Quick response please! Elmar 5cm fake or not?

[micromoogman]

Yeah, I know it's boring but I really need some more opinions than my own... What do you think of this nickel pre-war Elmar 5cm lens, real or not? My conclusion is fake but I am not completely sure abou these early ones... It has an FSU air...
Judge for your self.

 

[John Shriver]

Now I can compare this photo to my 1936 chrome Elmar at home.

The front of the f-stop tab on mine is flush with the front ring of the lens, yours is recessed. The rest of that aperture ring my lens has a round (bead) front, yours is square.

The metal of the focusing tab and mount is thicker than my Elmar.

The threading on both the mount and the focusing helical go right to the edge on this lens. On mine, both end neatly before the end.

The engraving doesn't match, no space before cm on mine, the f isn't italic on mine. The line for f/18 takes a right angle bend on mine. The infinity marking is turned 90 degrees from mine.

The angle of the knurling around the front of the lens is different. It is also coarser than mine.

There is only one stop pin on the mounting flange, of medium length. My Elmar has a short one as an infinity stop, and a long one as a 1 meter stop.

But, not having a nickel pre-serial-number Elmar to compare, I can't be sure if these were production variations. But there's a lot of fishy things here...

 

[FrankS]

I'm not saying this lens is the real thing, but most fakes have an aperture ring around the front element, not an aperture tab which real Elmars have.

 

[John Shriver]

That's why I brought up the rather hand-hewn look of the aperture tab, and the squareness of the face of that ring. It may well have been filed down.

On the other hand, KEH has an Elmar with an italic f, and the 45 degree angle in the line for f/18.

Have a peek at:

http://jay.fedka.com/index_files/Page444.htm

Lots of hints there, like the thick flange, and the conical, rather than domed, infinity catch button.

 

[FrankS]

From the Fedka site: The earlier Industar used by the FED resembles the Elmar in dimensions and both use a tiny lever to set the diaphragm. Industar 22/50 use a (more convenient?) ring in its place.

So, my simple method of discriminating between fake and real is NOT reliable, sorry!

 

[xayraa33]

where are the aperture blades positoned on this lens?
on a real Elmar they are right behind the front element.
not so on the FSU lenses, as these are direct Tessar copies.

 

[micromoogman]

I've asked the guy who is selling it and he says "in the end", but as far as I know they should either be in the middle, fake, and just behind the first glass if it was a real Elmar? One thing, it is uncoated, and I believe most of the russian lenses are coated?
Thanks for your help!

 

[xayraa33]

The early Fed pre war lenses were uncoated.

 

[Limpovitj]

Hello everyone! (My first post)

Yes, I saw that one as well. The same seller also lists what looks like a Leica II (in the same condition), but it's serial identifies it as a IIIc... It is a russian fake, made from a (pre-war) FED-1, I'd say. Thus, the uncoated lens. (I once removed the coating from a lens with toothpaste and q-tips, however...)
I have a hard time imagining how a camera and lens would brass in that way, in those places, from use. It looks more like someone gave it a good rub with sand paper...
Also, I do have a (genuine) nickel-Elmar, and on mine the engravings are quite different (they read Leitz Elmar 1:3,5 F=50mm, but that can vary) and more importantly are nowhere as poorly done as on this one.

Jag känner en kille som har en MicroMoog, förresten.

 

[Limpovitj]

But, hey, maybe it's the real deal, and I just want to buy it before you do...

 

[micromoogman]

heh, I'll wait 'til I find a good one. But I have seen genuine Elmars on Feds and real Zeiss Sonnars on Kievs... You really never know!

Jag har haft en micromoog 😉

 

[Nikon Bob]

Hope these help you in your search for an Elmar 50mm/F3.5. The one reference book that I have states that there are 14 versions of screwmount Elmar 50mm/F3.5 lenses and that the engraving of 5cm was used on later versions.

Bob

 

[micromoogman]

Thank you for the pictures! Could you tell me where the serial number is located, and how it looks like? I allready have a 2,8/50Elmar to my M2 but it's too good, the result doesn't look like those "classic" Leica pics...

 

[FrankS]

Don't know if this is helpful:

 

[Nikon Bob]

Thank you for the pictures! Could you tell me where the serial number is located, and how it looks like? I allready have a 2,8/50Elmar to my M2 but it's too good, the result doesn't look like those "classic" Leica pics...

The serial number is usually found on the flat surface of the lens ring. The ring is the one around which the aperature lever rotates. Hope that is clear. I say usually because they were made without serial numbers also. You will need to look carefully with a good magnifying glass to see them. I don't know about the old time look but I had mine cleaned at DAG and it is very good in use if you keep the sun off the front of the lens. BTW mine has no serial number and trying to find it drove me nuts till I found out some simply did not have any.

Bob

 

[ZorkiKat]

Those aren't real Elmar. They used to be FED 50mm (Industar-10) lenses. The numbers stamped on the rear side of the mount are typical of these Ukrainian collapsible lenses.

Jay

 

[ZorkiKat]

...nothing wrong with the lens, but its use may be limited to early FED cameras due to lens mount, camming, and working distance/lens register issues. FSU Tessar trplets are good lenses by all means.

 

[johannielscom]

Thread from the dead!

Been looking online for the definitive answer on authentic Elmar 5cm lenses when you take the number of element reflections into account when you close the aperture, but tonight am unable to locate any internet link that addresses this approach on determining fakes.

Anyone? How many reflections in the lens elements with a real 50mm Elmar, and how many with an Industar (Tessar clone)?


EDIT:

Nevermind. Found it already in another thread on here:

The Tessar design was produced in 1902, and awarded a US patent in 1903. When the patent expired in 1920 there were many variants on the Tessar design released by other companies, such as some of Kodak's Ektars and Schneider's Xenars.

The Leica 50mm f/3.5 Elmar lens patented in 1920 and released in 1925 was a Tessar type lens but structurally different. . Zeiss Tessar and Leitz Elmar are both four element three group designs, with a rear cemented doublet, but there is major difference between the Tessar and Elmar: the position of the diaphragm. The Tessar lens has two elements in two groups in front of the diaphragm and a cement doublet behind the diaphragm; on the other hand, The Leitz Elmar lens has one group in front of the diaphragm, and one group plus one doublet behind the diaphragm.

Michael

(https://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showpost.php?p=642999&postcount=19)

So the Elmar has two reflections, and the Industar will have four...