Hi there, I’ve been given a bunch of gear and included is a Leitz Elmar 50mm 3.5 lens for a Leica Barnack style camera. I don’t own one of these Leicas and I’d love to see this lens. Are there any cheap Russian cameras that I could buy and mount this lens on? Or is the Leica screw thread specific to Leicas only?
Sure, will fit any of the LTM cameras.Oh awesome, thanks for the replies everyone.
So would a Canon VT be appropriate?
Oh awesome, thanks for the replies everyone.
So would a Canon VT be appropriate?
Why not the Vt's. I don't mind using the Vt, easy to hold camera and wind and focus with left hand and shutter release with the right. The L winds are ok as well, both more convenient for winding than the Barnack style, but they are smaller and lighter.Yup but as someone who owns a VT and also an L1, L2 and a L3 I much prefer the L lever wind series.
To my knowledge there was no disassembly at/of the Leica plant at all, let alone to the USSR.What everyone says about the focus calibration on Russian m39 cameras is true up to a point. Some of the early Russian rangefinder were direct clones of the Barnack Leica made from genuine Leica plans and tooling taken as reparation after WWII. They might have more Leica-like calibration.
Then plans, at least. The early FEDs were slightly modified copies of one of the Leica II series, close enough that I've seen people use Elmars on an early FED body.
I know the Contax toolings and plans were given to the Soviets, to the extent that the better Asenal products were comparable with their Contax originals... I assumed it was a similar case, but less drastic with Leica.
Wetzlar is solidly on the West (non-USSR) side of Germany.
there is the little matter of 39mm diamete being equal, but leica used inches when measuring threads where Canonn used metric measiures. In the distant past, I used a canon 35mm lens on my Leica IIIg, and a leica 50mm summicron collapsible on canon VI, but not without forcing when mounting. Not recommended.
p.
Where did you read this information about the Japanese cameras using a different threading standard than the LTM? I have never seen any reference to the Japanese thread mount cameras using a different threading standard than the genuine Leica LTM nor read anyone else note this difference (with one exception - see below). My 1960s or maybe 1970s Canon 50mm ƒ1.4 lens mounts and focuses perfectly on my 1949 Leica IIIC.there is the little matter of 39mm diamete being equal, but leica used inches when measuring threads where Canonn used metric measiures. In the distant past, I used a canon 35mm lens on my Leica IIIg, and a leica 50mm summicron collapsible on canon VI, but not without forcing when mounting. Not recommended.
p.
there is the little matter of 39mm diamete being equal, but leica used inches when measuring threads where Canonn used metric measiures. In the distant past, I used a canon 35mm lens on my Leica IIIg, and a leica 50mm summicron collapsible on canon VI, but not without forcing when mounting. Not recommended.
p.
You know... I feel like I have to defend the FSU cameras a little. A lot of them were very well made at the time--it's just that most of them don't get CLA'd. If you buy a Leica a CLA seems like a small and worthwhile expense. Not so for a FED 2 you spent 20 bucks on. Judging a camera that's never been CLA'd against a family of cameras that are probably some of the most commonly CLA'd is a little unfair. Now obviously the engineering and workmanship is better on the Leicas, because it was literally some of the best work done in the camera world ever.... but most FSU cameras, especially in the old days, were pretty well-done on their own terms.We have rangefinders sub forum here.
FSU cameras are nice decor.
If you want direct Leica copy which works buy Nicca.
Direct Elmar 50 3.5 copy is industar-10, fed 50 3.5. On exterior. Optics are not Leitz quality.
comment no 14 above asks where I had somethread infor from. Peter Decherts book on Canon angefinder cameras page 14 liste the early canon mount as 1,1mm pitch and leitz as 0,977 and state that canon ater tried to standardize on the German thread, but that some oldr nikon and canon LTM lenses will not mount properly on leicas and canons made after 1952. I may well be mistaken ad threading difficukties,that could be due to fumbling on my part, but Dechert notes that the japanese threads "had so much inherent slop´´ that they could be fitted to both J and Leica threads".
p.
Chris, he is referring to the pre-1952 (or older) Japanese lenses. These are the ones I described above, ""The Leica mount is precisely M39 × 1/26" — i.e. 39mm diameter and 26 threads per inch — with 28.8mm film-to-flange distance and rangefinder coupling. Very early Canon (J mount) used an incompatible M39 × 1/24" screw mount, 39mm in diameter but with 24 threads per inch.[1]" 1/24 equals 1.058mm, so that would be the 1.1mm pitch in Decherts' book.I have two Leica screwmount bodies. A IIIc that was converted to IIIf, and a IIIf Red Dial. I have four Canon lenses and three Leica lenses and all work perfectly. The canon lenses mount flawlessly. No slop, no forcing needed, focus is spot on perfect.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?