all these screw mount lenses...how do they fare against the later M lenses? In what situations are they best applied?

-- Travis koh (teckyy@hotmail.com), March 28, 2002

Answers

The LTM lenses still hold up well in this new era of ASPH lenses and new coatings. You cannot put a M camera w/lens in your pocket like you can a Leica III w/50 3.5 Elmar lens.

The older lenses may not be as sharp or have good contrast, but considering you can still go out and shoot negs with a 35/3.5 Elmar made in 1935, says a lot.

The LTM lenses work best for B&W, since most were designed when color just coming out and the negs were expensive to process. B&W was easier and still is today.

-- chris a williams (LeicaChris@worldnet.att.net), March 28, 2002.

I have used the Elmar 3,5/3,5 (coated) for about half a year as an alternative to the summaron 2,8/35. In my eyes it has a little less contrast under some circumstances (on B&W wide open) and is a bit more flare prone, but otherwise works almost identical on color slide film. In normal situations I did not see a difference when shooting at 5.6 and above.

I don't have a modern 35 mm Leica lens to compare, but compared to my distagon 2.8/35 it features a bit less contrast and is a bit more flare prone at wider apertures. Altogether I was quite astonished by the performance. Remember that the lens was recoated later on (most probably at the factory), and this might have improved it quite a bit (for contrast and flare). I also have an uncoated summar of the same age which shows considerably less contrast and flares more, though it has quite a lot of cleaning marks, so it is not completely comparable.

-- Kai Blanke (kai.blanke@iname.com), March 28, 2002.

There's a softness factor that hasn't been mentioned. The LTM lens are simply not as sharp as new M lens. I actually shoot the whole array purposely w/ a IIIC for that effect -- very 30s & 40s. We have become too used to tack sharp lens, & the older Leitz lens have a wonderful signature that most photographers have forgotten. They're great tools, if used thoughtfully--

-- Patrick (pg@patrickgarner.com), March 28, 2002.

I own those lenses...stop them down to f/8 and shoot them handheld on ISO 400 neg film and you will not see a tremendous difference over the latest M lenses. If you shoot wide open and your technique is so meticulous that it correlates to Tech-Pan, tripod and resolution wall chart results, then you will see a tremendous difference.

-- Jay (infinitydt@aol.com), March 28, 2002.

Elmars are 4 element lenses with only 6 air/glass surfaces, but it's hard to know just how good these lenses were when new, as there has bound to be some surface oxidation, at least in the old, uncoated ones. The best 35mm Elmar is probably the LST Nikkor f:3.5/35mm clone. The 90mm Elmar is the finest portrait lens that Leica has ever made. Personally I swear by the 50mm for Kodachrome or Velvia. Viewed under high magnification it's not all that sharp, but projected the slides are just beautiful. All Elmars are at their very best when stopped down a little.

-- Bill (bmitch@comcast.net), March 28, 2002.

The last screw mount Elmar of the "old" series in 50mm that was produced was the f2.8 (catalogued as ELMOO introduced in 1957). This is one of the "softest/sharpest" lens that Leitz made in the late 50's. This lens defines that mysterious term "Bokeh" that is used so much today. While all the future 6 and 7 element Summicrons are technically better lenses, this old Elmar renders a smooth even tone throught out its range. I put it on my lllF RD when I want to go play and get that "vintage" look. Leave meter at home and do like I did in the old days, guess at exposure at 5.6, 8 or 11 and just have fun!

-- F. William Baker (atelfwb@aol.com), March 28, 2002.

I have the f/4 9cm collapsible Elmar in M mount (not LTM, but pretty old, c.1954) & it performs very well, comparable to other high-quality lenses of that era (Zeiss, Nikkor, Canon, etc.). Although they're only single-coated @ best (& Leitz coating in that period was a notch below the competition), the old lens designs (Tessar variant for the 9cm Elmar) minimized the # of elements, so they're quite capable of producing excellent pix, as the great photographers of that era proved. In my experience, the biggest disadvantage of older "classic" lenses, both uncoated & single-coated, is that they're not nearly as resistant to flare, so always use a hood & avoid filters as much as possible.

-- Chris Chen (Wash., DC) (furcafe@NOSPAMcris.com), March 28, 2002.

Travis. The 3.5 and 9 cm Elmars were designed and introduced in the early 1930s (1932 or so). The 5 cm Elmar was introduced as a replacement for the Elmax lens in 1926. The optical designs of these lenses remained unchanged, except that the post war lenses were coated. As to how good they are, they were quite good for the late 1920s to early 30s era. But this is year 2002. Optically, any modern Leica lens will blow these early lenses away. Leitz deliberately kept the speed slow (3.5-4) because the ability to provide edge to edge high quality was limited in those days.

-- Eliot (erosen@lij.edu), March 28, 2002.

Travis, my summicron 50/2 doesn't blow my elmar 50/3.5 away, at least not in the crappy photos I take. One's sharper and has more contrast. The elmar with portra 400VC or plus X at EI 400 in diafne is sweet and smooth. By the way, my elmar is full of dust.

-- John (johnfleetwood@hotmail.com), March 28, 2002.

I think the 50 is the best of the ones you mentioned, and I have a clean coated 50 that is a surprisingly good little lens--emphasis on little. Mine doesn't seem to be too prone top flare, and does fine with color film--I don't find it lacking in contast either. It is a fun lens to have and use, and makes my M3 seem like a much smaller camera. Ergonomics are a bit odd and take some getting used to.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), March 29, 2002.

Hello Travis.Considering the lack of computer facilities until 1951 and shortcomings in production techniques, Professor Max Berek and his lense design team did a wonderful job with those old Elmars.The same Elmar design with the necessary changes in the lenses' dimensions (to suit the varying focal lengths) was employed in a number of new types ,that followed the original 50mm focal length.A 35mm and a 135mm were introduced in 1931 and the 90mm and 105mm in 1932.The last true Elmar design was the 65mm type made in 1960 for use on the Visoflex housing.New glass types and coating methods among other factors undoubtedly give better results over those early Elmars.Most important is the fact that the standards of optical quality set by Professor Berek when he designed the first lenses are still valid for Leica today:perfection within reason. There is no ideal,perfect lense and the best a designer can do is to design a lense that is free from aberrations for all practical purposes.

-- Sheridan Zantis (albada60@hotmail.com), March 30, 2002.