Leica Elmar M 50mm/2.8

[Justin Low]

I need some information on the above-mentioned lens. Will this lens collapse completely into the Bessa R2? Will it hit the ledge in front of the shutter? 🙂

Peter, the Elmar-M is a wonderful lens. I've posted some pictures made with it on RFF before. It's my favorite!

As for collapsing, it will do so all the way on a Leica M, but not on a Bessa R2. It does not pose a risk on the R2 however, as the body has an internal stop which the lens will encounter. No worries about the lens hitting the shutter at all.

As for size wise, perhaps I will take some comparison pictures this weekend.

 

[ERV]

I'll soon be getting an elmar 50 f2.8 Classic. I've read that the build quality is better on the first version, but that the current M version is sharper. Does anyone have any experience with both?

I had both and sold the original elmar 2.8 for the current model.
The original has the same build quality has a chrome summicron rigid; nicely finished and heavy weight for a small lens. It was a medium contrast lens and had beautiful graduated tones.
The one dislike is the aperture rotates on the lens barrel together with the focus ring, so to set the aperture you have to hold the lens againest the camera body and then focus. This is hard to explain, however it works with practice. The newer elmar doesn't have this problem. I still have the original 2.8 lens hood, which is also beautifully made.
I don't think the build quality of the new elmar is bad at all. I like it so much I sold my current 50 cron. Very light, small, smooth. A great travel lens.
More contrast than the first version, but not as much as the current cron, which I didn't care for.
Also, I invented 🙂 the plastic tube-ring method on my elmar to keep it from collapsing into my M5. I posted here with photos back in the day.

 

[Ronald M]

Frank.

I have both and each is nice in it`s own way. The buiild is like all the current lenses, very good and better than enyone else, but not as nice as the original. It is very fast focuring rotation wise. Infinity to 10 feet is about 3 degrees.


The original came two ways, heavy bright chrome like the original DR and a satin chrome like the later DR/rigids. Mine is a later version and has the properties of the Summicron DR/Rigid. Downside is the rotating focus mount rather than parallel on either.

The new model is like the current `cron on sharpness. Some one suggested maybe a planar fingerprint, but I can`t say as I don`t have a new `cron. I will say is it is very sharp, noticabely so compared to my 1969 `Cron and all my other 50`s

 

[d_e]

Anybody has samples of this lens wide open? I am contemplating on getting a 50 Summicron F2 Type 1 Rigid serial 2,100,000+, which might need cleaning for its old age or a current version 50 Elmar serial 3,000,000+ which is in pristine condition. This thread makes me think about the Elmar more.

 

[taffy]

I had both and sold the original elmar 2.8 for the current model.
The original has the same build quality has a chrome summicron rigid; nicely finished and heavy weight for a small lens. It was a medium contrast lens and had beautiful graduated tones.
The one dislike is the aperture rotates on the lens barrel together with the focus ring, so to set the aperture you have to hold the lens againest the camera body and then focus. This is hard to explain, however it works with practice. The newer elmar doesn't have this problem. I still have the original 2.8 lens hood, which is also beautifully made.
I don't think the build quality of the new elmar is bad at all. I like it so much I sold my current 50 cron. Very light, small, smooth. A great travel lens.
More contrast than the first version, but not as much as the current cron, which I didn't care for.
Also, I invented 🙂 the plastic tube-ring method on my elmar to keep it from collapsing into my M5. I posted here with photos back in the day.

Hi! would you still have pictures of your plastic tube method?

Thanks!

Taffy