akptc
Shoot first, think later
Hi, I recently got my 1st Leica III with a 50/3.5 Elmar collapsible. Just picked up my 1st roll (100 Superia) and am wondering what I am doing wrong. The pictures are just plain "normal", i.e. not worse or better than anything I've shot with an Olympus P&S, for example.
So my question is - what should I expect from this lens? Was it a mistake to use color film with it, i.e., would more of a difference show up on B&W film?
I mean, I understand that (1) I am a total amateur and likely don’t know what I don’t know
and (2) this is my 1st roll. But *how* do I get the most out this lens?
Any advice or perhaps samples (or pointers to samples) of images that really explore the possibilities of the Elmar would be greatly appreciated.
So my question is - what should I expect from this lens? Was it a mistake to use color film with it, i.e., would more of a difference show up on B&W film?
I mean, I understand that (1) I am a total amateur and likely don’t know what I don’t know
and (2) this is my 1st roll. But *how* do I get the most out this lens?Any advice or perhaps samples (or pointers to samples) of images that really explore the possibilities of the Elmar would be greatly appreciated.
Attachments
FrankS
Registered User
Andy, see Raid's 12 lenses tsted for Elmar results compared to other lenses. You may not see anything on 4x6 colour prints. 8x10 B+W prints would be telling, I think.
akptc
Shoot first, think later
captainslack
Five Goats Hunter
Hmm.... You also have the 35mm Elmar, not the 50mm one that most people here rave about. That might have something to do it.
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
Andy: Also check the negs for density. If the exposure is way off in either direction, it would probably obliterate the Elmar's particular signature/characteristics.
FrankS
Registered User
"Hi, I recently got my 1st Leica III with a 50/3.5 Elmar collapsible."
Nope. It's the 50.
Nope. It's the 50.
doubs43
Well-known
captainslack said:
Look closer and you'll see "5cm" clearly engraved on the Elmar. I think you've mistaken the aperture marking for the focal lenmgth.
Walker
OldNick
Well-known
I've used my Leica IIIa and Elmar 5cm f/3.5 with both B&W and color, starting with ASA 10 Kodachrome in the 1950s. If the exposure and processing are good, the lens does a fine job. It sounds like you used a commercial processor. I have been disappointed with prints from sources like that. I've found that, for both B&W and C-41 color, I do better by getting a CD only, no prints, then loading the images onto my computer and cropping and adjusting using PhotoShop.
Jim N.
Jim N.
akptc
Shoot first, think later
Ok, this will undoubtedly reveal my deep ignorance but how do you check film for density?Trius said:
FrankS
Registered User
Not too opaque, not too transparent, but just right.
They should not be so dark that you can't see an image when held up to light, and they should not be so thin that an image is barely there.
They should not be so dark that you can't see an image when held up to light, and they should not be so thin that an image is barely there.
akptc
Shoot first, think later
Yep, I had it developed at CVS one hour photo... I tried the CD route as well but (at least around here) they tend to scan at very low resolution, good only for small prints.OldNick said:
The one thing I did notice though, is that the half of the film where I used a light meter came out very well exposed, while the not metered ones are all over the place. This surprised me since I can usually shoot a good roll of film with my Zorki 4K + 50mm Jupiter w/out a meter. I think one reason is the non-standard aperture scale, which will take some getting used to (when metering, I had to approximate the stops to match the meter readouts).
Anyway, this is certainly a challenge and I look forward to learning to shoot with this lens.
akptc
Shoot first, think later
Thank you Frank, this makes sense to me.FrankS said:
Ronald M
Veteran
You have an uncoated lens made before 1946. Its character is best shown with home processed black and white film. Commercial color processing uses a highcontrast paper and the high contrast is mitigated by the lower contrast uncoated lens. If you are used to looking at the high contrast, you may not like it. Just look at the televisions on display in a store. They have the color and contrast all jacked up on every one. Stereo places do the same by turning the base and treble up telling people the extremes be reproduced, but the uninitiated don`t realize all the mid tones are gone.
Make sure the lens is clean inside by shining a small light thru it. Any haze at all kills the quality.
Make sure the lens is clean inside by shining a small light thru it. Any haze at all kills the quality.
T
tedwhite
Guest
Don't know Leica stuff, but did use an M3 for some time. Its 50/2 Summicron was superb and gave a certain something to the prints. Luminosity? I'm searching for the right word... But then I metered so the negs were not over or under exposed.
OldNick
Well-known
My Elmar has the same aperture scale as yours. Being an engineer, I was taught to interpolate between scale markings and have never found this to be a problem. A half-stop error should not be enough to ruin your negative. However, I would refer to the meter for the first few rolls, or use the "sunny 16" rule, where, in bright sun, you set the shutter to the setting nearest to the inverse of the film speed, (for a film speed of 400, set the shutter to 1/500) and the lens to f/16. As the light dims, open up appropiately.
Jim N.
Jim N.
akptc
Shoot first, think later
It's becoming clear to me that developing one's own film is the way to go to get the desired quality.
R
Rich Silfver
Guest
Sorry if you've seen these before - but if not - I also bought an uncoated 50/3.5 Elmar and I'm loving it. It's 'sharp yet soft' - not quite sure how to describe that, hopefully some of my photos may be able to do a better job of showing what I mean.
OldNick
Well-known
Andy- Take a magnifier and look at the bronze ring surrounding the front element. You should find a serial number engraved in very small print. Post the number and I will try to date it, to see whether it is pre-war or post-war, hence whether it is likely to be coated or not.
Jim N.
Jim N.
akptc
Shoot first, think later
Right you are, when approximating the meter readouts on the Elmar scale, all of the frames were nicely exposed. I've been using a Minolta digital meter but am considering the VC Meter II to mount in the hot shoe. Ultimatey though, I prefer not using a meter during daylight, and hope I can use the Leica III + Elmar this way too.OldNick said:
akptc
Shoot first, think later
OldNick said:
Jim,
The serial number on the Elmar 50/3.5 is 243016
Might as well mention the other two Leitz screwmounts I got for this body:
Summaron 35/3.5 - S/N 1283581
Elmar 90/4 - S/N 1411622