Leica LTM Advice for a new Leica III owner?

Leica M39 screw mount bodies/lenses
T

TheMapleLeafForever

Established
Local time
6:58 AM
Joined
Dec 15, 2020
Messages
75
Hello everyone,

First time posting here. I have had a Leica IIIa for maybe a year now but I think you can say it is still pretty new to me as I have only gotten a few rolls out of it. It is the first 35mm I shot with. A lot people my age are getting into film for the first time, buying Canon AE-1s and so on, but I liked this 83 year old Leica so I stuck with it.

Anyway I was hoping I could ask a few questions and also get some general advice.

I recently picked up a Summar in nice looking condition, but it seems to have some light cleaning marks that you can't see unless you shine a flashlight. How common is this and would this be considered pretty good condition for a Summar? The other issue with it is that when collapsed, gravity would extend it again. Not a big issue it seems but could this be fixed?

I have two hoods, the FIKUS (from my Elmar) and the SOOMP, which is better for the Summar?

I also tend to like replicating photographs from the 30s, and 40s, (one of the reasons why I bought an uncoated Summar) any recommendations for B+W films (or colour) that might give that effect better?
 
Welcome to the forum!

The cleaning marks you describe are common; if visible only by flashlight, your lens might be better than average these days. Lenses from that era are uncoated typically, so you’ll get flare when making photos with strong light coming from the front or off to the side. Also normal.

I’ve been thinking of using Rollei Ortho 25 film (ISO 25) in my Leica III - I think it has the speed and light sensitivity characteristics of early 1930’s films. I’ve used Rollei RPX 25 - it’s nothing special to me. Tri-X or HP5+ would’ve been more suitable, allowing smaller apertures and higher speeds.

One thing I’ve discovered with my III and it’s f/3.5 Elmar is that my best results are at f/8 - f/11 and that such a small light camera is difficult for me to get sharp photos under 1/60 or slower without steady support (like a table) - whereas with an ordinary heavier SLR, I can handhold 1/15.

Regardless, these are fun cameras.
 
I’d say that both hoods would be about the same, but since the SOOMP is the ‘proper’ hood for the Summar, might as well use that one. Just be careful with it, as it’s a pricey little hood (about $150 last time I checked).
 
Vince Lupo said:
I’d say that both hoods would be about the same, but since the SOOMP is the ‘proper’ hood for the Summar, might as well use that one. Just be careful with it, as it’s a pricey little hood (about $150 last time I checked).
Click to expand...


Oh definitely pricey. If I didn't get mine included with the Summar and filter, I couldn't bring myself to buy it alone.
 
Pál_K said:
Welcome to the forum!

The cleaning marks you describe are common; if visible only by flashlight, your lens might be better than average these days. Lenses from that era are uncoated typically, so you’ll get flare when making photos with strong light coming from the front or off to the side. Also normal.

I’ve been thinking of using Rollei Ortho 25 film (ISO 25) in my Leica III - I think it has the speed and light sensitivity characteristics of early 1930’s films. I’ve used Rollei RPX 25 - it’s nothing special to me. Tri-X or HP5+ would’ve been more suitable, allowing smaller apertures and higher speeds.

One thing I’ve discovered with my III and it’s f/3.5 Elmar is that my best results are at f/8 - f/11 and that such a small light camera is difficult for me to get sharp photos under 1/60 or slower without steady support (like a table) - whereas with an ordinary heavier SLR, I can handhold 1/15.

Regardless, these are fun cameras.
Click to expand...


Thanks for the advice! I haven't considered Rollei films yet.
 
Neither the FIKUS nor the SOOMP are ergonomically good, both tend to fall from the lens because they are too heavy. On a Summar the "12050" shade is the best, it is like a short FOOKH, the FOOKH itself vignettes on the Summar. The 12050 is postwar and has the inscription "Elmar-Summaron".

The scratches on a Summar are not nice, but most of the Summars have them. The glass of the Summar is very soft and scratches easily.

The Leica III is one of the best prewar Leicas. Winding should be smooth and the curtains should run free. Just put a film in the camera and see what happens. Good luck!

Erik.
 
Nothing much for me to add except welcome to RFF and have fun shooting with the IIIa!
 
Erik van Straten said:
Neither the FIKUS nor the SOOMP are ergonomically good, both tend to fall from the lens because they are too heavy. On a Summar the "12050" shade is the best, it is like a short FOOKH, the FOOKH itself vignettes on the Summar. The 12050 is postwar and has the inscription "Elmar-Summaron".

The scratches on a Summar are not nice, but most of the Summars have them. The glass of the Summar is very soft and scratches easily.

The Leica III is one of the best prewar Leicas. Winding should be smooth and the curtains should run free. Just put a film in the camera and see what happens. Good luck!

Erik.
Click to expand...

Thanks Erik. I don't know if I'd call them scratches thankfully, perhaps micro-scratches. They are really invisible without a flashlight.

I am also a big fan of your pictures on the pre-war glass thread.

Oh another thing I think you'd be able to help with. How do you deal with the old f stops on the Summar? Do you just slide the aperture ring between the marked f-stops? E.g if you want f/3.5 you slide it to between 3.2 and 4.5.
 
Yes, you can interpolate between the markings on the f/stop settings. Since there is no auto diaphragm on these lenses you can set them wherever you need to between markings. I don't want to discourage being precise about exposure, but if you're shooting B&W negative I wouldn't get too worried about getting your settings to be perfectly exact.
 
Welcome aboard.

Years ago you could get a 34mm screw in lens hood for the Summar, it is superior to the originals simply because it works and does not cost so much that you never take it out of the house.

I'll go along with the others about the condition of these lenses nowadays.

As for the pre-war aperture scales, it is possible to get meters showing these but the difference is so slight that the midway position works without any problems.

Regards, David

PS Years ago someone offered a complete refurbishment service including coating etc for the Summar; I have often searched for one but never found one...
 
Last edited:
David Hughes said:
Welcome aboard.

Years ago you could get a 34mm screw in lens hood for the Summar, it is superior to the originals simply because it works and does not cost so much that you never take it out of the house.

I'll go along with the others about the condition of these lenses nowadays.

As for the pre-war aperture scales, it is possible to get meters showing these but the difference is so slight that the midway position works without any problems.

Regards, David

PS Years ago someone offered a complete refurbishment service including coating etc for the Summar; I have often searched for one but never found one...
Click to expand...

Thanks David! If you or anyone is looking for a coated Summar, there is one at the Leica Shop in Vienna for around $500 USD. It is in exceptionally good condition and they tested their lens out for me on their M10 but I passed on it cause I wanted something uncoated for once.
 
Congrats on the IIIa, lovely camera! Have a look at Foma 100 image samples on the web. Is that the look you're after?
 
Welcome and congratulations. You mentioned black and white but I wanted to mention that I really like the results with Kodak Ektar and uncoated lenses. I have a 1934 Leica II and the results with Ektar are different from modern color in a nice way. Have Fun. Joe
 
TheMapleLeafForever said:
I recently picked up a Summar in nice looking condition, but it seems to have some light cleaning marks that you can't see unless you shine a flashlight. How common is this and would this be considered pretty good condition for a Summar?
Click to expand...


Here is something that might make you feel a bit better. I own three copies of the Summar, one is uncoated, and one is coated. I picked up the third one for almost nothing, because it is trashed (lots of scratches). I was really disappointed with the results from the trashed Summar, not because they were bad, but because of how good they were.
 
Summar f2.0 was my first Leica lens, I used it for almost a year. What a year some shots I'll never forget. It was even scratched and Haze in 1963 was an unknown factor in lens selection; not that I was particularly scrupulous or intelligent in lens selection.

Here are a couple with a pretty beat up Summar:

Leica IIIc Summar F2.0 by John Carter, on Flickr

1964 by John Carter, on Flickr
 
I'll second what Zane mentioned. My Summar has very fine scratch marks on the front element. It looks like haze but it's finely scratched all over. This diffuses the light and gives a vintage feel.

Scratched Summar with Fomapan 200 in XTOL 1+1 (follow the link if you want to see a larger version on my Flickr):

36340198736_0ed4213f47_c.jpg

Hyde Park (after Atget) #162 by lynnb's snaps, on Flickr

Summar with APX100 in Rodinal 1+50:

25798306667_5c8a4911da_c.jpg

Manly beach, Sydney, summer 2018 #665 by lynnb's snaps, on Flickr

Summar, Tri-X in XTOL 1+1:

20467946270_bd02b37787_c.jpg

Summar portrait #026 by lynnb's snaps, on Flickr
 
Just get a cheap screw-in hood. Both straight and wide (cone-shaped) options are available; both work fine. My Summar was so badly scratched when I got it it was damn near opaque. I polished as far as I was willing to go and you'd never know it was so abused from the photos. As noted, HP5+, Tri-X, and Ektar are all good options with uncoated lenses.
 
lynnb said:
Congrats on the IIIa, lovely camera! Have a look at Foma 100 image samples on the web. Is that the look you're after?
Click to expand...

Thanks, and you take some lovely pictures! The Foma look is really good for what I am going for. I have only tried Foma Retropan 320 and it looks pretty aged with its softness and grain.

Also would really like to try Ektar as a few of you mentioned.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom