Inexpensive LTM lenses

[Sanug]

I recently purchased a coated Leitz Elmar 4/9 cm from 1951. Incredible low price. It was easy to deassemble the lenses for cleaning. Very smooth focusing. I am very impressed about the image quality.

Canon 7s
Leitz Elmar 7/9 cm
Orwo NP100
Adox XT-3, 1+2, 12 Min.
Plustek Opticfilm 7300, Vuescan

 

[Arthurwg]

You need a 28, not a 35.

 

[Arthurwg]

The Elmar 7/9 is the best lens bargain on the planet.

 

[GregY]

The Canon 28mm 2.8 LTM is a gem. I hear the 3.5 is good too....

 

[Sanug]

With some of the Canon lenses you need to be careful when purchasing. They may have not removeable internal fog that has damaged the lenses.

 

[GregY]

With some of the Canon lenses you need to be careful when purchasing. They may have not removeable internal fog that has damaged the lenses.

Well that's true of some much newer Cosina Voigtlander lenses as well. like the now expensive 28mm 3.5 and the 35mm 2,5 Color Skopars

View attachment 408007

 

[chuckroast]

Well that's true of some much newer Cosina Voigtlander lenses as well. like the now expensive 28mm 3.5 and the 35mm 2,5 Color Skopars

Yep, I ran into one of those and had to return it. Apparently, the haze in question actually somehow etch the glass permanently.

I was fortunate to (eventually) find very clean versions of the 21mm f/4, 35mm f/2.5, and 50mm f/2.5 Color-Skopars that have the more modern contrast and rendering I prefer as compared to legacy Leica glass. That said, I still have a 50mm f/3.5 Collapsible Elmar and I sometimes miss 50mm f/2 Collapsible Summicron (which is definitely not inexepensive). All of these plug in nicely into my IIIf. The 21mm also gets used on my Ms with a finder.

I found this really reasonably priced 135mm f/4 Elmar that is most tempting. But: A) I don't know anything about the performance or look of this lens, having never used one and B) I don't know how much I'd actually use it. I do have two M bodies that have those framelines and the conversion ring to make it all work so ...

 

[blee1996]

I recently purchased a coated Leitz Elmar 4/9 cm from 1951. Incredible low price. It was easy to deassemble the lenses for cleaning. Very smooth focusing. I am very impressed about the image quality.

I feel the same way about Elmar 90/4: inexpensive and optically excellent. One of the best bargains in LTM lenses.

 

[Kodachromeguy]

I feel the same way about Elmar 90/4: inexpensive and optically excellent. One of the best bargains in LTM lenses.

The M version is also a bargain. It is impressive for a 4-element optic originally designed in the 1930s. Erwin Puts wrote that the 3-element version was a major improvement, but these 3-element Elmars have become cult items for collectors. Here is an example of the M 90mm ƒ/4 4-element version from Greece.

Salt, Messolonghi, western Greece. T400CN film, so rather grainy.

 

[GregY]

Yep, I ran into one of those and had to return it. Apparently, the haze in question actually somehow etch the glass permanently.

I was fortunate to (eventually) find very clean versions of the 21mm f/4, 35mm f/2.5, and 50mm f/2.5 Color-Skopars that have the more modern contrast and rendering I prefer as compared to legacy Leica glass. That said, I still have a 50mm f/3.5 Collapsible Elmar and I sometimes miss 50mm f/2 Collapsible Summicron (which is definitely not inexepensive). All of these plug in nicely into my IIIf. The 21mm also gets used on my Ms with a finder.

I found this really reasonably priced 135mm f/4 Elmar that is most tempting. But: A) I don't know anything about the performance or look of this lens, having never used one and B) I don't know how much I'd actually use it. I do have two M bodies that have those framelines and the conversion ring to make it all work so ...

Yep, I ran into one of those and had to return it. Apparently, the haze in question actually somehow etch the glass permanently.

I was fortunate to (eventually) find very clean versions of the 21mm f/4, 35mm f/2.5, and 50mm f/2.5 Color-Skopars that have the more modern contrast and rendering I prefer as compared to legacy Leica glass. That said, I still have a 50mm f/3.5 Collapsible Elmar and I sometimes miss 50mm f/2 Collapsible Summicron (which is definitely not inexepensive). All of these plug in nicely into my IIIf. The 21mm also gets used on my Ms with a finder.

I found this really reasonably priced 135mm f/4 Elmar that is most tempting. But: A) I don't know anything about the performance or look of this lens, having never used one and B) I don't know how much I'd actually use it. I do have two M bodies that have those framelines and the conversion ring to make it all work so ...

CR is the 135mm a focal length you're fond of? I always found it too long for portraits and too squinty in the finder for landscapes. The 90mm is a gem IMO....although i only have the M version & don't even use that one much. (for me a 50mm is a short tele.....)

 

[chuckroast]

CR is the 135mm a focal length you're fond of? I always found it too long for portraits and too squinty in the finder for landscapes. The 90mm is a gem IMO....although i only have the M version & don't even use that one much. (for me a 50mm is a short tele.....)

Not really, which is why I didn't buy it. I do I have a 135mm f/2.8 AIS Nikkor should I be so moved.

I do own a 90mm f/2.8 Elmarit-M, though, which I do very much enjoy.

 

[M. Axel Wikstrom]

Should be able to find a Summaron 35mm lens for $300 or so, which is pretty reasonable for Leica glass.

 

[Petrochemist]

Should be able to find a Summaron 35mm lens for $300 or so, which is pretty reasonable for Leica glass.

Not bad for Leica glass, but IMO not even remotely 'inexpensive'.
All my LTM lenses have been <£100.

 

[Arthurwg]

Not bad for Leica glass, but IMO not even remotely 'inexpensive'.
All my LTM lenses have been <£100.

You must have bought them a while ago.

 

[aw614]

I've picked up your typical Canon and Nikon 50mm LTM under 120usd in decent enough shape to use.

Other pickups in similar to lower price range looking around were the Canon 85mm F2.0 and 35mm F2.8. Both needed some work to get working right, but have been solid to me. The 85mm had cleanable fungus, and the 35mm, whoever had it didn't install it correctly.

The most impractical ltm lens I bought was a Komura 200mm F4.5 for 30 dollars at an antique shop

These were purchased within the last 3 or so years on ebay, reddit, etc.

 

[Petrochemist]

You must have bought them a while ago.

All in the last 10 years, the most recent (Industar 26-M 52mm/2.8) came with a FED 3 body at a car boot sale for £25 back in April.

The most expensive £79 was a Canon 100mm/3.5 from a camera store in November 2022 and the cheapest a FED retractable 50mm f/3.5 (Industar 10) from another car boot in Feb 2023 for the mighty sum of 50p (a lucky find in among some plumbing bits, it did need a severe clean).
With the exception of the Canon & a Kyoei Optical Co. Super-Acoll 135mm f/3.5 (£50) all have been under £25.

 

[GregY]

Should be able to find a Summaron 35mm lens for $300 or so, which is pretty reasonable for Leica glass.

Haven't seen one at that low price for a long time.

 

[M. Axel Wikstrom]

Not bad for Leica glass, but IMO not even remotely 'inexpensive'.
All my LTM lenses have been <£100.

I basically got one for free six months ago. Paid $300 for an almost mint iiif and attached to it was a Summaron with the proper hood. Local Craigslist sale. Now I have two; should probably sell one.

 

[chuckroast]

I basically got one for free six months ago. Paid $300 for an almost mint iiif and attached to it was a Summaron with the proper hood. Local Craigslist sale. Now I have two; should probably sell one.

If you got it for free, I am willing to reimburse you that $Free to take possession of the lens. I'll even pay the shipping and insurance. That's the kinda guy I am ;P

 

[GregY]

I basically got one for free six months ago. Paid $300 for an almost mint iiif and attached to it was a Summaron with the proper hood. Local Craigslist sale. Now I have two; should probably sell one.

well that was a gift!

 

[chuckroast]

How do we feel about the 135mm Canon LTM lenses? I am thinking I might not be able to live without one...

 

[Kodachromeguy]

How do we feel about the 135mm Canon LTM lenses? I am thinking I might not be able to live without one...

They are very good lenses if without haze or fungus. The later black and chrome models came in a two-part case with lens on the bottom and viewfinder in the top.

 

[M. Axel Wikstrom]

If you got it for free, I am willing to reimburse you that $Free to take possession of the lens. I'll even pay the shipping and insurance. That's the kinda guy I am ;P

I’ll sell it for $350 plus shipping, no hood

 

[chuckroast]

I’ll sell it for $350 plus shipping, no hood

Quite reasonable but not currently in my must-get-now list

 

[darinwc]

I think its disingenuous to recommend a $300+ lens as "inexpensive" because you were lucky and bought it for peanuts.

How much time did you spend scanning craiglist or wandering local markets? Put that time into money. One could easily work some extra temp jobs for a weekend and just buy whatever they want,