Which are the sharpest contrasty LTM Lenses?

[John Shriver]

Excuse me, but everyone had to worry about Leica's patents until 1945. Then ALL German patents were cancelled as a war reparition. The rangefinder-coupled LTM mount was patent protected, even in Japan. Zeiss only started making LTM lenses during WW-II at the direction of the German government. Canon didn't make any LTM rangefinder cameras or lenses until 1946. (There were some without rangefinders.) The lenses Nikon made for Canon were in the Hansa Canon mount, not LTM.

Not to knock Nippon Kogaku's optical prowness, but they couldn't ship any LTM lenses until the patent were voided.

Same thing with the Contax mount, it was patent protected. The entire Contax I and II design all had to be designed around Leitz's patents. That's why the odd lens mount, and the very complicated shutter.

 

[doubs43]

Old Leica lenses were pretty mediocre.

Kinda makes you wonder how they'd have sold if they'd have been any good, doesn't it? I have a few Leitz lenses that I like. Think I'll keep them. 🙂

Walker

 

[doubs43]

Raid: I think your lens is from 1962. It was one of the sharper of the bunch, despite the cleaning marks. It has the "eyeball with optical ray" logo, right? Walker (Doubs43) told me that they were produced in smaller numbers with higher quality control, by a subsidiary that made lenses for the military.

That is correct according to Princelle's book. The "ZOMZ" (eyeball-light ray logo) factory was under the KMZ military-industrial complex umbrella and backed up the main plant. Princelle says that the ZOMZ-made chrome LTM J-3 is "uncommon" and the same lens in Kiev mount is "rather rare". Plants that manufactured for the military generally had better quality products from all I've been able to learn.

Walker

 

[doubs43]

Who would think that???

ANYWAY: Not me. But, the original poster is more interested in lenses with higher contrast. That always brings out the Nikon in me. I like the Leitz lenses as they are lower-contrast; give me a real alternative to how I want a picture to come out. For outdoor portrait shots, the Leitz lenses produce a pleasing picture, handle contrasty light without losing shadow detail. especially my pre-war 9cm F4 uncoated Elmar.

I was just yankin' a few chains, trouble maker that I am. 😀 The debates over which lens maker is best has been going on for decades and will continue long after I'm gone. I have lenses made by all of the major makers and minor players as well. Most will do a very credible job and have nothing to be ashamed of. Choice often comes down to what a person wants or favors.

The uncoated 9cm Elmar is a delightful lens and certainly worth owning. My second one arrived in the mail today. Made in 1938, it looks to have been used very little. Exterior finish is easily better than 90%. There's slight haze between elements that I'll clean tomorrow and it should be as close to new as these lenses can generally be found.

Walker

 

[raid]

Brian and Walker: Wow! I am happy indeed to get such a "rare" J-3 from Brian. Thanks.

 

[Will]

What do you think are the sharpest and most contrasty lenses in LTM?
Which one can pull the best out of efke25 and velvia?

To cut long things short: Which lens makes the film the limiting factor?

Do the cv lenses have a resolution that makes the film the limiting factor? Or do I have to move to zeiss lenses (Which I cant do by now beause of the price 🙄 and because most of them have M-Mount) ?

What are your experiences?

Thanks for your attention
Robert

ZM 25mm, rated at 400lmm according to:

http://www.cameraquest.com/ZM lenses.htm

38mm Biogon on 120 should be another candidate (VF). The lens is rated at 200lmm+

This is a camera that my dad wanted in his 30s, and never owned one.
He said one of his friend should a vesa (no idea how, maybe compose like Adams?) and discover all the inperfection that can't be seem.

The original Nikkor lenses retained the same optical formula and 51.6mm focal length as they used for the Hansa Canon bayonet mount when they were produced in LTM and S-Mount after the War.

Brain,

Just a point of interset,

Did the tradition of a 51.6mm A.F.L. carry on to Nikon SLR standard lense?

Like, is the AIS 50mm still have a A.F.L of 51.6mm?

Same go for Contax, did the RTS's 50mm still have an. A.F.L of 52.3mm?

Probably the 1999 limited edition Leica LTM lenses: 50/2 Summicron and 50/1.4 Summilux. Also the Cosina/Voigtlander 50/3.5 Heliar.

Would love to see photos by the f/3.5 Heliar.

Does it retain character from the Large Format Heliars?

I use a lot old Leica glass, but I put up with a lot to do it.

That's enjoying classic camera.

Cheers





Will

 

[FrankS]

Yours was the 1950 lens, Raid.





(just kidding)


😉

 

[VinceC]

>>Not to knock Nippon Kogaku's optical prowness, but they couldn't ship any LTM lenses until the patent were voided. <<

I don't know what patent laws were in the 1930s and 1940s, but today, patent laws grant 17 to 20 years of protection. Those Barnack patents were expiring anyway. Seems to me that if the patents hadn't been voided, then the way would not have been opened for innovation and competition. Leica might not have developed the M in its current form, nor its finer lenses, if it had retained its patents on 1930s technology.

 

[Ronald M]

I think it is important to consider all the rework repoted on Russian lenses that people do to get them to work. I still say the value is CV which work right from the box.

 

[Mike Kovacs]

The entire intellectual property Germany fell into the hands of the allies. Never before or since has such a large body of knowledge fallen from the hands of one nation to another. Right or wrong, the Germans lost the war and that was one price they paid.

The fact is, the patents were taken by the Americans and given to the Japanese. This put the Japanese on near even footing with the German camera industry, and it didn't take long for them to surpass the Germans in popularity.

PS - I received a couple of PMs. I'm not hacking on the Japanese. Its a credit to their ingenuity and hard work that they came up on top. Who knows what would have happened in the long run, but I think the German patents accelerated the process for sure.

 

[VinceC]

>>I'm not hacking on the Japanese. Its a credit to their ingenuity and hard work that they came up on top<<

I think the German companies were somewhat complacent. Here's an interesting quote from a little time-capsule of a book, a 1950 catalogue of new German cameras, in English and targeted to American buyers:

"Cameras from Germany" (1950, Hanns Bierl, Munich) -- From a report on the first FotoKina of 1950 in Koeln (P. 24) -- "True, none of the world-renowned cameras such as Leica, Contax, Rolliflex, Robot, or Retina, to name only a few, showed any revolutionary change upon superficial examination, but what is there to change on such a stable and proven basic design?"

Meanwhile, over in Japan ...

 

[VinceC]

>>As much as I remember from School, German and Swiss patents were granted for 50 years until a few years ago.<<


That seems right. The Leica-M mount patent expired in 1998, which led to a little revolution in the RF world, thanks in no small part to Cosina-Voigtlaender.

 

[Meleica]

Lens Guides

1. Leica Screw Mount, made by others:

http://members.aol.com/dcolucci/lsm.htm

2. Leica made, LSM lenses

http://members.aol.com/dcolucci/c.htm

3. Canon made, LSM lenses

http://members.aol.com/dcolucci/can.htm

Dan

 

[Will]

The 50/1.4 introduced a little later is very close to the 51.6mm standard. I've seen Pop Photo tests do the "measured" focal length, and comes out something like "51.4mm". That will vary lens to lens. Does give the chance for Nikon RF fans to take a lens module from a later SLR lens and hack it into an internal S-Mount lmount collar, like one from a Helios-103. The built-in helical of the Nikon RF camera would provide proper focus, and the back-focus of the SLR lens gives enough working room. Not that I've ever thought about it...

Brain,

People had done it! This japanese firm built it's own helicord, I guess you would foucs with the helicord.

http://mitte.nir.jp/~mitte0576/index.htm

My Switar Adapter use the moving lense group to push the RF cam of the adapter. So, it is 1:1 etc, and foucs with the helicord from the lens.

How much are dead Helios-103 (that's the russian Elmar copy rite?) going nowadays?

Just think if you can use that Bessamatic Standard lens on your M...

Cheers




Will

 

[doubs43]

Many people forget - or never knew - that pre-war Japanese optics and precision machined goods were world-class. Too many associated Japanese goods with the post-war toys and tin crickets that seemed to be the only items imported in any quantity until companies such as Honeywell and others began bringing in cameras and lenses. I think everyone knows how David Douglas Duncan used Nikkor lenses in Korea and opened the eyes of the world to quality Japanese optics.

Who can doubt that the Germans (Leitz in particular) were motivated by Japanese competition to improve and inovate? We've all gained in the improved products.

Walker

 

[doubs43]

How much are dead Helios-103 (that's the russian Elmar copy rite?) going nowadays? Cheers Will

The Helios-103, as I understand it, is an improved Jupiter-8 with a maximum apertture of f/1.8. That would make it a Sonnar based design I suppose.

Walker

 

[jonasv]

How much are dead Helios-103 (that's the russian Elmar copy rite?) going nowadays?

There is a guy with 100% feedback on ebay selling them for $20, which includes worldwide shipping.

 

[Mike Kovacs]

the helios-103 is a double gauss design is it not?

 

[raid]

Yours was the 1950 lens, Raid.





(just kidding)


😉

Frank: It would have killed me if this was true. (just kidding!)
I double-checked the lens, and just as Brian said, it had that logo he refers to.

 

[raid]

The Helios-103, as I understand it, is an improved Jupiter-8 with a maximum apertture of f/1.8. That would make it a Sonnar based design I suppose.

Walker

Walker: This lens is found in Kiev/Contax mount online. I have not seen it in LTM.