Lens for first ltm Leica what I'm looking for

[GregY]

I have experienced the viewfinder encroachment on the Zorki S, should be about the same given the viewfinder placement is almost the same. I BELIEVE (and I’ll be careful not to scratch anything) that unlike the Zorki, the Leica can mount a Voigtländer Kontur 50mm action finder, which I greatly prefer to a small viewfinder. And then the early I-26M I have has the narrow focus ring which makes the encroachment bearable.

When compactness is at issue I think I’d run it with my banged up old I-22 until such a time as I can get a collapsible Canon or the collapsible Elmar.

I'm a big fan of the uncluttered view of the accessory viewfinders. I use mine on my CL, M & IIIg (now that the iiif is gone)

 

[Elmarc]

I have experienced the viewfinder encroachment on the Zorki S, should be about the same given the viewfinder placement is almost the same. I BELIEVE (and I’ll be careful not to scratch anything) that unlike the Zorki, the Leica can mount a Voigtländer Kontur 50mm action finder, which I greatly prefer to a small viewfinder. And then the early I-26M I have has the narrow focus ring which makes the encroachment bearable.

When compactness is at issue I think I’d run it with my banged up old I-22 until such a time as I can get a collapsible Canon or the collapsible Elmar.

I did not realise you already had the Industar 1-22 50. I'm sure that will serve you just as well on the Leica.

 

[RLangham]

I did not realise you already had the Industar 1-22 50. I'm sure that will serve you just as well on the Leica.

I do want to get another collapsible lens eventually for two reasons. First, putting a Soviet lens on a Leica immediately makes it look like a counterfeit. Secondly my I-22 was almost free because it’s missing both the stop pins and the infinity lock, and has really unsmooth focusing action.

That being said I’m looking at the lenses I bond with and I don’t know what the pattern is other than that they’re all pre-1960. Industars which are just Tessars, Nikon Auto Nikkor-S 5cm f:2, Argus Coated Cintar which is also modified Tessar… Cassar-S which I think is just a triplet… Steinheil Auto Quinaron 35mm…

I can’t help but think I might really fall in love with an Elmar, probably the coated version. But god I wish Zeiss Jena lenses weren’t so expensive, I always like those.

 

[GregY]

I do want to get another collapsible lens eventually for two reasons. First, putting a Soviet lens on a Leica immediately makes it look like a counterfeit. Secondly my I-22 was almost free because it’s missing both the stop pins and the infinity lock, and has really unsmooth focusing action.

That being said I’m looking at the lenses I bond with and I don’t know what the pattern is other than that they’re all pre-1960. Industars which are just Tessars, Nikon Auto Nikkor-S 5cm f:2, Argus Coated Cintar which is also modified Tessar… Cassar-S which I think is just a triplet… Steinheil Auto Quinaron 35mm…

I can’t help but think I might really fall in love with an Elmar, probably the coated version. But god I wish Zeiss Jena lenses weren’t so expensive, I always like those.

RL, my experience with the early 3.5cm & 5.0 Elmars tells me the coating isn't that important.... they're terrifc lenses....

 

[RLangham]

RL, my experience with the early 3.5cm & 5.0 Elmars tells me the coating isn't that important.... they're terrifc lenses....

I’m not worried much about flare but don’t you lose contrast with no coating?

 

[GregY]

I’m not worried much about flare but don’t you lose contrast with no coating?

that has not been my experience with lenses of this era.

 

[RLangham]

The camera was delivered today. I see why I got a bargain on it, someone put a replacement leatherette on it with, shall we say, more enthusiasm than finesse: some glue is visible on, for instance, the strap lugs; the seller also thought the long speeds were inaccurate but they seem to be well within a half stop to me. Curtains don't look 80+ years old so I assume they were replaced at some point; clearly has been CLA'd in the last twenty years but probably needs it again soon.

But all that notwithstanding, I really like it, I think a lot of the hype is actually deserved.

From where I stand I think eventually I'll want a Summitar or something of that nature, but in the mean-time instead of shelling out for another normal when I have an I-22 and I-26m that I already like on character, I'll go for a Canon 35mm. Now, unfortunately my 35mm/80mm parallax corrected finder collides with the shutter speed dial, so I'll have to pick up a finder, but honestly the Leitz universal finders aren't that expensive.

Now can anyone tell me why the collar around the shutter release spins with the shutter?

 

[Don_ih]

Now can anyone tell me why the collar around the shutter release spins with the shutter?

Your shutter button should turn when you advance the film, since it's physically tied to the shutter actuation. When you press it down, it releases that to allow the springs to operate the shutter. The collar shouldn't move when the shutter releases, even though it will rotate when you advance the film.

 

[RLangham]

Your shutter button should turn when you advance the film, since it's physically tied to the shutter actuation. When you press it down, it releases that to allow the springs to operate the shutter. The collar shouldn't move when the shutter releases, even though it will rotate when you advance the film.

Yes, sorry, I phrased that poorly, it spins when winding, not releasing, as you say.

Still, seems odd to me that the threads that hold the collar (and so the collar, where present) spin with the button. Seems like an inconvenience when using the Leitz-style cable releases, since the entire cable would twist as you wind on. Briefly I entertained the notion that this is how you would recock for a double exposure, except that it also (tries to) wind the film if you twist it, and as the IIIf manual says: double exposures are not possible.

I suppose having the collar and threads rotate in lockstep with the button is a protective measure so that the thin shutter release rod isn't worn down by rotating inside the collar; instead the mechanical wear is distributed over a larger bearing surface. I dunno, still weird. I'm just glad mine has the original-style collar and not that big conical thing (made for winter gloves?)

I need to scour the Leica information thread pinned in this forum to see if anyone has a good link to the IIIb manual. Butkus seems to have no manual for the early III series.

 

[Don_ih]

The likelihood is they never considered the cable. If they did, they expected the cable would be short (most were). The threads turn because that entire thing is the drive sprocket for the film. The camera wasn't made for double exposures. (I've heard some people suggest turning the shutter speed dial after the shutter has been released, without pulling it up, as a way to recock the shutter - the mechanism was not made for that, though, so I'd call that a bad idea.) It's amazing you have a shutter-button collar at all - and it may not be original.

There, apparently, was no manual for the IIIb - just an outline of how it was different from the IIIa.

There's interesting stuff at the Pacific Rim Reference Library - but no IIIb info.