skahde
V for Victory!
I'm also using a Summaron with the FOOKH and as always price depends on condition. Mine is undented but has a few scratches which reduced the asking price to "tolerable". Fortunately they aren't a rare item.
Last edited:
Godfrey
somewhat colored
I tend to cycle between 35 and 50 mm as my "most used" lens ... I've had several 50 mm over the years, my standard now is a Summicron-M 50/2 current series. But... I just bought an Elmar 5cm f/3.5. It's a coated lens, I presume that means it's either late 1940s or 1950s, but where the heck did they hide the serial number on these lenses?I am boring. I shoot a 50mm lens more than any other. I love the perspective.
And out of all the 50mm lenses I own the one I shoot the most frequently is my boring old collapsible Elmar.
Which reminds me, I have been shooting my SLR far too frequently. Time to pick up a rangefinder for a bit.
G
Coldkennels
Barnack-toting Brit.
It's engraved on the black ring directly around the front element, and it is tiny. You can see it here about the f= part of the name ring.
(Also, I really need to dust off this name ring. Bloody hell...)
Erik van Straten
Veteran
There are two types of FOOKH or EKURZ, short ones and tall ones. The tall ones will vignette on all lenses - also on the Summar - except on the first model of the Elmar 35mm f3.5. For all other 35's or 50's you will need a short one.
Both models are rare and expensive.
Both models are rare and expensive.
Last edited:
Erik van Straten
Veteran
If there is no serial number at all the lens is originally from an early Leica model 1a, but is modified to be interchangeable.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
Thank you! I see where the serial number is on my lens, but it looks like someone painted that ring on an overhaul some years ago and I can just barely make out some of the numbers. The best I can make out seems to give a serial number dated to 1931-1933, but my lens looks like it has coated elements which would date it a decade or two later. So it's a question mark .. I'm not brave enough at the moment to take a thin wire wheel to the ring and clean off the paint. LOL! Doesn't really matter, I was just curious.
I got the Elmar along with the BOOWU-M macro leg set. Its rangefinder callibration seems on point when I fit an M-mount adapter and test it with the M10-M. What I find, though, is that the focus distances are slightly off with the three BOOWU-M mounts compared to the leg extension markings. Not by too much .. focus plane is a 0.5-1.0 inch or so farther than the numbered click setting ... I wonder why.
G
Coldkennels
Barnack-toting Brit.
Erik, EKURZ is the code for a 35mm Elmar, not the hood. Kurz is German for short, after all - Short Elmar, as opposed to the ELANG (Long Elmar, aka 90mm Elmar).
I think you're thinking of the less-helpfully-named FLQOO, which is indeed too long for anything but the 35mm Elmar (and considerably rarer than the FOOKH).
jja
Well-known
I have been following this thread avidly because I'm looking for my next LTM lens, either a 35mm Summaron or 50mm Elmar. Igorcamera.com has several copies of each. Can someone knowledgable on current pricing comment on these? Here's the link:
If you have other online recommendations (not Ebay), let me know.
Leica TM lenses: Leica TM lenses, Summicron, Elmar, Thambar, Leica M39 lenses, Summarit, Elmarit, Summar, Hector, Summarex, Leica SM lenses, Visoflex lenses
Leica TM lenses: Specializing in Leica TM lenses, Summicron, Elmar, Thambar, Leica M39 lenses, Summarit, Elmarit, Summar, Hector, Summarex, Leica SM lenses, Visoflex lenses and Telyt lenses
www.igorcamera.com
If you have other online recommendations (not Ebay), let me know.
Saganich
Established
Prices are good when including a decent CLA.
boojum
Ignoble Miscreant
My pedestrian view is that a good 50 is the keystone of 35mm format camera lenses. It seems closest to what we see. It is popular which means there are a lot of choices out there in the used market. I have bought all but one 50 from eBay and come out alright. I tend toward the Jupiters, KMZ ones, and Canons. The new lens is the Bertele which I was guided to by our lens guru, Sonnar Brian, and he was right. It is the Chieftain o' the Sonnar Clan. And there is a lovely old CZJ f/1.5 which is quite nice. It fell into my lap. My point is that you can buy really good 50's at low prices by careful shopping. If you want Jupiter 8's I can advise that KMZ has been consistently good for me and from what I have read by people who know it is the best of the FSU lens factories. For ~US$100 it is hard to go wrong and chances are you are going to go right. ;o) Filters cost more.
Here is the current eBay link on M39 J8's. I have no gain from any purchase you would make on eBay or anywhere.
Here is the current eBay link on M39 J8's. I have no gain from any purchase you would make on eBay or anywhere.
Jupiter 8 M39 for sale | eBay
Get the best deals for Jupiter 8 M39 at eBay.com. We have a great online selection at the lowest prices with Fast & Free shipping on many items!
www.ebay.com
Last edited:
Erik van Straten
Veteran
gelatin silver print (summicron 50mm f2 rigid) leica m3
Babroeisk, 2005
Babroeisk, 2005
Bill wrs1145
A native Texan
Thanks very much for clearing the air on filter and hoods!
skahde
V for Victory!
There isn't much I could add to that besides that I bought my nice Summaron 3.5/3.5 for a hundred less and removed the haze, often found on these lenses myself. It is condensed oil from the aperture mechanism (degrease it, repaint that ring flat black) and easy to remove. If one decides to also try it, please only use alcohol-wet, soft cotton on the inner elements and swipe gently. Q-Tips leave fine lines in the coating, don't ask how I know, it still hurts!
And with respect go 50 mm LTM lenses my chrome Canon 50 mm f1.8 turned out to be a real keeper. Sharp, well behaved without any quirks, nice bokeh. One of those lenses you can simply forget as you know you can depend on it.
Last edited:
Bill wrs1145
A native Texan
Coldkennels--Many thanks for your advice.
boojum
Ignoble Miscreant
I bought that on the advice of Sonnar Brian. He was right, again.