Cheapest Uncoated 50mm Leica Mount?

[wlewisiii]

Having sold my uncoated Sonnar to help finance the CL, I find myself going through uncoated 50 withdrawl 😉 The old uncoated lenses just give a look I really like (especially with Reala & Plus-X) so I'd like to find one I can use on the Canon and CL.

At this point there seem to be two inexpensive uncoated 50's - an old enough Elmar 50/3.5 and the Summar 50/2. It doesn't need to be Leica by any stretch of the imagination, but the few not from them I've seen have been a smidge out of reach :bang:

Are there any others I should be keeping an eye open for? When I do find myself able to pick this up, I'll probably still only have a budget of $100 - 150 or so.

Hints, tips, suggestions, etc gladly accepted.

Thanks!

William

 

[rover]

I was looking at the Sonnar this morning, I didn't realize it was a collapsible. I am very happy with my "new" Sonnar.

I think you hit the two most available uncoated LTM lenses. Considering that coatings were introduced either just before or during WWII most LTM lenses were coated. I am not sure about the original Nikkors used on the early Canon cameras, they are more collector pieces right now and priced that way. Also the early Canon LTM lenses were not 100% compatible with non Canon Cameras until 1947 ish.

 

[wlewisiii]

I was looking at the Sonnar this morning, I didn't realize it was a collapsible. I am very happy with my "new" Sonnar.

I hope you are happy with it. It's an excellent lens - not the prettiest cosmetically but it always did everything I could hope for a lens to do. Run a roll of Reala with it; I think you'll be pleased.

The front lens was under probably a real 1/8th inch of dirt/dust when I got it and I expected a dog. I was pleasantly surprised... 😀

I think you hit the two most available uncoated LTM lenses. Considering that coatings were introduced either just before or during WWII most LTM lenses were coated. I am not sure about the original Nikkors used on the early Canon cameras, they are more collector pieces right now and priced that way. Also the early Canon LTM lenses were not 100% compatible with non Canon Cameras until 1947 ish.

That was just about my thinking. Well, both are lenses I'd like to have (for different reasons) anyway, so I'll just have to wait for ones I can afford to present themselves to me. Serendipity is a b*tch when you're waiting for it... :angel:

Anyone got a Summar they'll trade for a Karat or a Contessa?

William

 

[Nick R.]

The coating on the early m-mount collapsible summicron is so soft it can be cleaned off. I don't know if that's what you had in mind but it's doable

 

[wlewisiii]

That's an interesting suggestion, however I presume that Leitz coated all the surfaces, so cleaning off the front and back would simply result in a lens like my 1943 127/4.7 Ektar which has Kodak's first gen coating only on it's internal surfaces. IIUC that coating made Leitz's look as hard as Canon and Nikon's and so they didn't even try to coat the external surfaces. But even that much coating really does make enough difference to my eyes.

Thanks for the idea, I do appreciate it.

William

 

[ray_g]

Just for the heck of it, you may want to try an Industar 22 clone of the elmar for around $10 or so. It is either uncoated or single coated, IIRC, but either way less coated (?) than the newer I-50. Some informal tests on PNet showed similar (or better) sharpness as the elmar.

 

[wlewisiii]

I have one. It's classic FSU single coated and it has a very nice look in it's own right. And it is a quite sharp lens. I'll admit that I'm probably more inclined towards trying to get my grubbies on a Summar first as a result of having that I-22. But if an uncoated Elmar popped up ... 😀

OTOH, I'd even be happy if someone wanted to just throw my way a current 50/2.8 M mount Elmar despite the [daffy duck] dethpickable [/daffy duck] coating :angel: I do love them Tessars... 😀

William

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

I'll take a Helios 103 in LTM. Anyone?

 

[ZorkiKat]

Just for the heck of it, you may want to try an Industar 22 clone of the elmar for around $10 or so. It is either uncoated or single coated, IIRC, but either way less coated (?) than the newer I-50. Some informal tests on PNet showed similar (or better) sharpness as the elmar.

Ray_g

It would be hard to look for uncoated Industar 22. Almost all (and all which fall lin the $10 range) are coated. The early uncoated ones tend to be found with early Zorki. And like the early Zorki, they'll be expensive.

Any Russian lens marked with a red "П" would be coated. That П was what "T" was in Zeiss glass, standing for what "transparenz" is in Russian.

The only uncoated Russian optics I have (and the easiest to get IMO) are the collapsible FED lenses found with prewar and immediate post-war FED cameras. They are often found 'white' and are marked in the older f-stop (f3,5. 4,5. 6,3....) scale. But they won't likely fit mounts other than the one which they came on. The early Soviet M39 wasn't exactly the same as LTM 39- the thread pitches were different (Leitz = M39x 1 inch, FED= M39x1 metric). Only after the war- maybe 1947 or so- did FED switch to the 'correct' LTM pitch.

BTW, Industars were more Tessar than Elmar. Elmar had the diaphragm placed after the front element. Industars followed the configuration found in Tessar- between the 2nd and 3rd groups.

🙂

Jay

 

[Stephanie Brim]

I still want an Industar-22... Should probably wait a bit, though, and see if I have money for an Elmar.

 

[ZorkiKat]

I still want an Industar-22... Should probably wait a bit, though, and see if I have money for an Elmar.

Stephanie

the I-22 are excellent lenses. I've used them a lot. They do better than what my 1933 Elmar can do. I haven't any of the coated 3,5 elmars, but I do have the 2,8 collapsible LTM version. It has some haze inside, so I cant really say if the 2,8 Elmar is any better.

Watch for the later collapsible FED lenses too. They 'draw' things differently than I-22 or I-50

Jay 🙂

 

[raid]

I wouldn't mind trying out an I-22 lens one day. Such lenses are so affordable compared to Leitz lenses.