Leica LTM 4,5 13,5cm Hektor vs Elmar

[uwe zankl]

Hi there...

Could someone explain to me the difference between the pre war 13,5cm Hektor and Elmar lenses, please? Which one is the better one...where are the diffrerences?

thanks a lot
Uwe

 

[Luddite Frank]

I have both, pre-war.

My understanding is that the 135 Elmar is a "triplet" lens design, like the 90, 50, & 35mm Elnars.

The 135 Hektor is a two-element (?) lens.


If this is indeed the case, the Hektor was probably less expensive to produce.

The 135 Hektor must have been of "acceptable" quality, as it continued in production into the "M" era, whereas the 135 Elmar was dropped after WW-II...

I hope I don't have things mixed-up....


I believe my 135 Elmar is NOT rangefinder-coupled... longer focal-legnth lenses have shallower depth-of-field, so "scale-focusing" becomes more risky, or you will have to stop-down further, to compensate for focusing errors...


I don't believe I have shot my 135 Elmar yet, so I can't compare its performance to my 135 Hektors.

Hopefully someone will provide more concrete info on the subject...


Good luck,

Luddite Frank

 

[charjohncarter]

I hope someone come forward, too. I have the Hektor, apparently named after a dog, and find it to be fine, but they seem to blast it whenever it is mentioned.

 

[Abbazz]

The 135 Hektor must have been of "acceptable" quality, as it continued in production into the "M" era, whereas the 135 Elmar was dropped after WW-II...

I have a 135/4 Elmar in M mount. It's a superb lens. Leica users usually prefer other 135mm lenses to the Elmar as it is very long, being a true long focus lens and not a telephoto. It's also not very fast.

Here are some pictures taken with the Elmar (resized for the web, no sharpening applied):

100%crop of preceding picture, taken wide open at f/4.0:

OK, I confess, I used a digital SLR

. The 135 Elmar is much suitable for all kind of experiments, as the optical head can be unmounted from the focusing helicoid, thus allowing the lens to be mounted on all kind of cameras (see this thread).

Cheers,

Abbazz

 

[charjohncarter]

abbazz, wow, nice, digital box or not it is still impressive.

 

[charjohncarter]

re: abbazz's thread.

abbazz, pretty trick. Is that how you mounted the Elmar to the DSLR?

 

[Abbazz]

abbazz, pretty trick. Is that how you mounted the Elmar to the DSLR?

The results from this lens are indeed impressive. I used my universal iris lensholder mounted on a Russian PZF bellows:

Cheers!

Abbazz

 

[Luddite Frank]

Abbazz,

Thanks for the better info and the lovely pics...


As for being "slow"... both the screw-mount 135's are f/ 4 or 4.5 (they're not handy for me to check).

I have a Chiyoko-Rokkor 135 that is just a tad faster, at f/ 3.5.

Both my black 135's, and my 1950's 135 can have the lens-assembly unscrew from the focusing mount / lens tube.


LF

 

[charjohncarter]

I love this stuff. Thanks for posting abbazz, I have tons of stuff to do this. Where did you get the iris thing/cosa? Here is one of my crazy descompuestos.

 

[FPjohn]

fine images.The Elmar 135mm f4.5 (EFERN) was made from 1931-1933. The f4.0 135mm Elmar (11750) is a different beast made from 1960-1965. The hecktor was an improvement over the original elmar but not the equal of the latter but it is close.

yours
Frank

http://www.leicagallery.com/hektor135mm.htm

http://www.leicagallery.com/elmar135.htm

http://cameracollector.proboards30.com/index.cgi?board=head&action=display&thread=1193858397

 

[Abbazz]

I love this stuff. Thanks for posting abbazz, I have tons of stuff to do this. Where did you get the iris thing/cosa? Here is one of my crazy descompuestos.

Is this a 20/4.5 Super-Takumar? The best part in this lens is the lens shade 😀

The universal iris lensholders have become very scarce because they are actively tracked by those large format loonies. Yeah, that's 100% APUG's fault 😉. I got mine from Glennview in Chicago.

Cheers!

Abbazz

 

[Mr_Flibble]

Wonderful pictures Abbazz! Better then mine 😉



Some of the first shots I took with my 135mm Hektor from 1947 (on my Leica IIIa)

Can't remember what film I used, I think it was Fuji Superia that had expired a year before.

 

[charjohncarter]

Rick, nice shots, they show what the Hektor can do. It feels good to see good quality out of that lens.

 

[Luddite Frank]

okay, I hauled out my "big bag o' Leica junque" this morning and have my three Leitz 135 lenses sitting on the desk in front of me...

Starting with the oldest:

" Ernst Leitz Wetzlar Elmar 1:4,5 F=135mm " - no s/n, at least none on exterior. f : 4,5 - 6,3 - 9 - 12,5 - 18 - 25 - 36
Bright nickel focusing scale: 1,5 - Inf , mtr.
No Rangefinder coupling !
Tripod socket. Lens is all-black (incl. thread-mount) , except for focusing scale.

Next:

" Ernst Leitz Wetzlar Hektor f= 13,5 cm 1:4,5 " s/n:4152XX (on lens mount, and barrel/focusing mount)
f : 4,5 - 6,3 - 9 - 12,5 - 18 - 25 - 36
Satin nickel focusing scale: 1,5 - Inf, mtr RF-coupled.
Tripod socket. Lens is all-black, except for camera mount & focusing scale (Nckl)
Lens was coated at some point.

Last:

" Ernst Leitz Wetzlar Hektor f= 13,5 cm 1:4,5 Nr. 824426 " ( all this on ring around front element).
f: 4,5 - 5,6 - 8 - 11 - 16 - 22 - 32
Satin chrome focusing scale: 5 - Inf feet. RF-coupled.
Tripod Socket ; Barrel is vulcanite & satin-chrome.


When the two black lenses are standing side-by-side, they look almost indentical, at a quick glance, but if the lens-mounts are removed from the barrels, the Elmar barrel is a little shorter, while the Hektor barrel has a "collar" about 1/2" tall extending beyond the focusing grip.

The Elmar lens mount has the aperture setting ring closer to the threaded mount, while the Hektor's aperture ring is further-out near the front element.

The Elmar does indeed appear to have more glass in the lens-mount, but it's hard for me to tell w/o taking things apart further.

Sorry I can't post pics; don't have a digi-cam ...

Luddite Frank

 

[charjohncarter]

Luddite Frank, Like you I found my Hektor 135, it is close to you newest at just over 1,000,000. I loaded the three f and am running some C-41 color though to see how it performs. It is raining here so it might be a couple of days for posts.

 

[Telewatt]

Hi there...

Could someone explain to me the difference between the pre war 13,5cm Hektor and Elmar lenses, please? Which one is the better one...where are the diffrerences?

thanks a lot
Uwe

The first Elmar 4,5/13,5 cm (1931-1936) was a 4 element , 3 groups lens, not the best lens. So they changes it to the Hektor 4,5/13,5cm (1933-1960) 4 elements 3 groups a very nice performer...
.the best was the second Elmar 4,0/135mm (1960-1964) 4 elements in 4 groups)

regards,

Jan

 

[gdi]

Luddite Frank, Like you I found my Hektor 135, it is close to you newest at just over 1,000,000. I loaded the three f and am running some C-41 color though to see how it performs. It is raining here so it might be a couple of days for posts.

I just noticed my Hektor is SN: 1414141 - easy to remember....

 

[charjohncarter]

Repeat that, is it: 41414141?

 

[gdi]

Repeat that, is it: 41414141?

No - its starts with 1 (and then 3 x '41')...

1414141

 

[charjohncarter]

abbazz, no that is the 28mm. I found the Hektor and use a roll this weekend, raining and overcast but here are two from that roll. The first is full frame and the second is about 60% of full frame. My problem with this lens and the IIIf is getting accurate focus. The ones that I had right on were great, today is sunny and I tried focusing, much easier.