I know that Leica has recently made some LTM lenses for the Japanese market. I believe one was the 35mm Summicron, recently discontinued. Did they also make a 50mm Summicron in LTM mount? I know about the older Summicrons in LTM but I am asking about the late version lenses, just made in the last few years.

-- tom (therbert@umiami.ir.miami.edu), June 05, 2002

Answers

they made in the most recent batch (c.1999-2000) the 35 asph cron, 50 lux and 50 cron. in the mid 90s they also made a 90mm (i think the cron, pre asph).

-- roger michel (michel@tcn.org), June 05, 2002.

Tom; I bought the 50mm F2 LTM from Heliar/K&H camara..It is Leica #11619 and is in chrome and real heavy....It has the built in hood and is very sharp...........

-- Kelly Flanigan (zorki3c@netscape.net), June 05, 2002.

The 35 Summicron looks cute but I already have a 35 Summicron in M mount. I forgot how heavy the chrome lenses are - Even if I could find one for sale, I bet it would be awfully big and heavy on a IIIc or IIIf.

BTW, where is Heliar/K&H .. I don't know them.

-- tom (therbert@umiami.ir.miami.edu), June 05, 2002.

Helair on Ebay/K H camera is in Southern California; my 2 purchases from them were very professionally handled.....

The Russian lenses are a real crapshoot; see my test shots here taken with my M3..My Industar-50 looks like a kids toy but is up there with My new 50mm F2 LTM Summicron; and 40x less in price...maybe I got lucky..Kelly

-- Kelly Flanigan (zorki3c@netscape.net), June 05, 2002.

Tom, if you want compact modern lenses in LTM on a IIIf, you must look at the Voigtländer lenses. The one Voigtländer lens I most frequently use on my IIIf is the 25 mm. It is very lightweight, alas no rangefinder coupling. Using the same lens barrel you have also the 21 and 35 mm. The Nokton 50 mm:1.7 is big, and needs a separate viewfinder, as the one on the camera is blocked. The new and much smaller 50 mm:2.5 should be ideal for normal use. I would also appreciate it if they made the 50 mm heliar (collapsible) available as a standard lens (although I am sure it is not as compact when collapsed as an Elmar 50mm). If you look at Steve Gandy's www.cameraquest.com you will find detailled information and pictures. All my lenses are the chrome version, and they have held up very well. I am happy that Cosina offers such a useful alternative to the high cost Leica lenses.

-- Sebastien Simon (sebastien.simon@alumni.ethz.ch), June 06, 2002.

I think it's KB Camera - www.kbcamera.com Last time I looked they had only one left, which was a 50 Summilux (E39!)

-- Gregory Goh (GregoryGoh@hotmail.com), June 06, 2002.

The producing of these lenses is exactly the reason why leica will disappaer from the market. They have no reason to make these lenses, yet the company invests its precious time, effort and resources in making lenses for collectors. Do you see pentax manufacturing their lenses with a screwmount for the owners of their 1960's camera's? Or am I missing something and has Leica now started reproducing, after the 0 camera, the IIIf? Would be just the thing for a company that survives out of nostalgia.

Frank

-- Frank (frank_bunnik@hotmail.com), June 06, 2002.

gee, i always thought it was a good idea for companies to make things their customers want (i know more than one person who bought all three of the new LTM lenses). i also think its praiseworthy for a company to continue to support products it made 60 or 70 years ago. what exactly is the problem here??

-- roger michel (michel@tcn.org), June 06, 2002.

The problem is that it is ridiculous to back up 60 or 70 year old products today. I wonder if iI go to Ford if they still have spareparts for my model T.

Someone else stated that Leica is a cash-poor company. No wonder since they don't use modern production methods and feel they have to support extremely old products in which the company has to invest precious money and materials.

-- Frank (frank_bunnik@hotmail.com), June 06, 2002.

Frank; The "New" LTM lenses are the same lenses as for the M; only the rear ring is longer and has the screw thread...This is not alot of engineering work to produce a minor league slight change....The tooling cost is low....It is a smart move for Leica...The project has a good return on investment.....Most all the special lenses are all sold.....They make money selling a couple of thousand screw lenses; with little tooling impact......this is basic business 101....

In the early 1980's Ford motor company made BRAND new stamping dies for the 1965 Mustang's wheelcovers..They made the dies for the 14" and 13" wheels...With over one million 1965 and 1966 Mustangs produced; they had a good ROI (Return On Investment) for the Die project....The wheelcovers were stamped in Canada...I bought 5 of them in 1980 for 20 dollars apiece; before they were all sold out.....

Businesses needs projects that bring in positive cash during lean years..the auto industry hit a major league low in sales in 1982...These positive return projects reduce the risk of the company....Profit is like health; they need profit to stay healthy...............

If you were at Ford maybe your boss would have to make the choice between cutting more heads/jobs; or actually making good money on low risk projects........Lets us see; do we let Frank go or make some wheel covers for a 15 year old car???.....

-- Kelly Flanigan (zorki3c@netscape.net), June 06, 2002.

You couldn't be more wrong Frank. Firstly these lenses cost nothing extra for Leica to make. Maybe you have not noticed but all of these lenses were existing lenses for the M and only needed a mount to make them fit the screwmounts. Being that Leica sold them all I doubt if they lost money. Secondly Leica makes huge money from the collectors market, many of whom like to regularily sell as well as buy their 'prizes', creating a used market so that shooters can afford Leica. Lastly, cameras are not like cars (the old Ford example). Todays cars are faster, safer and far more reliable than 50 year old cars. But I can get just as good an image out of my 45 year old IIIg (though-be-it with the above 35 Asph Summicron), as can a 'modern shooter' with an F5 or EOS1.

-- Bob Todrick (bobtodrick@yahoo.com), June 06, 2002.

Well Bob, try fill-in flash with your m compared to what nikon or canon offers.

Because leica is manufacturing mainly for collectors it's prices are ridiculously high. Imagine what happens if suddenly a new leica would cost only half of that it costs now. Is is possible.

Look at the bessa R2. Of course other factors play a part but somebody here stated a while back that this camera is so cheap because the parts come from other cameras, so the initial investment has long since been paid back and that this does not aply to Leica. The bodies of m 1, 2, 3, 4 (2 and p), 6 and 7 and it's parts are not that different. Has Leica still not earned it's investment in the M3 back?

Just to make it clear. I really like Leica and I would like it to last but sometimes I am afraid that within a few years Leica will be gone.

-- Frank (Frank_bunnik@hotmail.com), June 06, 2002.

frank -- leica cannot, should not, and does not compete with nikon canon minolta, etc. it caters to a niche market by producing unique products. like it or not, the collector market is a major component of leica's sales base. many here would love to pretend that leica is still the ultimate pro camera as it was for a few brief years in the 50s and 60s. those days will never return. if you want to see leica disappear for real, all they'd have to do is follow your advice and try to compete directly with the major japanese mfrs.

-- roger michel (michel@tcn.org), June 06, 2002.

Frank I do understand what you are saying. But Leica will probably survive just as will Piaget (though a $100 Seiko keeps as good time), Mont Blanc (a Bic writes fine), Ferrari, etc. There will always be people who appreicate and are willing to pay for hand- craftsmanship. Would you really buy a Leica M that was made of plastic, with parts butchered from other manufactures and optics 'nearly as good as' and only costs $1000. Many wouldn't. I believe this is borne out with the Leica point and shoots. Though there not bad cameras, most of this market segment has never heard of Leica and will buy a Pentax Espio or Canon Sureshot before a Leica. Even if Leica did build a good, plastic camera it would probably do them no good. I sell cameras for a living, and believe me when I say that most people buying a Nikon F80 or Canon Elan have never even heard of Leica.

-- Bob Todrick (bobtodrick@yahoo.com), June 06, 2002.

Roger.

could you contact me offlist? your email address on this forum doesn't work for me.

Skip

-- Skip Williams (skipwilliams@pobox.com), June 06, 2002.

Sorry Frank, but some of your arguments are bordering on ridiculous. If we are going to judge good image-making by a cameras ability to do fill flash easily (yes I can do it with my IIIg, all I have to do is think a bit), I guess we may as well throw away all those photos by Capa and HCB.

-- Bob Todrick (bobtodrick@yahoo.com), June 06, 2002.

Bob, my arguments may not be that good but you understand what I mean. Capa is good indeed. I don't find HCB anything special although I would not question his importance.

-- Frank (frank_bunnik@hotmail.com), June 06, 2002.

skip -- my email server is a little wacky this week. try michel@techfoundation.org. thanks

-- roger michel (michel@tcn.org), June 06, 2002.