LTM collapsible advice

[msbarnes]

I'm looking for a collapsible 50mm, or maybe two because I can't decide between size and speed.

small/compact lens (f3.5)
Leica 50mm f3.5 Elmar
Cosina 50mm f3.5 Heliar

larger/faster lens (f2)
Leica 50mm Summitar
Leica 50mm Summicron
Cosina 50mm Heliar

Questions
1. There are a few ltm elmars, which ones had 39mm filter threads? just the f2.8?
2. Are the Cosina lenses 39mm filter threads, i would think so, but I want to make sure.
3. Anyone have a size compaarison of these lenses? I'm not sure how the Heliar (slow and fast variants) stacks up against the Elmar /Summicron in terms of size.

 

[msbarnes]

to the moderator, I realized that this might be more appropriate in the rangefinder thread so feel free to move this there.

 

[250swb]

To give you an idea of the Leica lenses the collapsed distance it sticks out the front of the camera, minus lens caps or filters is

3.5 Elmar 12mm
2.8 Elmar 21mm
2.0 Summitar 24mm

I'm not sure about the LTM Summicron but would assume it will be about the same as the Summitar. You can get an adapter so the Summitar can take 39mm filters, and I think you can get a slip on adapter to take 39mm filters for the 3.5 Elmar.

Steve

 

[Jim Jones]

My collapsing Summicron extends 27mm from the front of the camera. It was a much used lense for many years. Tests suggest the 2.8 Elmar is even sharper.

 

[darkosaric]

I would say go for one lens - compromise between size and speed: elmar 2.8.

 

[msbarnes]

That is my current thinking.

I feel that it is better to go 50mm f3.5 Elmar (for size) and 50mm f2.0 Summicron (speed/performance) or just compromise with a 50mm f2.0 Summitar or 50mm f2.8 Elmar. But the purpose of a collapsible is to be compact, the the Elmar might win, and it is easier to deal with filter-wise (39mm, i believe?)

 

[250swb]

Yes the 2.8 Elmar takes 39mm filters, and it is a better lens than the Summitar overall. But the Summitar is popular because of its rendering, a glow wide open, sharp stopped down, and a curious bokeh that some like and others don't.

Steve

 

[georg16nik]

Summitar got noticeable comma up until ƒ/5,6, collapsible Summicron is a bit better, I am talking about good samples not dog lenses.
The Elmar ƒ/2,8 is very interesting lens but LTM Elmar ƒ/3,5 got unique rendering due to diaphragm position after the the 1st element and other optical specifics, also a much smaller lens than anything 50mm Leica.

 

[darkosaric]

LTM Elmar ƒ/3,5 got unique rendering due to diaphragm position after the the 1st element and other optical specifics

Hi Georg,

Are those unique characteristic also valid for Industar-22 lens? They have same diaphragm position?

tnx

 

[georg16nik]

Hi Georg,

Are those unique characteristic also valid for Industar-22 lens? They have same diaphragm position?

tnx

Industar 22 diaphragm is located before the rear group and the glass is different from Elmar LTM.

Leica relocated the diaphragm later in Elmar ƒ/2,8 and changed the glass.
The black Elmar ƒ/2,8 M is supposedly the most fine tuned Elmar derivative.

 

[jochen]

only the last versions of the 3,5 and 2,8 Elmar had an E 39 thread. The Summitar was an uncoated pre war lens that was continued after the war until in 1953 the collapsible Summiron was presented but with coating and the number of diaphragm segments was reduced from 9 to 6. The front lens was made of a rather soft glass and therefore many Summitars have a scratched front lens. The sharpness is good in the middle but falls down noticeably to the corners. The lens is more susceptible to flare than the Summicron, lens shades are very rare and expensive. The 2,8 Elmar is only hardly better than the 3,5 but due to the use of rare earth glass the speed could be increased by 1/2 stop. The resolution of the collapsible 7 lens-Summicron (it is not identical to the rigid) is better than the Elmar and the Summitar, the best stop is 5,6. With all old collapsible lenses you can have the problem that the mechanical mount is worn and wobbly and the parallelity and the register of the lens is no longer guaranteed. If you forget to pull it out or you don't bolt it correctly, you don't get a sharp picture!

 

[darkosaric]

I have just find one link that could be useful in this discussion, probably most of you know this site already. It is on Italian, but anyhow:

http://www.marcocavina.com/articoli_fotografici/50mm_Leica_a_telemetro/00_pag.htm

 

[msbarnes]

I have just find one link that could be useful in this discussion, probably most of you know this site already. It is on Italian, but anyhow:

http://www.marcocavina.com/articoli_fotografici/50mm_Leica_a_telemetro/00_pag.htm

Never seen that website but thanks for sharing.

Thank goodness for google translate.

 

[Newt_on_Swings]

depending on your body, some collapsible lenses may not be compatible and have to be either always extended, or have the barrel taped to prevent it from fully collapsing.

 

[jochen]

the restrictions for use of collapsible lenses refer to the Leica M 5 and the Leica CL only. These body have the measuring cell on a swinging arm which swings into the space between the lens and the shutter. If the lens is collapsed and you try to measure the ligt, the arm could be damaged. In the M 6 and upward the collapsed lens (or a Super Abgulon or first type of 28 mm) only shades the exposure measuring cell.

 

[darkosaric]

The Elmar ƒ/2,8 is very interesting lens but LTM Elmar ƒ/3,5 got unique rendering due to diaphragm position after the the 1st element and other optical specifics, also a much smaller lens than anything 50mm Leica.

Sorry to bugging you with details Georg , but what about M mount 3.5 version? More similar to 2.8 or LTM in rendering and character?

 

[georg16nik]

Hi Darko,
I haven't shot with the ƒ/3,5 M Elmar, it might be identical to the ƒ/3,5 LTM Elmar made around the same time during the 50's.
You are having a second thoughts about the M ƒ/2,8 You wanted? You can always go Zeiss Sonnar ƒ/1,5 way

 

[darkosaric]

Hi Darko,
I haven't shot with the ƒ/3,5 M Elmar, it might be identical to the ƒ/3,5 LTM Elmar made around the same time during the 50's.
You are having a second thoughts about the M ƒ/2,8 You wanted? You can always go Zeiss Sonnar ƒ/1,5 way

Well, guy who was selling me black elmar f2.8 changed his mind. So yesterday I was going thru ebay and I saw some nice not too expensive summar. While looking on summar - it was gone, purchased :\ ! Then I went on Meister Leica Camera Hamburg shop, and while looking on another summar - it was gone - reserved and purchased !

So today I was fed up: I decided to get myself Xmass present today - and elmar 50mm f3.5 M mount is on his way.

 

[georg16nik]

Great! it was meant for You to get the ƒ/3,5.

 

[darkosaric]

Here it is! Elmar-M fits M3 perfectly, much better that elmar-C or summicron 50 type 3. This weekend I go with HP5+ to make some test. Life is good

 

[georg16nik]

Here it is! Elmar-M fits M3 perfectly, much better that elmar-C or summicron 50 type 3. This weekend I go with HP5+ to make some test. Life is good

View attachment 61224

Congratulations!

Looks like the diaphragm is positioned after the front element like in the LTM Elmar.

 

[darkosaric]

Congratulations!

Looks like the diaphragm is positioned after the front element like in the LTM Elmar.

Thanks Georg. Yes, it is after the front element. So optically it is same Elmar as original, only in more modern package that take 39mm filters.