65 Elmar macro and bellows

[airfrogusmc]

A good friend of mine gave me this. It was his fathers.

Leitz Canada 65mm 3.5 Elmar and Leitz Wetzlar close up bellows and focus chimney.

A couple of quick close ups from around my office.

My MM

 

[madNbad]

Nice gift!

 

[airfrogusmc]

Thanks and I agree. He didn't know if it worked because it had been stored for a very long time. I don't do macro but I might start doing more now. The bellows are in great shape and the lens is very sharp. The test shots were all at 3.5.

 

[michaelwj]

Nice kit!

I needed to do some macro shots for a small project I was working on, but after pricing it all up it was cheaper to just get a Nikon FE with a 3.5/55mm Mirco-Nikkor and Nikon extension rings. I'd still like to get rid of the Nikon and get a kit like yours though...

 

[Roger Hicks]

Fun, innit?

From The Worst DSLR in the World, http://www.rogerandfrances.com/subscription/worst dslr.html

It's heavy, it's absurdly expensive, it's slow-handling, the choice of lenses is miserably small, and it's great fun: an M9 with a Visoflex III reflex housing.

I have both the bellows and the OTZFO -- but mostly I use a Df and Micro-Nikkor 55/2.8.

Cheers,

R.

 

[airfrogusmc]

Fun, innit?

From The Worst DSLR in the World, http://www.rogerandfrances.com/subscription/worst dslr.html

It's heavy, it's absurdly expensive, it's slow-handling, the choice of lenses is miserably small, and it's great fun: an M9 with a Visoflex III reflex housing.

I have both the bellows and the OTZFO -- but mostly I use a Df and Micro-Nikkor 55/2.8.

Cheers,

R.

yes it is fun. Have only shot a few frames with it but plan to shoot some more. Really tripod only with the bellows. It is slow and methodical. Kinda large format without all the movements but left is right (Hasselblad without eye level finder) when looking thought the chimney. Lens is insanely sharp.

 

[Dralowid]

That lens is truly excellent and with the correct focussing mount makes an almost useable combination, particularly with Viso III. At some point it was re-computed and the later black version is apparently even better but I wouldn't know and probably couldn't tell the difference.

For those who are interested in such things the unusual filter size for the 65 Elmar is the same same as the old 1.5 Summarit.

 

[Ronald M]

Since you have a start, 90 2.8 Elmarit (not tele elmarit) and 135 4.0 tele elmar will work well.

 

[airfrogusmc]

Thanks guys.
A couple from a few minutes ago with the MM

 

[madNbad]

Have you tried focusing out to infinity yet? It's a nice feature with the Elmars, they offer incredible range. Check out "To infinity and beyond!" In the Leica General Information thread.

 

[airfrogusmc]

Have you tried focusing out to infinity yet? It's a nice feature with the Elmars, they offer incredible range. Check out "To infinity and beyond!" In the Leica General Information thread.

No I haven't tried it but will now that you say it works. Thanks for the heads up.

 

[mdarnton]

I have one of these, on the focus mount for my Viso, and a
bunch of tubes. Also some rings to fit in on my Nikons. At one
point I tested it for slide duping, and it did a pretty good job;
then I discovered that it isn't actually designed as a macro lens,
in spite of the implication!!! But it's a handy rig on the Viso.

It's what I used to shoot this (a violin corner, for those of you
who don't get it right away):

 

[Roger Hicks]

yes it is fun. Have only shot a few frames with it but plan to shoot some more. Really tripod only with the bellows. It is slow and methodical. Kinda large format without all the movements but left is right (Hasselblad without eye level finder) when looking thought the chimney. Lens is insanely sharp.

The prism makes it hand-holdable. A quick Google reveals one for £35 (call it $45) and another for $150, so prices are all over the place. An OTZFO (16464) turned up for £31 or so.

The lens is good, but no better than a 55/3.5 Micro-Nikkor, and not as good as a late 55/2.8. Mind you, "no better" than one of the sharpest lenses ever, ain't bad.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Dralowid]

We should pity the OP. He is doomed to a life destroyed by addiction to the Visoflex and will wither away consumed by the need for curiously named adaptors.

If caught early, before the onset of UXOOR-SOORE, it is curable.

 

[Calzone]

A,

I have a chrome 65/3.5 Elmar that I have rigged out with a Leica focus helicoil and a "R" adapter that I use on a black Leica SL2-MOT. This lens is mucho sharp.

I understand that it is derived from a large format lens formula, that it has a rather large image circle, and that only a small portion of that image circle is utilized. Basically on small format you are only using the sweet spot.

I use it with slow speed film and the negatives have a large format look to them. Lots of detail...

Cal

 

[airfrogusmc]

LoL. well I don't think I am going to have a macro addiction but maybe denying is a sign of the addiction.

Roger, I was just pleasantly surprised by the sharpness. I wasn't expecting it.

 

[Roger Hicks]

. . . I understand that it is derived from a large format lens formula, that it has a rather large image circle, and that only a small portion of that image circle is utilized. Basically on small format you are only using the sweet spot. . . .

Dear Cal,

No, I don't think so. The "sweet spot" on a lens that covers a larger format is rarely if ever as sharp as a lens designed for a specific, smaller format. It's a 4-glass lens, far as I know Tessar-type, and it was apparently recomputed just the once in 1962, just two years after its 1960 introduction. It is of course optimized for close-up photography. Whether the Elmar-V (Wetzlar-made after 1968 or so) was recomputed again, I don't know, but it's still a 4-glass, 3-group. For comparaison the 55/2.8 Micro-Nikkor is (as far as I recall) a 5 glass lens with a floating element.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Roger Hicks]

LoL. well I don't think I am going to have a macro addiction but maybe denying is a sign of the addiction.

Roger, I was just pleasantly surprised by the sharpness. I wasn't expecting it.

Oh, sure. It is very, very good, but it's not (in my experience) the legend that some people claim.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Emile de Leon]

Try painting with light in color or B&W in macro...just get a tiny flashlight...stop the lens down..way down..and then put all that light exactly where you want it..
I stop down as far as I can..and use the lowest iso speed possible on the cam.. 10 to 15 sec exp is fine..
I just tried this for the 1st time the other day...just like darkroom burning work...in my A7....
Tiny 2.5" abalone shell...

 

[Calzone]

Dear Cal,

No, I don't think so. The "sweet spot" on a lens that covers a larger format is rarely if ever as sharp as a lens designed for a specific, smaller format. It's a 4-glass lens, far as I know Tessar-type, and it was apparently recomputed just the once in 1962, just two years after its 1960 introduction. It is of course optimized for close-up photography. Whether the Elmar-V (Wetzlar-made after 1968 or so) was recomputed again, I don't know, but it's still a 4-glass, 3-group. For comparaison the 55/2.8 Micro-Nikkor is (as far as I recall) a 5 glass lens with a floating element.

Cheers,

R.

Roger,

My understanding is that some use medium format lenses to exploit the center of medium format lenses on small format to exploit and create a center sweet spot.

As far as physics go it generally the edges and corners where softness occurs and where light falls off in lens design, and by exploiting a larger image circle than required to cover a given format is a work around of the given physics mentioned above.

Clearly having a large image circle and only using the center offers advantages to IQ.

I will also mention that specifically the 65/3.5 Elmar has a cult following among Pentax 645 users that adapt/adopt the 65/3.5 Elmar for medium format digital use.

I do not think the Medium Format Pentax users are trying to recreate a Holga. Perhaps I caused confusion by saying "large format" when it would of been better to express "Larger format."

Cal