LTM Summaron 35mm f3.5 to M3

[mobius981]

Okay...I have done a buncha research and need to check my thinking.

I have a Summaron 35mm f3.5 lens.
I have a lovely M3
I have a SM to bayonet adapter for the lens
I have a VIOOH finder.

From everything I can tell, I should be able to mount the lens to the M3.

I don't think I need the goggles. Is this correct?
Do I need a different finder?
What am I missing?

(trying to keep it simple here and trying not to display my ignorance).

All input is appreciated. The Summaron is a 1952 year btw per the serial number. The lovely M3 is a 1962.

Thanks in advance

 

[mobius981]

also if I am posting in the wrong arena of the forum, my apologies in advance . I wasnt sure where to post.

Also. I have the Fikus shade. So you know.

 

[peterm1]

If you have the earlier screw mount version all you need is an LTM to M adapter. Goggles were not made for that version.

But as you seem to be aware the M3 does not have frame-lines for 35mm lenses so even if your adapter is designed for 35mm it will not bring up 35mm frame-lines when used with your M3 - though it would if used with say an M2 or later camera which had those frame-lines. So you will need your VIOOH or perhaps another supplementary viewfinder designed specifically for the 35mm field of view that goes into the accessory shoe on top of the camera. They are smaller than the VIOOH though I had and used one of these with my M3 (since sold when I went digital). The 35mm specific finders can be had second hand from eBay (e.g. the early Canon one in chrome is very small usable on the M3 and reasonably inexpensive so far as these things go and many 3rd parties made them back in the day and these are even cheaper. Voigtlander also had a very nice one a few years ago which looks almost identical to the old Canon one). Some people also "wing it" and just ignore the M3's framelines and use the full picture afforded by the viewfinder as an approximation of the 35mm field of view. From memory this worked reasonably well for me when I felt like going down that path.

But your VIOOH will do fine. So yes, so you are good to go.

This is the LTM style I am referring to:https://www.mir.com.my/rb/photograp...sources/RF-Nikkor/Leica_RF/LSM35mm/index2.htm

BTW its a very good lens which pleasant rendering in that classic manner of older Leicas. I still have a bayonet version of this lens (which physically, looks more like the f2.8 version) and use it still. Notwithstanding its redesign the bayonet version in f3.5 is still optically identical to the LTM one in f3.5. And I vouch for it. I really like how it renders images.

One further thing. I had to have mine optically cleaned as it had developed a little internal lens haze. This era of Leica lens is quite renowned for that problem which seems to have something to do with the lubricant used out-gassing and perhaps interacting with ambient moisture. A little haze may not matter too much and your Fikus should help but if it does bother you cleaning by a technician can help. (Not always sadly as sometimes the lens surface gets permanently affected but that seems not to be the absolute rule so do not panic.)

 

[mobius981]

Ok. Peter that was just brilliant. My deepest thanks. Sounds like I am good to go.

The subject has been a bit confusing to me...and you clarified everything. Furthermore, I couldn't seem to find a definitive answer on the internet! lol.

Next step: put lens thru its paces.

Thanks again so much. I hope your lengthy and well-stated answer helps others as well....