About Press Copyright Contact us Creators Advertise Developers Terms Privacy Policy & Safety How YouTube works Test new features Press Copyright Contact us Creators. So since Leica started to 'reissue' some old lens-designs, a 50mm Elmar (preferably 1:3.5 with modern glass) with the old but straight-line mount of the bayonet-Elmar would be more appealing than what they have 'reissued' so far. Mnutzer, roger1987, Lukas F. The Leica A's 50/3.5 Elmar established long Leica traditions of infinity lens locks, lens focusing levers, and of course sharp lenses. Barnack's design genius got it right from the start: Barnack chose what was to become the standard 35 mm film format: 24x36mm. Small compact lightweight camera body.
Home
Very Nicely Done
FAKE Russian Leica II $400
Well, at first glance it looks like a Leica, but does it quack like a Leica?
Pictured here is a nicely done fake Barnack 'Leica II' # 387234 with fake Leitz 50/3.5 Elmar lens. Once upon a time before the internet was popular (mid 1990's) entrepreneurs could turn a quick dollar by remanufacturing an official Russian Zorki or Fed into a reasonably believable 'Leica.' It worked too, because the info on how to spot Leica II fakes quickly was not all that well known or easily shared before the internet. I like this particular fake because its rather well done and an interesting part of pre-internet Leica collecting lore. # 387234 has just had a CLA and is for sale at $400 with fake Elmar lens.
The first tip off of its Russian heritage is the raised frame around the viewfinder window. On Russian Feds and Zorkies that viewfinder frame extends ALL the way to the top of the top plate (like this one). On real Wetzlar made Leica screw mounts aka 'Barnacks,' that frame does NOT extend to the top of the plate. The nice thing about this viewfinder ID giveaway is that its easy and quick to spot, even if you are at a camera show viewing a group of cameras on the dealer's table. That alone confirms the fake's Russian heritage.
Notice there are no strap lugs or slow speeds. IF this particular camera were a real Leica, it could only be a Leica II -- CLICK FOR INFO. The later Leica III had both slow speeds and strap lugs.
Perhaps the nicest part of this fake attempt are the top plate engravings. 'Leica' looks rather convincing, though the oddly shaped D in DRP is not so real looking. Notice the concentric circles on the shutter release like the Feds and Zorki. Real Leicas had solid release buttons - no rings.
The lens has a slight scratch on the front element - not that it will effect pics much LOL.
The next big ID point is the rangefinder cam - that's the connection between the focusing cam on the lens and the actual rangefinder mechanism built into the camera's body. Real Leica Barnacks ALWAYS had round roller cams, Feds and Zorkies had lever activated rangefinder cams, like the one pictured here.
Wetzlar Leicas had film loading diagrams, Feds and Zorkies not so much - though of course they could be added.
You guessed it, Leitz Leicas did not look like this inside!
Wow, everything that says Leitz Elmar is not Leitz Elmar?
Not when its a converted Russian Industar which was a copy of the original Leitz Elmar!
I receive more emails than you might expect about identifying 'fake' Leicas. Most of the them concern ridiculous obvious fake military 'Leicas' - the likes of which never even remotely saw the light of day at the Leitz Wetzlar factory, cameras mostly like THESE.
Some emails concern possible fake Leica M2's & M3's. Well, truth is, if you EVER see a fake Leica M2 or M3, its so well done that it will fool virtually anyone - including the 'experts.' Fake Leica M2 and M3's are only expensive collectibles, usually worth $10,000 or more. I was told by one Leica insider that the only way to recognize the superb Polish Leica M fakes was to carefully disassemble them, comparing them to known less expensive Leicas. The difference? The fake Polish Leica M were better made than the Leitz originals! Once upon a time, an internationally famous special one off presentation Leica M was sold by a famous British auction house. Unfortunately the completely documented original resided in an American collection. The real owner contacted Scotland Yard, who was ready to pursue the matter. The dealer who bought the fake let the matter drop - the camera was most likely already SOLD! Understand I am not talking about repainted black M's that used to be chrome, or real M cameras converted to rarer more valuable models. I am talking about high end replicas that were made from scratch to be better than the best Wetzlar Leicas. Lots of luck on recognizing the true lineage of such a beast! LOL.
Home
Revised: February 16, 2012 . Copyright © 2012 Stephen Gandy. All rights reserved. This means you may NOT copy and re-use the text or the pictures in ANY other internet or printed publication of ANY kind. Information in this document is subject to change without notice. Other products and companies referred to herein are trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective companies or mark holders.
Introduction
If you are looking for a new, affordable 50mm Leica optic, then inevitablythe choice boils down to either the ƒ2.8 collapsible 50mm Elmar-M or the ƒ2.050mm Summicron-M.
Many users are attracted by the smaller size and 'retro' styling ofthe Elmar-M, but worry about the lens being any good. Is it as sharp as the Summicron? Is it as mechanically robust?…
Elmar vs. 'Cron
For a year I had both lenses - both the latest formulation Elmar-M and a 1993 version M Summicron (with focus tab & no built-in lens hood). Both were in mint condition and with mint glass etc. Observations follow:
- Sharpness at ƒ5.6-ƒ11 is difficult to tell apart. You have to go to extremely high magnification to see the Summicron's benefits, making the Elmar-M more than sharp enough everyday use.
- Differences in contrast are easy to see however, withthe Summicron definitely more contrasty at all apertures. Whilethis is an advantage in the polluted, constantly overcast NorthernHemisphere, it isn't so good in sun-blasted Australia.
- The Elmar-M doesn't cope with flare so well when photographing into the sun or a strong backlight. Mind you, the 'Cron can flareunder these conditions as well, it's just that it isn't as bad.Mind you, neither lens is as flare resistant as the Noctilux orSummilux.
- The Elmar-M isn't as weather resistant as the Summicron.I found this out the hard way when shooting outdoors in the rainand I noticed the lens interior had fogged up. Oops.
- Having to de-collapse the Elmar-M every time you prepare thelens for a photo is a pain. For the occasional snap-shot it's okay, but if you are shooting a lot and stowing your camera each time, then the extend-the-lens-before-you-shoot make-sure-the-lens-clicks ritual can get on your nerves.
- Despite this, the Elmar-M barrel extension lock is surprisingly robust. Occasionally a tiny smear of Vaseline on the detent knobs at the rear of the lens barrel cylinder will help keep the mechanism smooth and reliable for hundreds of clicks.
- When collapsed the Elmar-M makes the M/lens combo robust and v.compact. With the lens body safely tucked into the camera's lens cavity, there is less chance of damaging the lens barrel if you have a habit of banging your Leica about. However if you use the Elmar cylindrical Hood (strongly recommended to help keep fingers away from the glass), when collapsed the lens isn't much shorter than the Summicron without a hood (or with a rubber hood rolled back).
- Oddly enough, the Summicron's extra stop isn't significant for outdoors work. Indoors however, even the 'Cron's ƒ2.0 isn't enough!
Mainly due to it's compactness & lower contrast, in the end I decided to keep the Elmar-M and sold the 'Cron. I now use the Elmar-M to complement my 50mm M Summilux, with the 'Lux doing the bulkof my everyday 50mm work and the Elmar-M used for fun or knocking around.
Links / Reviews
To read User Reviews of the Elmar-M, see the following link:
<photographyreview.com/…>
For general discussions of Elmar-M vs. Summicron, see the followinglinks:
- <Photo.net: #004u4x> (Apr 2003)
- <Greenspun.com: #0089eK>
- <Greenspun.com: #004HpW>
50mm DR Summicron
Wondering which particular 50mm M lens is the 'best'?
Many imagine it's the 50mm DR - see the following op.ed. piece by Seth Rosnerin LHSA Viewfinder Vol. 34, where he is convinced his 1960s DR 50mm Summicron (11118/11318) provides greater resolution and generally gives a 'better quality' image than the latest 50mm Summicron (11819) formulation:
<lhsa.org/pdf/341newmusing.pdf> (PDF 140 KB)
(N.B. this link may be broken due to a change in web policy by the LHSA in March 2004.)
BTW Mr Rosner forgets to mention that you must set the DR to infinity when mounting and dismounting,otherwise it won't mount properly or focus-couple accurately. Additionally, there are reports of incompatibility problems with some versions of the DR 50 whenused with the newer M6 TTL and M7. See Stephen Gandy's detailed notes on his 'Leica M50/2 Dual Range Summicron' page,as well as this May 2002 online discussion at <Photo.net: #003OvN>.
Before you get too misty-eyed about the DR, in May 2002Andrew Schankprovided the following reality-check:
I had the 50 DR and it is an excellent lens for sure, but I didn't find it to be as good as the current 50 [Summicron], especially when wide open. It flares easier as well, not having the benefits of multicaoating.
I find it interesting that certain lenses attain such cult status basically based on something written somewhere by someone I never heard of. The DR 50 is also very heavy, and prone to fogging like all of the older chrome lenses. Mine actually eventually had the internal coatings fail and was basically beyond economical repair.
So in answer to your question, I shot with both extensively and prefer the current 50 [Summicron] based on my results. If I had to chose between the two, I'd pick the current 50. By the way, the DR feature was more of an issue back then when the regular 50 only focused to about 40 inches. The current 50 focuses to 0.7 meters, about 24 inches, without fooling with goggles and stage two focusing cams, etc.
After reading the above remarks, in June 2002 Mr Rosner responded:
[…] Mr. Schrank correctly states that the 50 DR/Rigid is more flare-prone than the current 50 Summicron. It also carries its slight contrast advantage better into the corners of the image. The contrast difference virtually disappears at medium apertures. On the other hand, the DR/Rigid resolves better than the current lens on and off-axis and maintains or increases the resolution advantage as the lenses are stopped down.
The Rigid and the DR without the close-focus finder weigh only very slightly more than the chrome version of the current lens (made of brass rather than alloy and significantly stronger as a result).
I find Mr. Schrank's reference to the DR's cult status amusing. If there is such a thing as cult status, it is not achieved by something written somewhere by someone he has never heard of. It is achieved by recognition by professional and serious amateur photographers over a period of 46 years of heavy-duty use as the best all-around 50mm lens.
Leica Elmar 50mm Sunglasses
Voigtländer Heliar 50mm ƒ3.5
Despite the rave reviews, you can forget about the VoigtländerHeliar 50mm ƒ3.5 collapsible lens. It is strictlya collector's item at the moment and is only available with purchase of the101 Heliar Edition Bessa T camera body.Nevertheless Erwin Puts has done a glowing review of the 50/3.5 Heliar in comparision with the Leica Elmarit-M, seehere.
In June 2002Jeffery Smithnoted the following about his Heliar 50mm:
The Heliar 50/3.5 is a phenomenally good lens if you can live with the slow speed. It is quirky and takes some getting used to (you can change the f-stop by rotating the lens hood). The optics of this lens are exceptional, and I feel that I am getting to the point that I can recognize which images I have shot with the Heliar based on their appearance. I have some test shots posted at:
1. <jeffery-nola.com/images/Heliar_1.jpg>
2. <jeffery-nola.com/images/Heliar_2.jpg>
3. <jeffery-nola.com/images/Heliar_3.jpg>
I find the images taken with the Heliar to be clear, sharp, and with no suggestion of light fall-off anywhere.
Other 50mm lenses
In late Feb 2002 Cosina announced the LTM Color Skopar 50mm ƒ2.5 lens- a compact 7-element, 10 aperture blade 'high quality' lens and maybe a good compromisebetween the quality of the 50mm Summicron and (lower) cost of the Elmar-M? Beforeyou get your hopes up however, early reports about the 50/2.5 aren't very encouraging(see the following August 2002 online discussion at <Photo.net: #003Z6H>).
Speaking of collapsible lenses, here is something to think about. Maybe one day Leica should release as a separate M-mount lens the 50mm ƒ3.5 Anastigmat they used on the 'O' yuppie-nostalgia model. Apparently this lens is very, very good - much better than the Elmar-M andyet just as compact. See the discussions at:
- <Greenspun.com: #007fZF>
- <Greenspun.com: #0099r4>
Leica Elmar 50mm Red Scale
For more info on 50mm Leica lenses in general, See Stephen Gandy's M lensguide at:
Leica Elmar 50mm Serial Numbers
<cameraquest.com/mlenses.htm>
Leica Elmar 50mm Scope
Also see this April 2004 summary of Leica 50mm lens featuresand differences byFeli di Giorgio at:
Leica Elmar 50mm
<LUG - v27/msg04820.html>