lawnpotter
Well-known
What is the difference between red and black scale Elmar? Thanks
rogerzilla
Well-known
Not much apart from red paint, although all red scales are coated and, of course, early Elmars aren't.
Erwin Puts has a FAQ on it; there is a theory that the glass is of a different specification, but he concludes that the serial numbers of the glass change and the change from black to red don't coincide.
Basically it's a good little lens with a bit more mystique than it deserves.
Erwin Puts has a FAQ on it; there is a theory that the glass is of a different specification, but he concludes that the serial numbers of the glass change and the change from black to red don't coincide.
Basically it's a good little lens with a bit more mystique than it deserves.
lawnpotter
Well-known
Thanks for the reply Rogerzilla
Juan Valdenebro
Truth is beauty
Here's a summary I wrote on other forum after discussing the subject:
After producing for twenty-five years the lens that made the Leica name famous worldwide, the 50mm f/3.5 collapsible Elmar lens was recomputed at Leitz in 1951, two years after its designer Max Berek had passed away.
Max Berek’s (and Oscar Barnack’s original) concept for the very first LEItzCAmera (then called miniature camera) was designing the smallest, sharpest lens without any distortion, and a very good lens through all its range: that lens design concept was truly respected when the type of glass and the optical formula were improved. Minimum focusing distance, maximum aperture and optical design remained the same, while newer glass and small changes in elements’ curvatures and spacing improved performance by a small margin (older elmars were already great lenses) and produced a slightly larger sharpness circle and smaller softened frame corners’ areas.
The recomputing was done during the few years when lens design wasn’t a totally optical/human process anymore, but neither a computer based one: Midland and Mandler’s computer aided design work would be known only a few years later, but hoping for a shorter minimum focusing distance or for the highest sharpness paying some distortion as a price, were not part of the new recomputed Red Scale Elmar recipe from 1951: the red scale Elmar was a true Elmar, and for its recalculation both extensive visual testing and comptometers (very noisy desk sized electromechanical scientific calculators for trigonometric and logarithmic functions) were heavily used. After the Red Scale f/3.5 production, came the f/2.8 Elmar, a different lens, and one that showed a new design path in part shared with the Summicron and the rest of the more modern Leica lenses: the Red Scale Elmar f/3.5 was the last one of its kind.
During the early 1950’s the new 50mm f/3.5 Red Scale Elmar was available first in screwmount version, and then very soon in M mount… It was produced from 1951 to 1962, so the whole Elmar f/3.5 production had an impressive life of thirty-six years that started in 1926, one of the longest production periods for any Leica lens. There are two types of Red Scale Elmars: those made during the first three years of its production (1951-1953), just before the M-mount was offered, and those made from then on (1953-1962)… The first ones, with serial numbers around one million, are called “diamond” red scale elmars because there’s a diamond or rhombus figure to mark the focused distance, while the second period ones share the same optical formula and performance but are called “triangle” red scale elmars because there’s a triangle, instead of the diamond, marking the precise focused distance… It seems the change from diamond to triangle had to do with a change in the type of available glass, although performance is equal.
It was common back then at Leitz factory, upgrading cameras and lenses: many photographers sent their cameras to have them upgraded by Leitz technicians for flash use, and also sent their pre world war II lenses to have them coated, both for improved contrast in black and white and for better saturation with color film. For this reason, coating service, there are some red scale elmars which have old elmars’optical cells inside, instead of real red scale elmars’ glass and formula: to avoid confusion, those upgraded older lenses inside red scale elmar’s metal housings have no serial number, or keep the original lens serial number, while true red scale elmars have official serial numbers for the 1950’s: close to one million and above.
Now in 2017, we can say the lens was designed a century ago… It was sold from 1926 on, but it was indeed designed several years before that: Leica prototypes start in 1915-16. The most amazing fact is, both optical quality and build quality were superb, and these days, the lens keeps performing amazingly well in the hands of a skilled photographer, on film cameras and also on digital cameras…
This is the story of the small lens that changed photography forever, making it a portable hobby, and an invaluable witness in the documenting of our lives.
After producing for twenty-five years the lens that made the Leica name famous worldwide, the 50mm f/3.5 collapsible Elmar lens was recomputed at Leitz in 1951, two years after its designer Max Berek had passed away.
Max Berek’s (and Oscar Barnack’s original) concept for the very first LEItzCAmera (then called miniature camera) was designing the smallest, sharpest lens without any distortion, and a very good lens through all its range: that lens design concept was truly respected when the type of glass and the optical formula were improved. Minimum focusing distance, maximum aperture and optical design remained the same, while newer glass and small changes in elements’ curvatures and spacing improved performance by a small margin (older elmars were already great lenses) and produced a slightly larger sharpness circle and smaller softened frame corners’ areas.
The recomputing was done during the few years when lens design wasn’t a totally optical/human process anymore, but neither a computer based one: Midland and Mandler’s computer aided design work would be known only a few years later, but hoping for a shorter minimum focusing distance or for the highest sharpness paying some distortion as a price, were not part of the new recomputed Red Scale Elmar recipe from 1951: the red scale Elmar was a true Elmar, and for its recalculation both extensive visual testing and comptometers (very noisy desk sized electromechanical scientific calculators for trigonometric and logarithmic functions) were heavily used. After the Red Scale f/3.5 production, came the f/2.8 Elmar, a different lens, and one that showed a new design path in part shared with the Summicron and the rest of the more modern Leica lenses: the Red Scale Elmar f/3.5 was the last one of its kind.
During the early 1950’s the new 50mm f/3.5 Red Scale Elmar was available first in screwmount version, and then very soon in M mount… It was produced from 1951 to 1962, so the whole Elmar f/3.5 production had an impressive life of thirty-six years that started in 1926, one of the longest production periods for any Leica lens. There are two types of Red Scale Elmars: those made during the first three years of its production (1951-1953), just before the M-mount was offered, and those made from then on (1953-1962)… The first ones, with serial numbers around one million, are called “diamond” red scale elmars because there’s a diamond or rhombus figure to mark the focused distance, while the second period ones share the same optical formula and performance but are called “triangle” red scale elmars because there’s a triangle, instead of the diamond, marking the precise focused distance… It seems the change from diamond to triangle had to do with a change in the type of available glass, although performance is equal.
It was common back then at Leitz factory, upgrading cameras and lenses: many photographers sent their cameras to have them upgraded by Leitz technicians for flash use, and also sent their pre world war II lenses to have them coated, both for improved contrast in black and white and for better saturation with color film. For this reason, coating service, there are some red scale elmars which have old elmars’optical cells inside, instead of real red scale elmars’ glass and formula: to avoid confusion, those upgraded older lenses inside red scale elmar’s metal housings have no serial number, or keep the original lens serial number, while true red scale elmars have official serial numbers for the 1950’s: close to one million and above.
Now in 2017, we can say the lens was designed a century ago… It was sold from 1926 on, but it was indeed designed several years before that: Leica prototypes start in 1915-16. The most amazing fact is, both optical quality and build quality were superb, and these days, the lens keeps performing amazingly well in the hands of a skilled photographer, on film cameras and also on digital cameras…
This is the story of the small lens that changed photography forever, making it a portable hobby, and an invaluable witness in the documenting of our lives.
mcfingon
Western Australia
Excellent detailed answer Juan. I have been surprised by how well my 1946 coated Elmar 50 3.5 performs on my Sony A7S, and that gave me confidence to buy the last of the 50 Elmar line, the Elmar-M 50/2.8.
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
Thanks, Juan, that's the best summary I've seen on the subject! I'm going to bookmark it.
Juan Valdenebro
Truth is beauty
Thank you... Yes, I've heard elmars work well with digital sensors... And that last elmar is of course a wonderful lens... Not as compact when collapsed, but we can't have everrything in the same lens... For a good digital sensor, that lens is hard to beat IMO, I would choose it too... Happy shooting!
Juan Valdenebro
Truth is beauty
Thanks, Rob!
Compact lenses are nice...
Juan Valdenebro
Truth is beauty
I just saw a comment on the Leica Forum about the summary I shared here, related to what I said about the elmar lens being close to a century old now... The comment states that the lens in the prototypes was not the elmar but the anastigmat... Well, I knew that, and I guess most of us did... I just want to clarify I was referring to a lens that was a 50mm too, and an f/3.5 lens too, and a collapsible lens too... For legal reasons names were changed and smal changes were done in relation to Zeiss rights and cementing of elements, placing of aperture blades, etc., but it was basically the same lens, and optical design is almost identical, and photographs produced by those lenses are almost identical. I certainly think it's a lens a century old, but I respect any other different forum member's opinion. Thanks.
Dralowid
Michael
I had an Anastigmat for a while, see my avatar. It has an additional element and I understood its production costs were too high as they were for the optically identical Elmax. Hence the redesigned Elmar. In this instance I believe patent rights were not infringed, indeed there are/were a lot of lenses around named 'anastigmat'.
For what it is worth, from my experience, I could see no performance difference between it and an early Elmar.
As with everything on the internet, treat my comments with caution.
For what it is worth, from my experience, I could see no performance difference between it and an early Elmar.
As with everything on the internet, treat my comments with caution.
Erik van Straten
Veteran
Very nice story, Juan.
Erik.
Erik.
Juan Valdenebro
Truth is beauty
Very nice story, Juan.
Leica I model A, fixed Elmar 50mm f/3.5, 400-2TMY, Perceptol. Camera No. 58734, 1930. Shot in 2017.
Erik.
Thank you, Erik... I remember having seen several great photographs of yours, all with different Elmars... Those surprised me, and made me really interested in an Elmar as the main lens for my daily shooting... Those lenses can produce clear, clean, sharp, undistorted images that I thought were not possible, so thanks a lot, as always, for your images and comments, which take time constantly, but here we are to enjoy them, and learn too.
Richard G
Veteran
Wonderful account Juan. I've noticed your many talents here but now I see another light you've hidden pretty well my whole time looking here.
I have a Nickel Elmar from 1932 and made some A2 prints for an exhibition. One photograph of the main cathedral in Melbourne is dead straight and very sharp.
Recently I added a red dial IIIf to my older Barnacks. I now will consider hunting for a red scale Elmar for it, but only for the fun of it, and probably I won't bother. The one I have on it is excellent, coated, 89xxxx. Fortunately I cannot be tempted into the perverse fetish of a non-existent red curtain, red dial with a red scale Elmar.
I've had one of these screw mount Leicas with me most days in recent months precisely because of the collapsible Elmar. I like the modern collapsible Elmar on my digitals but it is not nearly so compact.
When you think of Tri-X and what was achieved before fast films, f3.5 is fast enough. Joining the tradition of what the greats did with this tiny set up is sobering and inspiring.
I have a Nickel Elmar from 1932 and made some A2 prints for an exhibition. One photograph of the main cathedral in Melbourne is dead straight and very sharp.
Recently I added a red dial IIIf to my older Barnacks. I now will consider hunting for a red scale Elmar for it, but only for the fun of it, and probably I won't bother. The one I have on it is excellent, coated, 89xxxx. Fortunately I cannot be tempted into the perverse fetish of a non-existent red curtain, red dial with a red scale Elmar.
I've had one of these screw mount Leicas with me most days in recent months precisely because of the collapsible Elmar. I like the modern collapsible Elmar on my digitals but it is not nearly so compact.
When you think of Tri-X and what was achieved before fast films, f3.5 is fast enough. Joining the tradition of what the greats did with this tiny set up is sobering and inspiring.
davidnewtonguitars
Family Snaps
Great thread, and thanks Juan.
My 1950 Elmar is 804450 with the aperture down to f22, not yet a red scale but bumping the change. These are certainly the fine lenses, I'm glad they made so many, everyone needs one.
My 1950 Elmar is 804450 with the aperture down to f22, not yet a red scale but bumping the change. These are certainly the fine lenses, I'm glad they made so many, everyone needs one.
Dez
Bodger Extraordinaire
I believe the most important difference is that the red scale lenses had a fixed focus index and DoF scale with distances engraved on the rotating part, while older Elmars, inconveniently, were the other way around. Actually, I think that change was made just before they broke out the red paint. I never could figure out why Leitz got that backwards with the 35 and 50 mm Elmars.
Cheers,
Dez
Cheers,
Dez