Is my Leitz 5cm 3.5 Elmar "DOOGS" a 4-element?

[chip j]

That's what it looks like compared to my original Focotar (which, I believe, has 6). Any hard info, anyone?

 

[Ronald Moravec]

I can only say my borrowed one was not as good as Focotar 4.5 version 1 which is made for 5x prints. 8x10 barely holds corners. Had 3 or 4, all the same

Schneider made a Leica version next. Looks like Focotar 1 but front element is twice as big. Really nice lens, flat field, useable at 4.5, makes big or small prints

Last was Focotar 2. Leitz design and curved field is back. Very contrasty and sharp, but I need to stop down to 5.6 or 8, 8 I think, to get things sharp across the field

Best results for portraits, focus on eyes. Landscape focus 1/3 from center to corner. Advised for both 1 & 2. Schneider does whatever you want with no screwing around.

I would avoid 3.5 or 4.5 version 1

 

[chip j]

Yes, thanks, I have them all. But the "DOOGS" is the SWEETEST lens I've ever looked through!

 

[chip j]

bump

 

[John Koehrer]

Identifying Leica lenses (1999) shows the only optical diagram for the 50/3.5 as one cemented pair and two individual elements. They also
write that there were several mechanical variants but none mention changes in formula. Nothing at all
about the focotars.

 

[chip j]

Thanks so much!

 

[Patrick Robert James]

I have an Elmar and while not sharp like a modern lens, it is a nice lens for printing portraits.

Quality is relative to what you are looking for.

 

[chip j]

I have all kinds of different 48-55mm enlarging lenses; I'm always on the look-out for another one, because they all have diff. Qualties.