uncoated LTM or M lenses

[RML]

I'm interested in using an uncoated 50mm lens, just to see the effect of it on my photography. I'd like to "recreate" the look of those 1920s/1930s photos and I'm thinking that the lenses used back then were mostly uncoated/single-coated and rather low-contrast. I'm wondering which cheap but nice lens would make a good candidate. Or perhaps I can turn a coated lens into an uncoated one by some means (which means?). I might want to pay $50, tops, for the lens. 🙂 So, any suggestions?

 

[rover]

I think $50 may be the problem because your choices are going to be slim as it is. In LTM......well prior to the war who other than Leitz was making LTM lenses? See what I mean?

An early Elmar or Summar are the immediate answers to your questions but both will run you more than $50, but less than $200 if that is a good point. Your other option would be an uncoated Sonnar, but do you have a Kiev or Contax?

 

[RML]

Rover, good points.

Perhaps the $50 can be stretched, a bit. 🙂

I'd like to use the lens on my (digital) R-D1 so a Contax lens will most likely be out of the question.

 

[rover]

Uncoated Summitars and Summarits too, but the price is rising.

 

[sebastel]

hi,

i'm currently selling a coated summitar (see classifieds), but i can exchange it for my uncoated one, though i'll ask for a higher price then, because actually i'd prefer to keep it (it = the uncoated).

make an offer i cannot reject!

🙂

kind regards
sebastian

 

[RML]

hi,

i'm currently selling a coated summitar (see classifieds), but i can exchange it for my uncoated one, though i'll ask for a higher price then, because actually i'd prefer to keep it (it = the uncoated).

make an offer i cannot reject!

Show me the goods! 🙂

 

[Pherdinand]

I guess the paper used in that time might be the most crucial factor.

 

[Pherdinand]

How about polishing down the coating on a lens? 😉

 

[RML]

How about polishing down the coating on a lens? 😉

Are you in for a little challenge, Csab'? 🙂 I have a J8 that can be used....

 

[markinlondon]

I think $50 may be the problem because your choices are going to be slim as it is. In LTM......well prior to the war who other than Leitz was making LTM lenses? See what I mean?

Steinheil or Zeiss in Germany; Taylor, Taylor and Hobson, Ross and Dallmeyer in the UK are names that spring to mind. Sadly these are likely to cost much more than a pre-war Elmar due to their inherent rarity value.

 

[Pherdinand]

🙂) THE J8? Poor guy...

Let's see. I have access to RF plasma etching with different gases...
I also have access to HF but i don't like that stuff and I'm not sure i can stop it before it etches the glass too.
I wonder what would happen if i dump it in hot PRS3000. That stuff is so sneaky, it looks harmless but with time it can eat up everything.
Otherwise, plain polish with superfine polish paper might do it😉

Seriously, don't hurt your J8.
Even more seriously, I really think the coating does not matter that much for the old look. And then, why not doing stg digitally? the result is what's important...

 

[Flyfisher Tom]

The summitar seems like a good choice, I've seen some really impressive shots from that lens.

 

[wotalegend]

A pre-war FED lens would fit the bill, i.e. uncoated and within the $50 budget. The only problem is to find one. 🙄

 

[Pherdinand]

a pre-war FED lens, LOL

 

[wotalegend]

Why LOL? He did say he wants a 1930s look.

 

[RML]

Somehow I get the idea that an uncoated lens might give me a bit more of that 1920s/1930s look. See, I shot this photo of a DHL courier ( http://shardsofphotography2.blogspot.com/2006/10/paw-40-2006.html ) and this photo of a car park stair case( http://shardsofphotography2.blogspot.com/2006/10/paw-41-2006.html ) recently. Both were shot through (plexi) glass. The look is very much like what I often encounter in those 1920s/1930s photos: low contrast and a certain je ne sais quoi. Would an uncoated lens give me a similar look without having to carry a pane of plexi glass all the time? I'd like to try.

Besides, people rave about the CV 40/1.4 uncoated (single coated?) but that one is a bit too expensive for me.

I have an otherwise crummy J8 lying around that I might be willing to sacrifice to some experiments, Csab'. 🙂

 

[RML]

BTW, how do I recognise early (uncoated) Elmars, Summars, Summarits and Summitars on eBay?

 

[sebastel]

single coated lens mostly have a blueish shine on the lens surface.
multi coated lens can have greenish, yellow/brownish or even a purple shine.

all coated lens show lot less reflection when lookin into it.

recently i saw pics of the 40mm SC nocton versus the MC nocton - it was quite clearly visible. unfortunately i cannot remember where that has been.

uncoated lens are just glass ... without that coloured shine.

and, of course, you can detect it by the word "uncoated" in the description text!
😛

trying to upload a pic showing all three ... can you spot the coatings?

cheers,
sebastian

 

[furcafe]

Rather than carry around a pane of plexiglass, you might try an old uncoated UV or skylight filter. Also, a large part of the look of 1920s-30s photography has to do w/the film & papers that were used; if you're restricting yourself to the R-D1, you'll just have to simulate that in Photoshop.

Somehow I get the idea that an uncoated lens might give me a bit more of that 1920s/1930s look. See, I shot this photo of a DHL courier ( http://shardsofphotography2.blogspot.com/2006/10/paw-40-2006.html ) and this photo of a car park stair case( http://shardsofphotography2.blogspot.com/2006/10/paw-41-2006.html ) recently. Both were shot through (plexi) glass. The look is very much like what I often encounter in those 1920s/1930s photos: low contrast and a certain je ne sais quoi. Would an uncoated lens give me a similar look without having to carry a pane of plexi glass all the time? I'd like to try.

Besides, people rave about the CV 40/1.4 uncoated (single coated?) but that one is a bit too expensive for me.

I have an otherwise crummy J8 lying around that I might be willing to sacrifice to some experiments, Csab'. 🙂

 

[Elmar Fudd]

Aren't all Summarits coated? I thought the Xenon was the uncoated version.