Leica Elmar M 50mm/2.8

[Peter]

I need some information on the above-mentioned lens. Will this lens collapse completely into the Bessa R2? Will it hit the ledge in front of the shutter? :)

[back alley]

my understanding is that the bessa cameras cannot take a collapsable lens. at least you cannot collapse them all the way.

joe

[Huck Finn]

Peter, see Stephen Gandy's site at www.cameraquest.com

Refer to his writ-up on the R2. At the bottom of the page he has a section on Collapsible lenses. Re your question, it depends on which version. The latest version: yes, but collapse gently. The original version partially collapses.

[Peter]

Thanks for the pointer! :)

[peter_n]

Great lens Peter, if you're interested. It's very underrated because of the Summicron, but I've had both and personally I prefer the results from the Elmar-M. A couple of pics from this lens from my gallery below:

Elmar-M pic 1 (http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showphoto.php/photo/2971/password//sort/1/cat/500/page/1)
Elmar-M pic 2 (http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showphoto.php/photo/3635/password//sort/1/cat/500/page/1)
Elmar-M pic 3 (http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showphoto.php/photo/2714/password//sort/1/cat/500/page/1)

[Flyfisher Tom]

I know this is an old post, but for those interested ....

The newest Elmar-m will collapse partially into Bessa R(x) cameras, but not completely. The Bessa R(x) cameras have a shorter depth than Leica M cameras, and they have a built-in ridge that prevents the lens from collapsing into the shutter.

By the way, the Elmar-M is an incredible lens with exceptionally smooth bokeh. Highly underrated lens.

[Magus]

Post deleted by posters request

[Flyfisher Tom]

First, let me say I like Stephen and his site ... but it is unfortunate that cameraquest (an otherwise very helpful site) gives a less than flattering single sentence blurb about the Elmar-M only being for 'collectors' (without citing any reasons or other details as far as I can find).

I'm not sure where that highly underserved rap comes from. A lot of people who haven't actually used the lens seem to hold the same opinion (based largely I assume on just looking at lens speed rather than actual results).

Actual results are that it is as sharp as the summicron at equal apertures, and the OOF signature has a classic yet crisp look to it ... the best way I can describe it is that the photos have summicron sharpness but a very smooth OOF rendition that reminds me of the 2.8 Planar and 3.5 Xenar of the Rolleiflexes. Probably one of the few modern lenses that incorporates the virtues of modernity with the characteristics of the classical. Does that make any sense, perhaps someone else can describe it better.

By contrast, KB Camera 's review site gives a glowing review of the Elmar-M. So there is some appreciation out there, particularly from users.

Like I said, I like Stephen's site quite a bit, and have usually found his reviews to be very good, but on the Elmar-M, he, his source or his information is (with all due respect) ... wrong :angel:

[richard_l]

Also, the Elmar-M may be more flare resistant than the 'Cron. Anyhow, mine is.

Richard

[mfunnell]

Just how compact is the modern Elmar when collapsed? I'm thinking of a collapsible for use as a "body cap that takes photos" for my M3 as a small supplement to the, um, less than small 75 'lux that should be arriving Real Soon Now. The good words said here about the Elmar are encouraging me in that thought. But I do want something quite small indeed...

...Mike

[Flyfisher Tom]

Mike,

It is about the size of the CV 21 when collapsed into the M body. And, actually slightly smaller than the collapsible 1st version 50/2 summicron.

Makes my M pocketable. I use it without the hood, don't need it (this lens does not have a flaring problem at all).

You won't be disappointed :)

[Flyfisher Tom]

Mike,

keep in mind that this photo shows the lens with the HOOD and HOOD cap on, so it is in reality even smaller when used without the hood (which, as I indicated, you won't need as this lens does not suffer from flaring).

http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=218022353&size=o

[mfunnell]

You won't be disappointed :)That's plain mean :D I shouldn't be encouraged. Now I just need to figure out the logistics of converting a near-perfect M-Hexanon 50/2 into one of these (I'll keep my other Hex 50 that shows wear on the focus ring).

...Mike

[Flyfisher Tom]

Sorry Mike, I just like seeing lenses go to good loving homes ;)

[Magus]

Post deleted by posters request

[FrankS]

I'll soon be getting an elmar 50 f2.8 Classic. I've read that the build quality is better on the first version, but that the current M version is sharper. Does anyone have any experience with both?

[Flyfisher Tom]

I'll soon be getting an elmar 50 f2.8 Classic. I've read that the build quality is better on the first version, but that the current M version is sharper. Does anyone have any experience with both?

Frank,

I have the current version, and its build quality is as good as any Leica lens I've ever owned (including modern as well as the old classics 50/2 DR and Rigid). Smooth extension, buttery focusing, extremely high tolerances.

So if the first version is better, it must have been made out of Kryptonite by Rolex watch elves :)

[FrankS]

Goes to show you I guess, that you can't believe everything you read. :)

[MCTuomey]

Peter, I recall a post recommending use of an elastic hair band around the barrel to prevent its complete collapse into the bessa body. Kind of a safety lock, if you like.

Any way, here's one more voice in favor of the Elmar. I like it to the point where I prefer it for all-around use to my 50/1.4 'lux.

[Flyfisher Tom]

Mike,

Thanks for that tip. I think others have also suggested cutting clear plastic tubing from a hardware store in the right diameter as a stop.

cheers

[Justin Low]

I need some information on the above-mentioned lens. Will this lens collapse completely into the Bessa R2? Will it hit the ledge in front of the shutter? :)
Peter, the Elmar-M is a wonderful lens. I've posted some pictures made with it on RFF before. It's my favorite!

As for collapsing, it will do so all the way on a Leica M, but not on a Bessa R2. It does not pose a risk on the R2 however, as the body has an internal stop which the lens will encounter. No worries about the lens hitting the shutter at all.

As for size wise, perhaps I will take some comparison pictures this weekend.

[ERV]

I'll soon be getting an elmar 50 f2.8 Classic. I've read that the build quality is better on the first version, but that the current M version is sharper. Does anyone have any experience with both?

I had both and sold the original elmar 2.8 for the current model.
The original has the same build quality has a chrome summicron rigid; nicely finished and heavy weight for a small lens. It was a medium contrast lens and had beautiful graduated tones.
The one dislike is the aperture rotates on the lens barrel together with the focus ring, so to set the aperture you have to hold the lens againest the camera body and then focus. This is hard to explain, however it works with practice. The newer elmar doesn't have this problem. I still have the original 2.8 lens hood, which is also beautifully made.
I don't think the build quality of the new elmar is bad at all. I like it so much I sold my current 50 cron. Very light, small, smooth. A great travel lens.
More contrast than the first version, but not as much as the current cron, which I didn't care for.
Also, I invented :) the plastic tube-ring method on my elmar to keep it from collapsing into my M5. I posted here with photos back in the day.

[Ronald M]

Frank.

I have both and each is nice in it`s own way. The buiild is like all the current lenses, very good and better than enyone else, but not as nice as the original. It is very fast focuring rotation wise. Infinity to 10 feet is about 3 degrees.


The original came two ways, heavy bright chrome like the original DR and a satin chrome like the later DR/rigids. Mine is a later version and has the properties of the Summicron DR/Rigid. Downside is the rotating focus mount rather than parallel on either.

The new model is like the current `cron on sharpness. Some one suggested maybe a planar fingerprint, but I can`t say as I don`t have a new `cron. I will say is it is very sharp, noticabely so compared to my 1969 `Cron and all my other 50`s

[d_e]

Anybody has samples of this lens wide open? I am contemplating on getting a 50 Summicron F2 Type 1 Rigid serial 2,100,000+, which might need cleaning for its old age or a current version 50 Elmar serial 3,000,000+ which is in pristine condition. This thread makes me think about the Elmar more.

[taffy]

I had both and sold the original elmar 2.8 for the current model.
The original has the same build quality has a chrome summicron rigid; nicely finished and heavy weight for a small lens. It was a medium contrast lens and had beautiful graduated tones.
The one dislike is the aperture rotates on the lens barrel together with the focus ring, so to set the aperture you have to hold the lens againest the camera body and then focus. This is hard to explain, however it works with practice. The newer elmar doesn't have this problem. I still have the original 2.8 lens hood, which is also beautifully made.
I don't think the build quality of the new elmar is bad at all. I like it so much I sold my current 50 cron. Very light, small, smooth. A great travel lens.
More contrast than the first version, but not as much as the current cron, which I didn't care for.
Also, I invented :) the plastic tube-ring method on my elmar to keep it from collapsing into my M5. I posted here with photos back in the day.


Hi! would you still have pictures of your plastic tube method?

Thanks!

Taffy