Collapsible screwmounts.

[Stephanie Brim]

I'd like one. I'm thinking about the Canon 50/1.9, but it may be slightly (or really, really, really) over my 'budget' since I'm trying to save for an M and the CV 35/1.2. The prices I've seen for them lately are over the auction prices of a Summicron collapsible.

So, the question. How are the Elmars? Should I consider a Summitar? If I went Leica it would be my first...and my most expensive lens. I know that the FSU clones are pretty good as well when you get a good one, but I don't know if I'd want to take a chance on the auction site for that.

Any comments would be appreciated, thanks.

 

[srs5694]

I've got a FED 2 with a collapsible lens. The lens's model number isn't clearly marked, but I'm sure the possibilities are limited. Concerning its quality, I can't say much. I've shot with this lens, but not a lot so far. My early impression is that it's a bit softer than many other lenses, but not in an unpleasant way; it just produces photos with a more old-fashioned feel.

One thing to consider concerning FSU lenses is that their prices are so low that you can afford to take more of a gamble -- buy three or four and at least one's likely to be good (at least, in terms of fungus, scratches, focusing stiffness, etc.), and the total cost might not be more than you'd pay for a single sample from a higher-status brand. OTOH, if you want Leica quality, you're not likely to find it in FSU gear.

 

[Ole]

Stephanie,

I have a big stack of collapsible FSU lenses. I'll give you one to try. Either an I-22, a I-50 or a FED lens - they're all 50mm f:3.5. I'll see which decent one I can find when I get home next week.

 

[Stephanie Brim]

Awesome, Ole. You saying you had a bunch was what got me thinking about it again, actually. I'm also debating whether or not waiting and getting one next year when I get an M2. Decisions decisions.

 

[David H. Bebbington]

So, the question. How are the Elmars? Should I consider a Summitar? If I went Leica it would be my first...and my most expensive lens. I know that the FSU clones are pretty good as well when you get a good one ...

Like others, I never got a 50 mm FSU lens that I liked - on the other hand, I've had 2 135 mm Russian lenses and they were both good.

Summitar - having owned the 2 lenses either side of the Summitar (Summar and Summicron), I can't help but regard it as a transitional design - the coated version is definitely preferable, still has a lot of tendency to flare by modern standards, but is sharp and has quite a flat field by the time it's closed down 2 stops. The original Leica lens hood for the Summitar is a hoot (and shows how little faith Leitz had in their flare suppression) - it's huge and collapsible!

The Elmar is a great classic - I enjoy playing with an uncoated 50 mm f3.5 from time to time.The f2.8 I think is only worth considering if you feel you must have a collapsible lens - it has the design oddity that the iris diaphragm is placed (IIRC) between the first and second elements. Store your Leica and f2.8 Elmar lovingly in a drawer for any length of time lying on its back and oil vapor will condense onto the back of the front element - leave it too long and the glass will be pitted and beyond saving. I did have a mint-condition coated f3.5 Elmar once - very disappointed in the performance, spent money having it checked, the verdict was it was in as-new condition but ahd never been any good! It is worth bearing in mind that people scrutinise Leica pictures much harder now that they did, certainly before the war - the original owner of this lens (which was immediately post-war) may have used it for years, made 5x7" prints from the negs and thought the results were great.

I have just bought a 50 mm Summicron mark II and am looking forward to this - Summicron mark I was a nice lens, lower contrast than today's lenses, but I think Japanese collectors have bought every worthwhile example on the face of the earth! If I hadn't got this lens, I think I would have bought a CV f2.5 Color-Skopar. The choice is frightening!

Regards,

David

 

[desertrat]

FSU Lenses

You may be pleasantly suprised by the FSU lens you get from Ole. I have an I-22 and an I-50. I think they're sharp. I showed photos taken with the I-22, along with the lens and zorki-1 camera to a researcher where I used to work. He was born in Germany and a Leica collector. He marveled at the sharpness of the images and said, "Almost as good as an Elmar." Big praise from a proud Leica collector. As for the camera itself and the lens, "Not too shabby." The following year I showed photos taken with an I-50 to a coworker who had photographed professionally in a previous career. She was also impressed with the quality of the images. I believe the build quality of Khruschev era FEDs and Zorkis was better than some of the later models. I also think lenses from that period were more carefully adjusted at the factory - I didn't have to do any adjusting to my I-22 or I-50. All my later lenses were overunning infinity and I had to adjust them out. But they were sharp after that. Let us know how you feel about the lens!

 

[df cardwell]

Stephanie

WHAT do you want the lens to do for you ? Is there a period 'look' you want to reproduce ? Without some kind of context, there is no way to answer any question about " is it good " ?

SO, what do you like already ? Pin some things down, and the rest takes care of itself.

 

[Stephanie Brim]

Not looking for any specific look...I just want a collapsible with a decent sharpness and smooth bokeh. It's more that I want one to put on the camera when I'm going out in the daytime and I need the whole thing to be pocketable.

 

[Gerald Koch]

What camera body would you put the collapsable on? The reason I ask is that they cannot be used with the Cosina Voigtlander bodies as they will hit the shutter when collapsed.

 

[David H. Bebbington]

What camera body would you put the collapsable on? The reason I ask is that they cannot be used with the Cosina Voigtlander bodies as they will hit the shutter when collapsed.

Not sure about this - I have a Bessa L with a pre-war collapsible 50 mm Elmar on it, have even fired the shutter accidentally with the lens pushed in - no damage!

Regards,

David

 

[Lee L]

The C/V Bessa L, T, R2, and R3A bodies have cylindrical rebates in the top and bottom of the chamber that safely stop my 50mm Summitar before it goes deep enough to contact the shutters.

Lee

 

[Ole]

I haven't had any problems with any of my collapsibles (I-22, I-50 or FED) on the Bessa-L. Except for the lack of a rangefinder, of course...

 

[Helen B]

Stephanie,

Why not save your money for the M2 and a Canadian pre-asph 35 mm 'lux instead of the CV? The pre-asph 'lux is tiny, and it's not a bad lens. Though not as bitingly sharp, I think that it is better against the light than the current asph, but I haven't compared it to the CV f/1.2.

Best,
Helen

 

[Gerald Koch]

Camera Quest, which is the US distributer, has a warning on their website about using collapsibles.

 

[Stephanie Brim]

I want the speed.

In the winter my friends and I go to hockey games and then to the bar afterward. The speed of the lens will serve me well here...it's true that even a little bit more speed can help when shooting in very low light. The CV, even wide open, is pretty sharp. It's a great piece of glass.

 

[Stephanie Brim]

Camera Quest, which is the US distributer, has a warning on their website about using collapsibles.

Let me use this oportunity to clarify.

Mr. Gandy says to be careful when collapsing lenses on a CV body. He doesn't say implicitly not to use them. However, I believe there are a few that shouldn't be used because they collapse too deeply. Also, I do not have a Bessa. I have a Canon P. Just in case people were confused about my current kit standings.

 

[df cardwell]

Stephanie,

Why not save your money for the M2 and a Canadian pre-asph 35 mm 'lux instead of the CV? edit ....

By all means do what you want.

But CONSIDER the chance the old Summilux might be superior to the CV 35/1.2.

Erwin Puts wrote an assesment of the f/1.2 that pretty much nails all the issues: http://www.imx.nl/photosite/japan/voigt1235.html

The CV is a good lens. But there ARE better.

 

[Lee L]

Camera Quest, which is the US distributer, has a warning on their website about using collapsibles.

Gerald,

Here's a link: http://www.cameraquest.com/voigtBR2.htm for those interested. It's more of a warning to exercise appropriate caution and care than a warning not to use collapsible lenses at all. That's why I was specific about lens and bodies in my earlier post. As Stephen says, though, there are variations within lens models, so you need to go carefully with any new combination.

Lee

 

[Stephanie Brim]

By all means do what you want.

But CONSIDER the chance the old Summilux might be superior to the CV 35/1.2.

Erwin Puts wrote an assesment of the f/1.2 that pretty much nails all the issues: http://www.imx.nl/photosite/japan/voigt1235.html

The CV is a good lens. But there ARE better.

It's not that I don't respect Puts. I do. I go to his website when I'm specifically looking for Leica lenses. I do not go to his website when I'm not. I'm not saying that he doesn't give good advice, but I don't really care so much about small issues. I've seen photos that come from the CV 35/1.2 and I love them. That's really all I need to know. I love the bokeh, the sharpness, the extremely shallow DOF...everything. It's my dream lens.

Well, okay. A Noctilux would be my dream lens. I know I'll never get my hands on one of those, though.

 

[df cardwell]

Stephanie: good, go for it

( but if a Summilux falls to your feet, just don't step on it... )

 

[rfshootist]

I'd like one. I
Any comments would be appreciated, thanks.

One of the best ever built, if not THE best of all is the CV Heliar 3,5/50, Mr K. stopped the production because, as he said, the build costs were too high for the price.
Only prob: Mostly a T sticks at it's rear end . Worth the money anyway.

Bertram