Arthur
Established
I wonder how many Thambars still exist. Do you own one? Or know of one.
If you have or know of one, would you share some additional information?
Is 'the' Thambar complete? or not?
That is:
Full disclosure... I own a Thambar.
If you have or know of one, would you share some additional information?
Is 'the' Thambar complete? or not?
That is:
Does it have the original lens shade, spot filter, front and rear lens caps?
Does it have the original cylindrical, appropriately labeled "Leitz Red" Thambar container?
This is for fun.Does it have the original cylindrical, appropriately labeled "Leitz Red" Thambar container?
Full disclosure... I own a Thambar.
john neal
fallor ergo sum
You should talk to Roger Hicks - he's the man on Thambars
bucs
Well-known
I saw one locally. I heard they are specialty lenses
Roger Hicks
Veteran
http://www.shutterbug.com/content/leitz-thambar-90mm-f22brwhy-it-considered-legendary-portrait-lens
I've since bought the lens from the old friend mentioned in the test. I know at least two other people who own them: possibly as many as half a dozen. It's not one of those things that comes up often in conversation. Mine is complete but not boxed.
Not sure what sort of "additional information" there could be. I especially like mine at f/6.3 to f/9; I really don't like the effect with the centre spot; its biggest disadvantage is that the unique look is all but impossible to mix in pictures taken with the Thambar with pictures taken with other lenses, except perhaps the first version of the 90/2 Summicron and from what I've heard the 85/1.5 Summarex and the 125/2.5 Hektor. I've tried the Summicron but not the other two.
Cheers,
R.
I've since bought the lens from the old friend mentioned in the test. I know at least two other people who own them: possibly as many as half a dozen. It's not one of those things that comes up often in conversation. Mine is complete but not boxed.
Not sure what sort of "additional information" there could be. I especially like mine at f/6.3 to f/9; I really don't like the effect with the centre spot; its biggest disadvantage is that the unique look is all but impossible to mix in pictures taken with the Thambar with pictures taken with other lenses, except perhaps the first version of the 90/2 Summicron and from what I've heard the 85/1.5 Summarex and the 125/2.5 Hektor. I've tried the Summicron but not the other two.
Cheers,
R.
Vobluda
Well-known
I have it and sold it. The optics are very soft, similar to the lens from that age, so mine has front lens heavily scratched.
If you ever get one I suggest only wet cleaning.
If you ever get one I suggest only wet cleaning.
Luddite Frank
Well-known
Would love to own one, but will need to hit the Powerball to make it happen...
Emile de Leon
Well-known
Would like to have that lens..
Good to know that its not that great with the center filter..
Good to know that its not that great with the center filter..
Roger Hicks
Veteran
To the point, indeed, that if you're looking for one to use, in my view you'd be crazy to pay the extra for the centre spot. Also, the hood is essentially a cut-down 200/4 hood.
Cheers,
R.
Arthur
Established
To Roger Hicks...
To Roger Hicks...
"impossible to mix in pictures taken with the Thambar with pictures taken with other lenses"
?
To Roger Hicks...
"impossible to mix in pictures taken with the Thambar with pictures taken with other lenses"
?
Arthur
Established
So...
Let's return to the question...
How many "THAMBARS" still exist?
Let's return to the question...
How many "THAMBARS" still exist?
x-ray
Veteran
I had an older student several years ago that owned one. It was complete with original hood in nice condition and had the filter. He brought it to class once and allowed me to shoot some with it. This is the only one Ive see.
chrishayton
Well-known
Had one for a year in the shop where I work. Took a fair few photos with it. It's soft wide open without the filter as you would expect of that aperture lens at that time and very very soft with, almost as if you had removed an element (or put one in the wrong way round on a normal lens)
It had original filter and case but a 200mm Hood and Cap. Some where I have an original brochure/Manual
It had original filter and case but a 200mm Hood and Cap. Some where I have an original brochure/Manual
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Dear Arthur,
The look is so different that it completely screws up an exhibition, or any other group of pictures. The pics just don't hang together.
Cheers,
R.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Dear Arthur,
Meaningless (or at best unanswerable) question. From memory, about 3000 were made. How many are still owned by people who know what they have? How many are in drawers, attics, etc.?
If 3000 were made, the only answer is likely to be "fewer than 3000" (house fires, bins, butchery, accidents, buried to avoid confiscation...)
How on earth could you expect a better answer than that?
Cheers,
R.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Dear Chris,
Not really. The 85/2 Sonnar (earlier as I recall) was a lot sharper as well as fractionally faster. The Thambar was a deliberately soft-focus lens.
Cheers,
R.
Emile de Leon
Well-known
Thanks for that Roger..very useful information..much appreaciated..!
oltimer
Well-known
The Leica dealer I deal with in Toronto just sold 3 in the last month. From a low of $3250 - 3995, and the last one for $4350. They are out their; and as older collectors say it's time; they come out.