Leica LTM Looking for a new LTM lens for iiic

Leica M39 screw mount bodies/lenses
Larry Cloetta said:
FWIW, supposedly it's only the later, and lighter, and more plentiful Canon black, black and silver, 50/1.8 that has the major haze problem. The internal lubricants used in the later ones will outgas, which is where the haze comes from.

The earlier, all chrome, much heavier 50/1.8 rarely seems to have the same kind of haze problem.
Click to expand...

Makes sense. It is indeed the later black ones I've been looking at.
 
Any LTM Nikkor would get my vote as they can perform brilliantly and look very at home attached to a IIIc.

Newer CV options are well described above or at www.cameraquest.com. A lot depends upon how much you want to spend for the quality and speed you need.

I've been watching lots of conversations about the wide variety of CV glass over the years and frankly none will do you wrong. Some are world class, others perhaps a step down, none are worse than very good.

If you want classic, look Nikkor, newer CV.

B2 (;->
 
I use the Nikkor-W 3.5/35 LTM on my Canon P. It's lovely.

20713980743_e73eb3b160_z.jpg

Weekend Ride by P F McFarland, on Flickr

PF
 
Fadedsun said:
I've been researching into buying a new lens for my iiic and not really sure which direction to go. The camera came with the Elmar 5cm 3.5, and while I enjoy the lens, I would prefer something a bit more "modern". Definitely a lens with a wider aperture for lower light situations, and a more easily adjustable aperture ring.

Reading on the forums here, it seems like The Summicron 5cm f/2 and Summitar 5cm f/2 are great lenses. What differentiates these two in terms of quality? The Summitar seems to cost less overall. I also can't ignore lenses from other companies. I've heard that Canon made some great LTM lenses.

Any suggestions would be great! :)
Click to expand...

The Canon 50/1.4 is a great, relatively modern optic but the Nokton 50/1.5 in LTM is just about as modern as it gets. I recently did a CLA on one including re-calibration of the focusing mech and while it's not quite as nicely built as the old Canon or Leica lenses, it's still a solid piece of equipment and optically, it is very nice.

The Canon 50/1.8 is prone to haze, the 50/1.5 is a Sonnar so not exactly modern and the 50/1.2 is lower in contrast in general than the 50/1.4 although does have more of a character imprint on the image.

I had a Summitar and an Elmar 50/3.5, still have a Summarit 50/1.5 and I'd rank 'em like this:

Nokton 50/1.5
Canons (which one depending on your preferences)
Summitar
Summarit
Elmar

But I'm mostly a shooter and don't really care if it is Leitz or not, so YMMV.
 
Just so you have an idea, here is a sampling taken with the CV ColorSkopar 50 2.5

100% at ISO 3200 f 2.5 Leica M240:

ColorSkoparS-5-2_zpserzrvnek.jpg


And Leica M7 with Fuji C200 film (as your LTM obviously is a film camera)
78cad668-355a-49a2-999d-1e4c1889bb1c_zpsr2gibjhy.jpg


131aceb7-c159-4ebb-9eee-3c21e353f404_zpsmd71xyob.jpg


LTM-M adapter from Fedka.
 
Huss said:
What camera do you use it on? Does it focus correctly? (even if it is NOS it may need shimming). Do you have sample photos taken w it u could post? I like the look..

I am a little gun shy about Fedka. I bought one of their pricey LTM-M 50/75 adapters as they were meant to be good, but it was just as useless as the cheap Chinese ones. On all of my Ms (digital and film) it did not bring up the correct frame lines. Instead it was a mish-mash of different frame lines. It also did not mount the lens at the 12 o'clock position.
It did bring up the correct lines on my CLE, does that count as an M?
Click to expand...

I currently use the J-8 on a Sony A7II. As it isn't a rangefinder I am not troubled by the need to shim the lens.

A recent pic with the lens, shot at f:2.0...

 
A minor point the Summitar comes in a collapsible mount but you should be aware that pre-war ones will be uncoated and post war ones will be coated, usually.

Regards, David
 
Did Canon make a 50/f2?

I have visions of a LTM kit to parallel my Nikon RF system; my preference would be a Nikkor 50 but the right Canon would suffice also. I already have a Nikkor 28mm for it...
 
Everyone will have slightly different ideas here.

If you want click-stop apertures, the Jupiter-8 (or 3) are not for you. And I think the Sonnar rendering is exactly NOT what people mean when they say "modern." That said, many (me included) really like they way they draw. And really, they are fairly simple mechanically and easy to regrease.

I have a Canon 1.4, and I think it's a great lens - still classic but quite a modern approach to correction, double Gauss design, relatively stable character across the aperture range (unlike Sonnars). Click stop aperture in full stops. Has an infinity lock - dunno whether this is a plus or a minus.

I also have a Summitar (can't comment on the Summitar/Summicron division) which is a very sharp lens, but doesn't do distant out-of-focus areas well - can be messy or even swirly at times. Renders points as donuts when fully open, and as hexagonal donuts (if you have a later version like mine) at part aperture. Renders foreground OOF in a pretty manner, though, so a nice complement to a Sonnar which if course does the reverse with foregrounds and backgrounds. Period correct for a 111c, and cases for the pairing are around. Aperture is NOT click stop but does have an aperture ring. And an infinity stop, and collapses.

Canon's F2 option was the 50mm f1.8 - these are apparently pretty decent and are common, but the general rule of older lens designs (say pre 1980-ish) is that you probably want to buy a lens which is a stop faster than you intend to use. I got the 1.4.

The most modern handling lens I have is a Rollei 40mm f2.8 Sonnar, which uses a mount by Voigtlaender/ Cosina. It's nice having the more modern style focusing tab and click stops (1/3 stop), but to be honest I think older rangefinder cameras call for setting your camera up well before the shot, not trying to change settings with the camera to your eye. And if you ARE going to use TTL metering to adjust your aperture then click stops are irrelevant.

Still, lots of great options depending what you want. I would suggest looking at a lot of photos filtered by lens (in the gallery here, and flickr etc) to see what rendering you like.
 
I have/had a mess of 50mm LTM lenses, and I hardly think you can go wrong. They're all a bit different wide open, very similar stopped down. I had two Summitars and couldn't ever get into them, but many people like them. My favorite of all is the collapsible Summicron, IF you get a clean one, which is moderately difficult. In general, Nikon and Canon seem a bit clinical to me, but that's OK, too. I think people make too much of lens choice--if it's not absolutely rotten, I can make it work. Wait. . . . there's a place for rotten lenses too! :)

Probably the best solution to this is to go some place like Flickr and do a search for the various choices to see what you prefer, yourself, not listen to us.
 
The 2.8 Elmar is faster and a lot easier to adjust the aperture ring. There is usually one on eBay. I'm also partial to the collapsible Summicron. Both are compact on the IIIc. But the Elmar is even more compact than the Summicron.
 
Scrambler said:
The most modern handling lens I have is a Rollei 40mm f2.8 Sonnar, which uses a mount by Voigtlaender/ Cosina. It's nice having the more modern style focusing tab and click stops (1/3 stop)
Click to expand...

Oh yeah, forgot about the 'Rollei'. I have one of those too, sitting unused..
Silver, brass, much pricier than the CV 50 at about $650. Funny thing in looks and feel and construction it is obviously assembled from parts made by CV. It looks like the twin to the CV50 2.5, even has the exact same filter/lens hood/lens cap assembly.
Both are beautiful lenses, depends if you want a 40 2.8 or 50 2.5
 
Do you want one that has click stops? If not, a very useable and small lens is the much-derided Summar. If you want click stops, the collapsible Summicron is great, but the click stops are only at full stops, not half stops like the newer lenses. I have one of each, and enjoy both of them. BTW, after CLA the Summar even works wide open at its closest focusing point.
 
 
giganova said:
If you want one in chrome/silver, there's tons of sub-$1k options:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/172135612018?_trksid=p2055119.m1438.l2649&ssPageName=STRK:MEBIDX:IT

http://www.ebay.com/itm/172139431510?_trksid=p2055119.m1438.l2649&ssPageName=STRK:MEBIDX:IT

http://www.ebay.com/itm/162007281551?_trksid=p2055119.m1438.l2649&ssPageName=STRK:MEBIDX:IT

http://www.ebay.com/itm/351673018463?_trksid=p2055119.m1438.l2649&ssPageName=STRK:MEBIDX:IT

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B000NHWP44...=UTF8&colid=GBAZ3BU7UPMT&coliid=ISVTJU1IF1Q41

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00CW6966Y...UTF8&colid=GBAZ3BU7UPMT&coliid=I1UYRX9KJJ8T06
Click to expand...


Be very careful buying used lenses from a humid climate. Been burnt twice buying from Japan from sellers with great reps. Fungus free? Of course Sir! Right...

(others have had better success than me, but I'm done.)
 
Rob-F said:
The 2.8 Elmar is faster and a lot easier to adjust the aperture ring. There is usually one on eBay. I'm also partial to the collapsible Summicron. Both are compact on the IIIc. But the Elmar is even more compact than the Summicron.
Click to expand...


Be very careful when considering purchase of the Elmar 2.8 in LTM.

The inside surface of the front lens element degrades and forms a white film. This has the appearance of haze which one would suppose could be cleaned but is actually pitting of the glass surface. This is irreparable and necessitates replacement of the damaged glass element.
 
I think a Jupiter-8 from the 50s is a great option.
I found mine for about $75 with perfect glass, 1955 KMZ.
Nice at f2, excellent from f2.8. Light, small, cheap.
Just 130gr.
Small and light is important to me, so at less than $100 for a very good one, it is a super value imho
At least mine draws very nicely and it's sharp.


Summitar is a great option too if not scratched or hazy.
I'd look for a coated one (post-war) but I'd avoid the later 6 blades version.
Mine has perfect glass and it was $450 in 2014, from 1949, coated.
It's larger (although collapsible), heavier and more expensive.
Around 200gr

Canon 50/1.4 is a great option too for f1.4
But even larger and heavier (but f1.4)
Sharp at f1.4 and a special way of drawing.
Mine has good glass and was $370 in 2014
Around 250gr

Nokton 50/1.5 old ltm version is very good too.
Even heavier at 355gr

The Skopar 50/2.5 is good too, and small, but at f2.5 is maybe a too small step in to wider aperture.

The Canon 50/1.8 renders very nicely.
The earlier chrome version is *soposed* to be less haze-prone, heavier at 270gr
The later black/chrome version is lighter at 185gr
In any case be sure is not hazy or that you can send it back.
 
So given an Elmar 5/3.5, I'd personally look towards something extremely different if you want another 50. Fast, modern and ignoring size.

The VC 50/1.5 seems like a great opposite. If you prefer an older look, any of the Sonnar 50/1.5s or Canon 50/1.4 seem like solid options.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom