Leica LTM Who Would`nt Love a Leica For Christmas? - Happy Holidays! - From LeicaTom

Leica M39 screw mount bodies/lenses
xayraa33 said:
that 122 dollar Summaron would now be 987 dollars by the Inflation Calculator.
Click to expand...

Wow, now that was a good idea to do.....I`ve got ton`s of the old prices to make comparisions

Tom

PS: Those early Nikkor Nippon Kogaku prices were scary (under $30 at the Tokyo PX) LOL!!!!!!
But, that was "more bang for your buck" in opitical lenses in that time, that`s for sure 🙂
 
I've been such a good boy this year that I gave myself a Mountain Elmar for Christmas, not to mention a I/IIIf conversion body (yeah, I've been THAT good)....

:angel:
 
Vince Lupo said:
I've been such a good boy this year that I gave myself a Mountain Elmar for Christmas, not to mention a I/IIIf conversion body (yeah, I've been THAT good)....

:angel:
Click to expand...

Hahahahahah yeah Vince that was being good........Leica I to IIIF, hummm and it`s black? (THAT`S PRETTY STRANGE AND UNCOMMON) 🙂

I gave myself a 1951 IIFBD with original 50 Elmar, a f1.4 50mm Nikkor and a f1.5 Summarit (the fast lenses are going to get their fair share of hard work shooting all my pinup gals)

......I might just end the list this year with a nice f0.95 50mm Canon, but Santa has to see that I`m that really that GOOD too

Tom
 
Last edited:
Yeah - KEH had this sucker listed for the longest time (#8989, model I converted to a IIIf in Exc condition), and I kept thinking about it, and sure enough (at least according to the photo), it's a short body with what looks like a model III top with a IIIf shutter dial, and chrome hardware. I'll let you know how it is when it arrives next week (if it doesn't turn out to be what I thought I could always send it back, but KEH seems to be pretty accurate with this stuff). I just got the Mountain Elmar from them today -- black and chrome complete with the hood, caps, and box in Bargain condition which, if it were anyone else, would be at least Exc or Exc+ condition. The glass is perfect....
 
Vince Lupo said:
I just got the Mountain Elmar from them today -- black and chrome complete with the hood, caps, and box in Bargain condition which, if it were anyone else, would be at least Exc or Exc+ condition. The glass is perfect....
Click to expand...

Yes, it`s about TIME we see someone shoot with a "Mt. Elmar" because they have`nt been seen in use since the early 1930`s Luis Trenker movies made in
pre - Nazi Germany and Austria

I can`t wait to see photos, it makes me happy to see people SHOOT with strange and uncommon lenses, that`s what they were made for in the first place, not to become
"china cabinet princesses"

Tom
 
Last edited:
Absolutely agree with you Tom -- of course for my day to day 'making money' work I use that ol' digital stuff, but on the weekends and trips it's either Exakta, Alpa, Leica TM, Robot, Contarex or other forms of weirdness. When my wife and I did a three week tour of Europe in September and October, all I took were two Leica III's, 35 Summaron, 50 Xenon, 73 Hektor and 90 Fat Elmar, plus an Exakta II for shooting in Dresden...I really couldn't see myself doing Europe with a D200!

I'll do some shots with the Mountain Elmar this weekend and see how she does....
 
Vince Lupo said:
Absolutely agree with you Tom -- of course for my day to day 'making money' work I use that ol' digital stuff, but on the weekends and trips it's either Exakta, Alpa, Leica TM, Robot, Contarex or other forms of weirdness. When my wife and I did a three week tour of Europe in September and October, all I took were two Leica III's, 35 Summaron, 50 Xenon, 73 Hektor and 90 Fat Elmar, plus an Exakta II for shooting in Dresden...I really couldn't see myself doing Europe with a D200!

I'll do some shots with the Mountain Elmar this weekend and see how she does....
Click to expand...

That`s right!

I`ve seen you shooting with the older lenses and cameras before, see that`s great I`m not the only NUT around using older stuff, (well most of my stuff is 1945 to 1956) I might be daring and buy into some 1960`s stuff soon! (I also have my 1971 Canon F-1 which sadly lately has`nt gotten much love - I better take her back out again soon) afterall what were cameras made for in the first place?

In my business it`s an art form in itself trying to get the photos to look "old" and like they were shot 45+ years ago - they can talk all they want about using photoshop and all the digital schnick schnock, it just DOESN`T cut the mustard like using good old vintage glass and lenses

........and one of my problems now is finding a digital camera that can take photos that look the part so I can have some slack during night shoots and when I need flash, because I`m not krazy (or rich) enough to afford to use vintage flash blubs

Tom

PS: I have always used Sony digital gear because of the CZ glass, I just don`t like the newer cameras they have offered and the Vario-Sonnar is no longer offered on any of their latest models - and 5MP is getting to be very very hard to keep pushing for my PRO work, though I`ve been doing that for over 3 years now, I still want to try to find a digital in the 8MP range that`s got the "look" to it in the glass and low light performance - I guess you can say good luck!
 
Last edited:
I bought myself a Leica M6 for Christmas from the RFF classifieds. I'm eagerly awaiting it's arrival. There is room in the inn, it won't have to sleep in the stable!
 
Andrew Sowerby said:
I bought myself a Leica M6 for Christmas from the RFF classifieds. I'm eagerly awaiting it's arrival. There is room in the inn, it won't have to sleep in the stable!
Click to expand...

Fine fine that`s a great Christmas present 🙂

Happy Shooting

Tom
 
New Here, but I just recieved a Leica III from '39 and I have a FED 2 in the mail. Looking forward to trying it out. The Leica was a very unexpected christmas gift.
 
LeicaTom said:
In my business it`s an art form in itself trying to get the photos to look "old" and like they were shot 45+ years ago - they can talk all they want about using photoshop and all the digital schnick schnock, it just DOESN`T cut the mustard like using good old vintage glass and lenses
Click to expand...

I'm hardly a luddite when it comes to photoshop and digital photography in general, but I'll certainly second that 110%.
 
Tom -- I got that I/IIIf conversion from KEH. It sure looks right, HOWEVER as I was replacing the base plate a sizeable corner of the vulcanite cracked and fell off 😱 and no way could all those pieces be put back together.

Part of the vulcanite appears as though it had been patched at some point in its life (around 1 o'clock of the lens mount). In your opinion (or anyone else's for that matter), should I just leave it be or have the vulcanite covering replaced? If it would be acceptable to the LTM fold to replace it, who in the heck could do something like that?

Any thoughts on this gift from Santa would be greatly appreciated!

I'll try to post a shot or two of it soon.....

UPDATE -- I just found www.cameraleather.com who offers a recovering service of cameras. Has anyone used them?
 
Last edited:
Vince Lupo said:
Tom -- I got that I/IIIf conversion from KEH. It sure looks right, HOWEVER as I was replacing the base plate a sizeable corner of the vulcanite cracked and fell off 😱 and no way could all those pieces be put back together.
Click to expand...

Vince,

Check ur mail....and don`t do anything to that camera yet, I think I KNOW someone who might fix if for you here in the states, using the REAL vulcanite, don`t recover anything yet!!!!!

Tom
 
You can get the vulcanite replaced in the UK at CRR Luton, if it is any help. All patterns available.

If it is a I - IIIf conversion does it have the original pattern or the later pattern vulcanite?

I didn't see the pictures of this camera, is is a late conversion with f type flash, separate viewfnders and film advance knob with film type dial all on the short body?

I have one of these and it makes a good user though the postwar black finish doesn't appear to be quite as good as pre war.

They can be rather interesting in that they have unusual baffles within and a top housing modified to take the later shutter assembly. Result is that the accessory shoe is slightly proud of the top and they appear a bit chunkier than the original.

Michael
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom