How should a 1930's lens handle?

[hlpgtf]

In the last few months I've picked up a 35mm Elmar, Summar, and 135mm Hektor, all from the pre-WWII era, for use on my Sony NEX (sorry). They'll eventually see use on a Fed-2 as well, once I convince my wife that the cost of fixing it is somehow an investment in the future of something or another...

They're all pretty clean and work as they should, but none feels as smooth in operation - focusing is a bit stiffer/less precise in particular - as my 1960's - 1970's manual focus lenses from companies like Olympus and Nikon.

Should this be the case, considering their age, or would a good cla bring their feel about up to par with the aforementioned newer slr lenses?

I'm by no means complaining, but am more curious if the cost of a cla would really make much difference in what are pretty nice, well-sorted lenses to begin with.

Thanks!

 

[Livesteamer]

They probably do need a service but you can try them as is. With uncoated lenses, a hood is really nice. They flare easily. Don't shoot into the sun and expect a little lower contrast and softer colors than on a modern lens. That said I have two early 50mm Elmars that can make lovely photos. I also like the idea of being able to use 75 year old equipment and make good pictures with it. Good Luck. Joe

 

[MC JC86]

I second the hood recommendation, if the originals aren't too expensive (most of the Elmar correct hoods, (FISON, etc) aren't too bad.. Those lenses were originally made to fairly exacting tolerances and almost always can be restored to their former glory mechanically, if not optically. If you shine a light through many old Leitz lenses you will see a haze that wasn't apparent without the light. This results from, among other things, oxidation and glue seperation. I've had a lot of luck having my lenses professionally cleaned by Essex Camera Service in NJ. They come back without any haze and mechanically very smooth. With the haze no longer there, you can experience the optics original contrast characteristics.

That said, if you can deal with the mechanics in their present state you should shoot some film with each one first. You can figure out if servicing them is in order or not.

Good luck.. hopefully you'll post some pictures, I love these old optics and I think you will too.

EDIT: Just noticed you're using them on your digital... so testing will be even easier. My mistake.

 

[Ronald M]

Lubes go bad so cla is in order. After that they will be just like new focus mounts.

Glass will perform as described above, less real shadow detail, less highlight detail, less saturated colors, flare.

Single coating from late 1940`s was a big jump. Later multicoating a smaller improvement.

 

[David Hughes]

I'll go along with the others. Old age gives them problems but they are minor on un-coated lenses and cleaning etc cures it and doesn't cost the earth.

BTW, you may have problems with the FED-2 as a lot of people are convinced that Leica and FED bodies and lenses don't mix. Better, imo, to date the lenses and look for a body from Leica of the age of the Summar or a year older.

Regards, David

 

[ray*j*gun]

David is correct about the focus issues with FSU's vs German gear, although Brian Sweeney would be the man to ask for more info.

 

[MC JC86]

The solution might be to buy a Leica body for your lenses. A screw mount camera like a II or III variant can be had for around the price it will cost to fix your Fed. The viewfinder/rangefinder arrangement is admittedly different but they're in a whole different class as far as "fit and finish" goes. I just bought a IIc for $125, a good if not unheard of price.

Of course my solution would be to fix the Fed AND buy a Leica body. 😛

 

[rogerzilla]

The doublet in Elmars often separates after 50 years or so as the Canada balsam breaks down; concentric rings in a "flashlight test" are a hint that something is wrong. It's an easy fix by a technician who knows what he's doing. Modern cements will last longer too; Canada balsam is purified tree sap!

 

[hlpgtf]

thanks for your answers everyone. I've enjoyed the three so far - not much flare trouble with the Elmar or Hektor and I picked up three uv filters for about $2 each to use as a hood on the Summar - it's not pretty, but it works really well. I'm planning on using the Summar for a macro lens this spring and summer (with some cheap old Zenit tubes) - I'm looking forward to some soft, dreamy flower portraits.