PDA

View Full Version : Is this real?

iMacfan
02-02-2005, 15:07
Hi, I still find it very difficult to tell from photos the difference between real and fake LTM bodies and lenses - I don't have a contemporary lens for my IIc, and previous GAS attacks have left me less than rich, so an old uncoated 50/3.5 seems like the cheapest and most authentic way to go. I've seen this lens for sale, but would love someone who knows what they are doing to confirm that it's real.

Thanks,

David
Doug
02-02-2005, 19:36
I looks like a well-worn old Elmar to me, though I'm not an expert. Leitz really did use those odd f-numbers on some early lenses. One clue to FSU fakery is the use of "sm" for "cm" on the focal length. They get confused, because our "c" is "s" to them, so they think they need to transliterate that. Probably not a consistent error, but I have one "Sonnar" marked that way that's really a Jupiter-8. :D
Doug
02-02-2005, 19:40
Ooops, I even confused myself! I meant to say, "their 'c' is 's' to us..." As in their CCCP is our SSSR.
Nikon Bob
02-02-2005, 19:49
David

I ran what I thought was the serial number of the lens here http://www.leica-camera.com/cgi-bin/overview.pl/en/sn2preply and it came back as Leica Elmar 1:3,5/50mm. Hard to make out the serial number so maybe you can give it a try. My Elmar is out for cleaning so I can't compare the two. From memory it looks about right. Keep in mind that Leica made a great many versions of this lens.

Bob
Brian Sweeney
02-03-2005, 01:55
Look at the DOF scale on the lens body. The FSU "modified" lenses will use the old style aperture scale for setting the F-Stop BUT cannot file down and re-engrace the DOF scale. My "counterfeit" (advertised as such) has this mismatch. Most, if not all(??), FSU lenses are coated.
peter_n
02-03-2005, 07:05
The lettering of "Leitz" looks awfully dodgy to me, especially the "t". I got my 1940's Elmar 5cm out and had a look at the inscription on the front of the barrel - it all lines up and every letter has the same line weight.

Look at the t and the z in Leitz. Not only do they not line up, but the t is a completely different line weight. Very dodgy. :eek:
iMacfan
02-03-2005, 08:12
Here's the only other pic available:
peter_n
02-03-2005, 08:41
That serial nr. 255605 is a Leitz number and places the lens' production in 1935 if it is genuine.
Brian Sweeney
02-03-2005, 09:22
The DOF scale is very out-of-focus, I cannot make out if it is a "16" or an "18".

I would check the sellers feedback rating and make sure the lens can be returned. You may ask for a picture of the DOF scale.
RML
02-03-2005, 09:51
My first instinct was that it's a fake. Might still be one hell of a lens, though perhaps not at a price of a Leitz lens. If in doubt, don't buy. Safe your money, wait patiently, check the reputable dealers, and one day very soon you'll bump into that very Leitz lens at a bargain price. GAS is terrible, and though there's no cure for it it can be contained. :)
peter_n
02-03-2005, 13:03
Sage advice, Remy. I would be very cautious, iMacfan...
George
04-20-2005, 05:30
Re collapsable Elmar or its Russian copy: Will this lens work OK on a Canon P, especially in its collapsed position?
Elmar
04-20-2005, 23:55
Looks real to me, I have a 1930 Leica I and a 1932 Leica II and a 1934 Leica Standard and a few others and it looks like a nice nickel plated Elmar to me.
A sure way to know is to check the Apeture blades, if they are directly behind the front element then the lens is real, if they are further down the barrel behind more glass then its a fake russian lens.

It certainly looks real to me though.
bob cole
02-15-2006, 12:28
iMacfan , that definitely is a real -- but very old and very worn -- 5cm/f3.5 Leica Elmar lens...anyone who has handled any Leica product should be able to spot the real thing because the machining is very very good, as it is on this lens...the lens came from the factory without coating and in this condition [without seeing the condition of the glass] should be worth between $85 to $100 usd without front or real caps or Leitz leather case...as for the Leica screw-mount cameras, if they are being sold from Russia, they are almost always fake, regardless of what the seller says...Real Leicas, with very few exceptions are gold or gold-plated, none that I know of are pink, yellow, red, orange or whatever colors being offered...Very very few are special editions or made for the Swedish navy, the Germany Army, the German Luffwaffe, etc. Almost 100% of those are fake. Real ones of that kind are enormously expensive...Getting back to the Elmar, you will notice the serial number on the black ring around the lens...it's very hard to see but you can see it clearly in your photo...Fake Elmars very rarely have that feature...I believe I've told you more than you wanted to know...regards, bob [leica collector]...
ERV
02-15-2006, 13:23
I have had two FSU elmars and they both had aperture ring tabs that were a different shape than this.
This tab is flat and wide and will align with that elmar lens hood that allows you to change apertures by rotating the hood. Also, the serial number on the aperture ring is not found on the FSU elmars.
I believe it's the real thing.
Evgeny S
02-15-2006, 22:19
Jay (ZorkiKat) has published the nice information on his website about the differences between Elmar and Industar: Elmar? Industar? (http://jay.fedka.com/index_files/Page444.htm)
Hope this will help to avoid the "FSU Elmars" :D
RML
02-16-2006, 00:52
Re collapsable Elmar or its Russian copy: Will this lens work OK on a Canon P, especially in its collapsed position?

No collapsible will work properly in collapsed position. You must extend it and lock it before you can use it to its fullest potential.
xayraa33
02-16-2006, 00:58
if cost is an issue for now, the FSU Industar 22 or the 50 , are not bad preformers, and can be had for low prices.
ZorkiKat
02-16-2006, 05:59
Hi, I still find it very difficult to tell from photos the difference between real and fake LTM bodies and lenses - I don't have a contemporary lens for my IIc, and previous GAS attacks have left me less than rich, so an old uncoated 50/3.5 seems like the cheapest and most authentic way to go. I've seen this lens for sale, but would love someone who knows what they are doing to confirm that it's real.

Thanks,

David


David

It looks real. Try to look at the glass as well- a 1930s Elmar will have this white. Any tinge of blue or purple will mean that it's coated- and it shouldn't be.

More Elmar vs Industar here:

http://jay.fedka.com/index_files/Page444.htm

http://jay.fedka.com/index_files/Page367.htm

Jay