First photos with a iiia

[roland]

About a month ago, after some invaluable assistance on this forum, I treated myself to a Little iiia and uncoated Elmar. I thought I would share the first couple of usable shots I got from it. I found out the hard way that the elmar (without lens hood) flares if you even look at it - so these two are taken with an Industar 50 I picked up for ten pounds.

I hope you don't mind me sharing these: the first is a crowd watching rugby outside a small bar in Nantes. The second the view over the mill pond just down the road from my house.

 

[photobizzz]

My summar is the same way, still waiting for the hood, the industar did a good job though. I like both photos.

 

[zuikologist]

I lik e the second photo - sharp with good exposure control.

 

[Mr_Flibble]

The only uncoated lens I have is a 35mm Elmar. I have yet to try it out. All the other lenses I use on my IIIa have been coated. I do have a FIKUS hood to use with mine.

I agree with Photobizzz, those are wonderful photos Roland.

 

[mike goldberg]

Hi Roland,
I've got a IIIf coming...
Thanks for sharing your pix; I like both of them.

 

[Stu W]

Hi Roland, I just picked up a IIIc, my first departure from M's, and I was undecided as to what lens to fit to it. I ordered an Industar-61 L/D from the FSU-I figured at that price it'll suffice till I make my decision. Can't wait till it comes to try out the Barnack. Stu

 

[Dralowid]

Great pictures!

I'm a bit bemused about this Elmar flare thing. I recently ran some film through an early camera with an Elmar and I didn't use a hood. Flare all over the place.

This sort of contradicts my memory of this lens. When I first started using a Leica in the '60s I had an Elmar and switched to a Summar. The Summar flared bigtime and was generally in pretty grim condition so I went back to the original uncoated Elmar. I do not remember much flare even though I rarely used a hood.

So why, on my return to old Leicas, am I now dissapointed with the Elmar? Has my memory enhanced the performance of the Elmar or have I simply been spoilt by the great performance of the current version?

Don't get me wrong, I think this is a great lens in all sorts of ways, it just doesn't seem to be as great as it used to be...

Michael
(btw, the current Elmar in chrome weighs the same as a Leica I with Elmar)

 

[leica M2 fan]

Great pictures

Great pictures

I enjoyed both of these, the I-50 is a great lens. Mine has a noticeable scratch right down the middle of the front element but you'd never know it. The pictures are very sharp and the color strong. I haven't noticed a lot of flair but I haven't shot into the sun.I do use a hood.

 

[landsknechte]

It's weird... I've got an uncoated Elmar from 1937, and no shade. On a few of photos, I've gotten a little bit of "glow" in the highlights. On only one photo in maybe 20 rolls have I seen any really obvious flare. In that shot, I was virtually shooting into the sun. The curious thing is that I don't think it's really my technique. I've shot some other vintage cameras under similar circumstances and conditions, and ended up with more flares than a road crew.

 

[roland]

Thanks for all the nice comments folks.

I shot half of a roll of film with the elmar and half with the industar 50. The Elmar was flaring if there was the merest hint of sun anywhere in the sky (even behind me) adn the Industar 50 only seemed to flare if the sun was within about 60 degrees of the line of sight.

I have since tried the Industar 61 (off an old fed 5) and that hardly ever flares even with the sun in the bloody picture (and it's sharp as heck as well)! Its just a shame it's such a big, ugly lens! Its size kind of overwhelms the little camera (and you need HUGE pockets to carry it around in).

 

[dee]

hmm - flair or flare ? Elmar or I 61 ?

amused dee

 

[john neal]

Hi roland - nice pics. Good to see you have managed to get the IIIa out of the pub 😉 !

I told you that you would need a hood with an uncoated Elmar, but it should not flare with the sun behind you. I have some colour shots taken with that lens in bright sun & snow - there is a little softness compared with a coated lens, but nothing too drastic.

You could also try a Jupiter - great lenses, but definitely not as pocketable as a collapsed Elmar.

Have you got any shots of your customers to share?

 

[roland]

Hi John. Don't get me wrong. I have no complaints about the lens - and as soon as I get round to painting the lens hood you so thoughfully provided I'll be using it again.

No indoor shots yet - they are on a couple of rolls of B&W film which I have yet to process!

 

[john neal]

Roland,

No aggression or defense in my comments - just observing that most uncoated Elmars flare badly 🙂

I'm just developing some comparison shots from my remaining uncoated Elmar and an un-numbered but coated Summaron. tri-X in T-max soup, using Sanders McNew's suggestion of 120 asa. Used a couple of yellow & orange filters to try to capture some good clouds - sun definitely in shot for many of them. I'll post if they don't flare too much.

Looking forward to your B&W shots.