rotating the lens close distance and keep turning until it unscrewed. To clean, re-lubricate and put back together took a total of 15 minutes. Now I have a lens that that at 4X6 at least, takes pictures comparable to my 50 Summicron, and when colapsed fits into my front jeans pocket.

-- Gerald Widen (gerald@sfa1.com), June 01, 2001.

Several of the shots on my first roll were in backlit situations, and I did this on purpose to see how much "vieling" flare I'd get. There wasn't any. I have a feeling the reason many of the older Leica lenses do poorly in flare prone situations is that many are cursed with that pesky fog internally, plus an additional 500 cleaning marks if you are really lucky. My Collapsing Summicron would flare if ANY bright light hit the elements directly at all. It also had a lower contrast look to it in general. When I later learned about checking the inside with a flash light for fog, I figured out why.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), June 01, 2001.

Andrew

I used to have a Retina IIIc with the 2.8 Schneider Xenar and that was an excellent lens too - quite up to modern standards frankly. I think we always assume that latest is better. Most lens designs for standard lenses are at least a hundred years old, so it comes down to taking care in assembling them and having good quality control something Leica have alsways been good at. The original Elmar is a classic for a good reason...It is difficult to think of ways to improve these lenses - hence the longevity of the 50 Summicrons.

-- Robin Smith (smith_robin@hotmail.com), June 01, 2001.


Bob Todrick: "sharpness ain't all it's cracked up to be."

To borrow from Bill Pierce at digitaljournalist.org:

"Don't confuse 'sharp' with 'good', or you'll find yourself trying to shave with an ice cream cone and licking razor blades.

-- Andy Piper (apidens@denver.infi.net), June 01, 2001.


There hasn't been a quantum leap in optical quality with the standard 50mm lenses in the last 50 years, especially f2.0 or slower ones. Now with wide angles wider than 28mm,zoom lenses, and the long fast glass, then you can not compare the lenses of yesterday with their currect computer designed high tech counter parts. Ever try out an original Nikon 43 to 86 zoom, or the old Vivitar T4 series 75 to 260 monster? Can you say SOFT.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), June 01, 2001.


The first Leica lens I ever owned (and it wasn't THAT long ago - mid '70's) was an Elmar 3.5 attached to a $100 IIIc or IIIf that I bought from a college dormmate. (I have no idea which body or if it was coated - and I won't speculate as to what he wanted the $100 for ;^>)

Definitely the lens that taught me what contrast and sharpness were.

I used to use it at f/22 (having never heard of diffraction) and it had the depth of field of a 35. Of course, I had to use it at f/22 with 400 film - the shutter in the IIIwhatever only gave half frames above 1/125 second. >:^<

But in defence of modern designs, the complexity of designing a lens goes up as about the square of the relative f/stop, so it's about 10 times easier to design an f/3.5 than it is to design an f/1.4.

Wouldn't ie be nice if Leica.........? Nawww!

-- Andy Piper (apidens@denver.infi.net), June 01, 2001.


>wouldn't it be nice if Leica....< What came out with a Black Paint one for a good price? Hmm I sent mine to Shintaro for painting. (wow, words don't do) One problem though, He is a Perfectionist.... I told him I like the quality of this lens, dirt and all. Well, something got lost in the translation I guess. My heart sort of sunk as the flashlight revealed flawless clarity. ho humm :-( Then I happend to take a 15x loupe to a roll of Agfa APX25. YEOW? what's that? then some prints ... HollyMolly this little puppy is barking awful loud at the 50 Summicron..... It's shocking how sharp this lens is. How long this lens remains a sleeper is anyones guess.

-- Larry Welker (lwelker@turbont.net), August 29, 2001.

Actually, Leica is producing the lens right now - as the Anastigmat 2000 for the null-camera. I'd think it would be incredibly cheap and easy to crank out a few with screw/bayonet mounts - chrome, black paint, black chrome, whatever.

-- Andy Piper (apidens@denver.infi.net), August 29, 2001.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ