Just got a Barnack Leica!

[AlwaysOnAuto]

Chris, I can't think of a more deserving guy to receive such a great gift. Congrats!
Do you have a digital camera you can adapt these lenses to?
Film gets expensive, even if you do your own developing.

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

To the OP. A suggestion. If you are new to ltm Leicas forget about all the various bits you could have and go out just with camera and 50mm lens.

I've been a professional artist for 25 years. I don't need to 'limit' myself to 'learn.' I need the equipment to shoot any photograph that I see, and many photographs just plain cannot be done with a 50mm (though it is my favorite focal length).

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

Chris, I can't think of a more deserving guy to receive such a great gift. Congrats!
Do you have a digital camera you can adapt these lenses to?
Film gets expensive, even if you do your own developing.

I also shoot micro 4/3 digital. You can adapt just about anything to m4/3 but to be honest, I see no reason to. The Olympus Pro Series lenses I use are incredible, and adapted lenses are just a pain to work with for no real benefit. I tried it for using old Olympus manual focus lenses, and returned the adapter I had bought a half hour after I bought it.


I will use film and the Leica to use the lenses O.C. gave me. I don't care about the cost; I am a professional and the film is just a cost of doing business to me. It costs me far less than I spend putting gas in my car to go out photographing.

 

[AlwaysOnAuto]

OK.
I use adapted lenses because they still impart their character to the image taken.
Hope you enjoy your new to you Leica, it looks fantastic.

 

[CharlesDAMorgan]

It costs me far less than I spend putting gas in my car to go out photographing.

So true.

I took my 1933 Leica III out yesterday to take a few photos of a 1938 Ford truck. My petrol (OK at UK prices) totalled close to £25. One b&w 35mm and one 120 colour film and development costs - £15.

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

A couple more photos!

Shot on Ilford HP5 with the 50mm Summitar

Shot on Tri-X with the 135mm Canon lens

 

[victoriapio]

Naturally there is a story behind this “gift” to Chris.

A friend at work, Ray, inherited some vintage camera equipment from his uncle, who died during 2018. Ray knew my background in photography and asked if I would take a look at the equipment.

All the equipment was top notch but primarily sheet film cameras; graflexes, 3x5 sheet film cameras, even a Bronica TLR. But at some point all the camera metal had been exposed to leaking chemicals or other corrosive chemicals. There wasn’t much that could be done with them other than a complete disassembly of the cameras and restoring all the metal parts, not to mention leaky bellows and a lot of stuck focusing gears. The cost to do that was not practical.

Then Ray showed me a plastic grocery bag and when I looked into it, there was the Leica IIIC body and the lenses Chris mentioned. All were in original cases which with the plastic grocery bag, must have protected them from the corrosive chemicals.

I could tell the camera had not been touched for decades but the lenses looked clear and in good shape, even if the focus rings were stiff and in need of maintenance.

I sent some pics of the equipment to DAG who replied with an estimate for repairs and maintenance for the whole kit. Ray and I worked out a fair price for the equipment in their current condition, and I immediately sent everything to DAG. He determined the body was an original IIIC which had been sent to Leica NY sometime in its past and converted to a IIIF. Even the serial # was transferred to the new top plate. The lenses were cleaned and restored to shooting condition. When it was returned in January 2019, I put the equipment in my safe until two weeks ago.

Two weeks ago I retired from my job for the City of Victoria,Texas and the first thing I did was think about this nice kit stuck in my safe. (BTW, I moved to digital rangefinders when the Epson was first introduced and still have an M9 (sensor replaced) and a version 1 Monochrome that I will shoot a lot now that I have time.) While I admire all of you who shoot film, I did not want to go down that path.

So when I visited RFF on my first day of retirement, I went to the screw mount Leica thread and other film forums here and saw that Chris was still shooting film and still not using Leica. So I contacted him and asked if he wanted this kit and of course he said yes.

So I am grateful that the kit found a home with Chris and I know that he will shoot the hell out of it, and enjoy it. I am impressed with the photos he has already taken with it, and look forward to seeing more of his work.
OC

 

[victoriapio]

Oh that is so nice on so many levels! I changed Coelho's quote a bit ...'Often the universe conspires in helping you to achieve something you had not thought of until then.' I wonder what you'll show us. And please tell O.C. that there is a standing invite for al fresco dinner in Melbourne's Lygon Street!

I will try with all my might to take you up on that offer Egon 🙂

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

An update: I haven't posted any new photos because my original testing of the camera showed that the shutter was giving uneven exposures and the second curtain was closing on the first one before they had moved all the way across the frame at 1/500 and 1/1000. O.C. arranged for me to send it back to DAG to be adjusted, since it was still under warranty from DAG for the original overhaul that O.C. had him do on the camera.

I just got it back today and shot a couple of test rolls. Also, while I was waiting for DAG to adjust the shutter, I found a great deal on a Leica VIOOH finder for it. This finder has built in settings for 35, 50, 85, 90, and 135mm lenses. I used it today to try the 35mm Elmar for the first time.

I'll develop the film tonight so in a couple days (after I scan them) I will have some more stuff to show off from the Leica!

 

[Timmyjoe]

DAG does excellent work, he rebuilt my IIIc and I've been very happy with it. And that Leica VIOOH is a lot of fun to work with, and sits nicely on the Barnack bodies and has settings for most of my LTM lenses (no 28mm though). Have fun with it.

Best,
-Tim

 

[retinax]

To my eyes some grit and grain from film suits your clean compositions extremely well! Will we see more of this in the Fort Wayne thread?

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

DAG does excellent work, he rebuilt my IIIc and I've been very happy with it. And that Leica VIOOH is a lot of fun to work with, and sits nicely on the Barnack bodies and has settings for most of my LTM lenses (no 28mm though). Have fun with it.

Best,
-Tim

Interestingly, there is a 28mm adapter for the VIOOH. It is a lens that screws over the front of the finder. Unfortunately, it is fairly expensive, about $150 (the VIOOH cost me $40).

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

To my eyes some grit and grain from film suits your clean compositions extremely well! Will we see more of this in the Fort Wayne thread?

Yeah, I will post the stuff there, I have been really far behind in my photo editing. I've had to take on a lot of web design work because I haven't sold a print in awhile now, so that has kept me too busy.

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

Here's the camera with the VIOOH finder and the 3.5cm f3.5 Elmar. I shot this lens for the first time today, since I didn't have a finder for 35mm lenses when I did my initial shots with the camera before I sent it to DAG. The lens is smaller than the finder!

 

[zuiko85]

I also shoot micro 4/3 digital. You can adapt just about anything to m4/3 but to be honest, I see no reason to. The Olympus Pro Series lenses I use are incredible, and adapted lenses are just a pain to work with for no real benefit. I tried it for using old Olympus manual focus lenses, and returned the adapter I had bought a half hour after I bought it.

Just purchased my third Olympus ILC. It is a used EM10, my first micro 4:3 and the first digital I *may* be able to tolerate. But self imposed budget constraints have limited me (at this time) to a set of manual focus lenses. Specifically the Oly Pen F film Zuikos.
Thank goodness for the magnified focusing option, otherwise accurate focusing would not be possible most of the time. I really see you point though, it's a slow process for sure. The lens adapter was cheap and I've shimmed it out .002 inch to get it closer to infinity. Don't know what CoC Olympus used for the Pen lenses DoF scale but I just select 2 stops larger for scale focusing.

It appears that the Olympus 25mm f1.8 is the best bargain for a dedicated AF lens so when I can, that will be the lens I go for.

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

Just purchased my third Olympus ILC. It is a used EM10, my first micro 4:3 and the first digital I *may* be able to tolerate. But self imposed budget constraints have limited me (at this time) to a set of manual focus lenses. Specifically the Oly Pen F film Zuikos.
Thank goodness for the magnified focusing option, otherwise accurate focusing would not be possible most of the time. I really see you point though, it's a slow process for sure. The lens adapter was cheap and I've shimmed it out .002 inch to get it closer to infinity. Don't know what CoC Olympus used for the Pen lenses DoF scale but I just select 2 stops larger for scale focusing.

It appears that the Olympus 25mm f1.8 is the best bargain for a dedicated AF lens so when I can, that will be the lens I go for.

The 25mm f1.8 and the 45mm f1.8 are both incredible bargains. Olympus often puts them on sale for $250 each. The 45 is a great portrait lens.


I don't like the wideangle counterpart to these lenses, however. It is the 17mm f1.8. It is very expensive, about $400 and it is not very good optically. Dead center, it is SHARP, but as soon as you move even the littlest way from dead center it begins to rapidly lose sharpness. 2/3 of the way out, its incapable of rendering fine detail.


I tried and returned 5 of them, and all were the same. Months later, I tried several at another store and they were also the same.


If you want a wide prime, the Pana-Leica 15mm f1.7 is magnificent, VERY sharp. Its kind of expensive, but is worth it.

 

[CharlesDAMorgan]

Beautiful beastie - I look forward now to seeing the pictures you take with it!

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

I developed my films last night. The 3.5cm Elmar is VERY sharp, even to the edges. A lot of people online say it is a poor lens and that the later 35mm f3.5 or f2.8 Summar lenses are better. Maybe they are, I have never tried them, but the Elmar is still incredibly good.

The VIOOH finder works great too, as long as I remember to set it to the correct distance to compensate for parallax. The framing is a lot more accurate than it is with the Leica IIIf's built in finder (I'm comparing the VIOOH's 50mm setting to the camera's finder since the camera finder is for 50mm only).

Will try to scan some stuff tonight.

 

[mpaniagua]

I developed my films last night. The 3.5cm Elmar is VERY sharp, even to the edges. A lot of people online say it is a poor lens and that the later 35mm f3.5 or f2.8 Summar lenses are better. Maybe they are, I have never tried them, but the Elmar is still incredibly good.

The VIOOH finder works great too, as long as I remember to set it to the correct distance to compensate for parallax. The framing is a lot more accurate than it is with the Leica IIIf's built in finder (I'm comparing the VIOOH's 50mm setting to the camera's finder since the camera finder is for 50mm only).

Will try to scan some stuff tonight.

I think the reason people say that from the Elmar 3.5 is because there are a lot of them that are fogged. It is not a bad lens when clean. Mine was, and made the lens soft and contrast less. Once cleaned it became a different beast.

Regards
Marcelo.

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

I think the reason people say that from the Elmar 3.5 is because there are a lot of them that are fogged. It is not a bad lens when clean. Mine was, and made the lens soft and contrast less. Once cleaned it became a different beast.

Regards
Marcelo.

O.C. had mine cleaned by DAG before he gave it to me, and the glass looks flawless. That must be the secret to its good performance.