 |
 | Search this Thread |
| 05-16-2010, 06:49 AM | #1 |
| Are any of these Leica lenses actually anything to use? | |
| 05-16-2010, 07:10 AM | #2 |
 Originally posted by Ken Rockwell: LEICA ELMAR-C 90mm f/4 1973-1978, 39 x 0.75mm filters, 246g. 11 540; includes 12 517 hood and 14 543 pouch. This compact 90mm lens came out for use with the LEICA CL. It works fine on other Leicas, especially the M7 and M9 with which I've used it. Focus is just fine. Watch the filter thread: it's not a standard 39x 0.5mm thread. Leica intends for this to be used with nonexistent series 5.5 filters held in place by the dedicated threaded hood. The lens' threads are the same diameter, but too coarse to receive standard filters. I use regular 39mm filters, but I only screw them in to where they first stop. Force them and you destroy everything. This lens sells used for only about $100. Performance is swell, but watch for some obvious falloff (darkening) in the corners at f/4, gone by f/8. Bokeh is neutral to good. I prefer the 90mm f/2.8 TELE-ELMARIT-M since it weighs slightly less with similar size and a stop extra speed, but if you're short on brains and cash, this is a great lens. (the crack about being short on brains means that you should never cheap-out on lenses, since they are a far better investment than cameras.)  Originally posted by Ken Rockwell: LEICA TELE-ELMAR 135mm f/4 1965-1990, 39mm filters, 505g. 11 851. This lens has the same optics as the TELE-ELMAR-M above, but in a smaller, lighter package. Leica updated the styling to improve sales, therefore, this older lens is a top pick for fabulous optics in a smaller, lighter package for less money. Originally posted by Ken Rockwell: LEICA SUMMICRON 35mm f/2 1958-1969, 39mm filters, 238g, 8-elements. 11 108 as shown (11 104 in black). 11 308 without M3 auxiliary finder optics (11 307 Z in black). 11 008 in screw mount. A stellar performer even today, and priced to match. Even with the auxiliary finder optics shown, weighs less than today's ASPH version and performs as well, with even less distortion. Sounds like that one may be decent? Why the **** can't I find the camera? =P Not likely, I remember back then that I noticed it was fast but eventually not this fast ;D Originally posted by Ken Rockwell: LEICA NOCTILUX 50mm f/1.2 1966-1975, Series VIII filters, 470-515g. 11 820. Spare hood: 12 503. These sell for about $5,000 used, but don't appear that often. They are the world's first mass-produced aspherical lens, with two hand-ground aspherical surfaces. Originally posted by Ken Rockwell: LEICA SUMMICRON 50mm f/2 1969-1979, 39mm filters, 200g. 11 817. This is the third optical iteration of Leica's 50mm f/2 SUMMICRON, with six elements. It is one optical version before today's SUMMICRON-M optical design. Its street name is "type 3." You could not go wrong with this lens as your only Leica lens, for only about $400 used. Its performance is similar to the previous 1957-1968 SUMMICRON, with more contrast in exchange for a little less resolution. Dollar for dollar, Leica's best 50mm f/2 lens, but Leica has never been about price. Rigid. With near-focusing range (shown without viewfinder attachment, in normal range). LEICA SUMMICRON 50mm f/2 1956-1968: all take 39mm filters. This SUMMICRON has similar, but superior, optics to the first version. It came in screw and bayonet mounts, and the bayonet mount version came in two focus-mount versions: 1956- : Rigid screw mount, meters: SOSTA or 11 518. 1960-1963: Rigid screw mount, feet: 11 018 (rare). 1956-1968: Rigid bayonet mount, 251g, SOSIC or 11 818. 1956-1968: Rigid bayonet mount with near-focusing range (to 478mm), 339g + 52g finder attachment, SOMNI or 11 918. (Achtung:This special lens works perfectly on all Leica M cameras from M1 through M7, but an internal obstruction in the M9 prevents this version from focusing beyond 4 meters on the M9.) The street name for both these SUMMICRONS is "type 2." The street name for the 50mm SUMMICRON f/2 version with near-focusing range is "dual-range," or "DR," and the standard rigid lens is called "Rigid." These are superior lenses, and are usually in good shape when found used. Last edited by aliquis; 05-16-2010 at 07:15 AM. | |
| 05-17-2010, 06:02 AM | #3 |
| 05-17-2010, 08:31 AM | #4 |
|
Not worth anything?  it's all relative, think of what Pentax glass can be had for $150-225Also, the M series of Leicas are one of the all time camera classics, period. Personally, if I was lucky enough to have the equipment you describe, I wouldn't need anything else. ps. Here's an appreciation of the Leica, very infectious: A Critic at Large: Candid Camera : The New Yorker pps. you need to get past Rockwell, here's something a little bit better:http://www.cameraquest.com/classics.htm Last edited by Nesster; 05-17-2010 at 08:36 AM. | |
| 05-17-2010, 09:15 AM | #5 |
Originally posted by Nesster  Not worth anything? it's all relative, think of what Pentax glass can be had for $150-225Also, the M series of Leicas are one of the all time camera classics, period. Personally, if I was lucky enough to have the equipment you describe, I wouldn't need anything else. ps. Here's an appreciation of the Leica, very infectious: A Critic at Large: Candid Camera : The New Yorker pps. you need to get past Rockwell, here's something a little bit better:http://www.cameraquest.com/classics.htm The 90 one was very low valued and the 135 pretty low to, and I assume there may be a reason for that. I have looked around for a few hours now and read some about the voigtlander nokton lenses and such, seem like more performance for the money spent so to speak. This was a little fun: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/fastlensreview.shtml The Zeiss Biogon 35/2 was very sharp at the other ends compared to the others while others where more uneven but sharper in the middle. Anyway the Canons get pretty owned .. On the other hand I've read that sharpness is pretty uninteresting since people won't shoot in a way which gives 100% sharpness anyway and I guess using APS-C sensors some of the unsharpness of the other lenses vs the biogon, or the benefit of the biogon, will be gone since the other edges won't be used anyway ... And looking at a whole image I think color amounts and contrast is way easier to notice than sharpness, I guess especially against sun-light and such. It's my grandfathers equipment which my dad herritated inherit back in 85 or something. My grandfather had a big photo interest and I know there's plenty of old photographic journals, books and magasines around to. My dad appreciated the gear and it's value but I know there was something wrong with the meter or something and he never fixed that so he bought some cheap "automatic" film camera and where so happy with that instead .. Which seem pretty boring. Anyway I know he had asked some retailer for the value of the items at some time but I had no idea what it was or how it would look/be now. My dad died in alzheimers (or well, rather in pneumonia + allergic reaction to the first antibiotic which they pulled out and then waited to see if he would get well again for some days before trying another one, a very common side-effect of the drug Risperdal was pneumonia and he had just got that one because he shown anxiety and violent behavior so I guess eventually the drug killed him by pneumonia but he was sick in alzheimers) last weekend in november so the gear is mine and my sisters or whatever. Anyway I can't decide which camera to get, there have been a few used but new ads for the Nikon D90 for half the retailer price (4000-4500 SEK) but I haven't taken it anyway because I don't know if I want to buy into Nikon gear if I will get a MILC later and sell it, and I don't know if I will really want to pay a lot more for a D90 replacement to get better video features. The GF1 with adapters could be plenty fun and then I could use these items to but I don't know if they are worth using considering the value and eventuall little boost in performance or not. Only thing I have against the GF1 is the sensor size though, but I don't know if I want to wait until canon/nikon/whatever release a APS-C MILC. From Sony I would have to wait for Nex7 and well, Sony suck arse when it comes to proprietary systems so .. The 550D could mount more lenses maybe but it's harder to get such a good deal, the AF is supposed to be not as good, dynamic range, flash usage and such isn't either and the viewfinder is smaller and have less color and contrast. Anyway it's kinda fun to look at what performance these items may have considering their age. I read somewhere that some guy considered the 35mm more useful than the 50mm and that he meant that he would do fine with the 90mm if used outdoor on top of that for whatever situations the 35mm couldn't handle, or the 75mm which I think may have been 2.8 or 2.5 in other scenarios. The tricky part with all the cheap lenses is that I have no idea what is worth having and not. Or what a decent price is, and so on. I've looked at quite a few zeiss lenses for the contax g mount on german ebay. Also some "bad" lenses as per laboratory definition seem like a lot of fun, for instance some cheap CCTV lenses which people have mounted on their GF1s, I think it was 37/1.7 and 25/1.4. They had lots of vignetting, was only sharp in the middle and cateye boke but where cheap, had narrow dof and well... they really put the object in focus against all the other blurry dark unsharp stuff  It may not have been this one: http://www.mu-43.com/f81/unbranded-cctv-25mm-f-1-4-ebay-image-thread-1631/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/86853056@N00/sets/72157623514309445/ http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4019/4440299921_34b61e3544.jpg (Unrelated but related to this forum: http://e-p1.net/index.php?topic=1255.0) Because it was definitly this one: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=290406975819 http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1041&message=34012760 http://www.flickr.com/photos/86853056@N00/sets/72157623514309445/ - http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2429/3973826022_e44b6a525b_o.jpg - http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2460/4025610667_9d7308fdac_o.jpg The swirly boke and all the other flaws make it rather nice =P I wonder if it was the same lens, because in that case the price have been raised from 10 to 46 dollars .. and I can't find the 37mm or the seller mentioned in the second post, which suck because I didn't felt like I was in a hurry or needed it NOW or anything but well, if it's gone for always because lots of people had ordered and I missed out it feel kinda boring because it looked fun  | |
| 05-19-2010, 12:12 PM | #7 |
| 05-19-2010, 12:44 PM | #8 |
| 05-21-2010, 09:49 AM | #9 |
| Originally posted by aliquis Found the camera and the 50mm, it wasn't a summicron 2.0: 1958 Summilux 50/1.4 Type 1 (or pre?), 1644XXX, 700-875 $ (antiquecameras list them from 1645300) 1962 Summicron 35/2 black M2 it seems, 2500-2700 $ + Wetzlar* 1965 Tele-elmar 135/4 Type 1 (E39), 250-300 $ 1973 Elmar-c 90/4, 150-225 $ Don't know what camera modell it is, it was black I thought it was crome/metallic, got some meterthingy on top, can't find the serial, no idea where it's located and can't find anything telling the modell. | |
|
« Decent Compact...
|
Interesting Online Photographer piece on the "Super Zuiko" zooms from Olympus »
| Bookmarks |
| Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it! |
| c35, camera, cap, front, hexanon, konica, leica, leica lenses, leitz, wetzlar |
Similar Threads | ||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Leica IIIf + lenses.. Worth it? | SMPhoto | Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands | 9 | 04-12-2010 04:06 AM |
| Leica Lenses | JohnKSA | Troubleshooting and Beginner Help | 1 | 11-18-2009 07:02 AM |
| For Sale - Sold: Zorki-5 Rangefinder Camera (re-badged Leica) with Two Lenses | yb_abq | Sold Items | 3 | 09-03-2009 06:45 PM |
| Leica lenses on Pentax | Substitute | Pentax SLR Lens Discussion | 6 | 11-12-2008 05:02 AM |
| What would you do if you could mount old Leica and Zeiss lenses? | morfic | General Talk | 12 | 08-12-2008 10:36 PM |
