Leica. For. Less.

Some Leica lenses are not as expensive as you might think, and I recently bought a really nice 90mm f4 Elmar for only £50!
This has to be the cheapest Leica lens in the world!
It gives beautiful colours and very nice background blur, it's beautifully made and it's light and portable too.
I also look at two Leica 50mm lenses, the Summitar 50mm f2 and the Elmar 50mm f3.5.
Check out this bargain classic lens, and grab one while you can!
To support this channel on Patreon please go to:
www.patreon.co...
Thanks for watching!

[@StitchTheOtter]

At the moment I only own one Leica lens. The Colorplan 90mm f2.5. Its so good that I basicly never use any other 75-90mm lens. Its as sharp as modern aspherical lenses, near zero chromatic aberration, very nice almost Petzval-like swirl. Hard to adapt properly. Got mine for 25€. There are two main versions: Made in Germany and made in Portugal. The made in Germany version is generally sharp from corner to corner, but the made in Portugal lens is a bit sharper in the center and softer in the corners, which I perfere for portrait and single-subject works.

[@savffymusic1080]

Projector lens?

[@hansemannluchter643]

​​@@savffymusic1080👍👍 Excellent question!! I own 3 Leitz Colorplan 1:2.5 90mm projection-lenses, 2 different German-made, and one Portuguese-made. I use them, especially when Colour-rendering is important, as a loupe, or "magnifying glass", to look at prints etc. All the Leitz projector-lenses are fantastic loupes. The 5cm (50mm) Hektor has incredible depth-of-field, unlike fex the Zeiss jeweller-loupes, you can look at an item, fex a ring, and everything is tack-sharp... And if you need more magnification, you simply move it, and the object, farther away from your eye..

[@sierragold]

I have the Leica Elmar 90mm. My copy dates to 1958. It's a beautiful piece of kit, fungus and haze-free, and takes tack sharp photos. I have it adapted to my Nikon Z7 :)

[@NoToobForYou]

I shoot an older 50/2 Summitar on a iiif. Aside from the idiosyncratic f-stop markings and lack of clicks, this lens/camera pairing is a delight to use and they make great images when I do my job.

[@slow.poetry]

Those colors and sharpness look fantastic. First lens on my list when I get a rangefinder.

[@throtol]

Thank you for the suggestion of mounting the Leica Summitar 50mm f2 with the Zorki 4. I have a collection of rangefinders and find that my Niccas, Leotax, FEDS and Zorkis are more reliable than my Leica IIIs. The only downside to the Summitar is the hood. It cost me nearly as much as the lens itself.

[@steveborghardt]

Leica standardized bodies/lenses in 1930 - I have a 1930 Leica 1C that is standardized (Zero at the top of the lens mount) - These cameras will take all M39/LTM lenses just like the later versions. The only Leica's that are not standardized are the ones with the distinctive hockey stick that comes off the lens mount over a portion of the body - For those cameras the lens was made for that body only and were not interchangeable. Most if not all were 50mm Elmar f3.5 lenses.

[@Donyf911]

Good morning, congratulations on the great work that I have been following for several years. I would like you to recommend some vintage 50mm f 1.2 or 55mm f 1.2 lenses that are sharper and have great blur. Thank.

[@hansemannluchter643]

Olympus Zuiko (OM-mount) : 50 or 55mm f:1.2 Asahi Pentax (M42 screw-mount) : Takumar 50mm f:1.4 The 55mm Zuiko and 50mm Takumar have Thorium-glass in the rear-element, and therefore are radioactive. Both are AWESOME lenses. The 1.4 Takumar probably has nicer "bokeh" overall, the Zuiko is a bit "quirky".. Nonetheless, I've taken some amazing portraits with the Zuiko stepped down 1 ir 2 clicks, on my Oly m43 cameras...

[@calumhunter815]

Zen! Just realised, I have 7 (SEVEN) shift / pc lenses. Give us a shout if you wish to discuss. (Halifax).

[@Whywas6scared]

I do like your videos, and I will remember the excellent tip about storing rangefinders with lenses on close focus. However, "Leica for less" seems like click bait when one of the three is damaged and another will cost at least £300.

[@dizzybuizzy9347]

I have Zorki 4's and none of the Leica lenses focus on them properly - however, they focus quite correctly on my Leica 3f's!.... A lot of my Russian RF Cameras do not work well with my Leica Lenses!... Vodka might have something to do with it!

[@philwoodall9023]

And how does it work with a Russian lens? Is it only close focus where it doesn't work well?

[@JikoMuskato]

I've heard something like the register differing like 0.1 mm on soviet cameras, which might affect sharpness when focusing to infinity just a bit. Something like that.

[@hansemannluchter643]

I'd take a 1930's Zeiss Ikon "Contax" mount lens anyday.. Especially the Sonnar 1:1,5. Even the non-coated version is amazing, especially if you shoot in B/W. Do you realise that the original, pre-war, Contax II "colour dial", with the 5cm (50mm) 1:1.5 Sonnar, cost more than a Volkswagen, back when both where new? I gladly sell the 1930's Leicas I find, and buy at least 2 Contax for the money earned. BTW: It IS true.. The Russian distance to filmplane IS slightly different.

[@nicusorapostol]

❤

[@caw25sha]

Apologies for my ignorance but what do you mean by Zeiss and Leica registers?

[@NoToobForYou]

I think he means what cam position equates to what rangefinder alignment. This can lead to focus short of or beyond infinity when focus is set thus.

[@caw25sha]

@@NoToobForYou I see. Thank you.

[@miguelbazaaranaantunez4608]

Tengo dos Barnacks una de 1935 y otra de 1954. Con varios objetivos originales todos 50mm 35 mm 90 mm 135mm Que más puedo decir de estas joyas!! Funcionan todo a la perfección. Y seguiré trabajando con ellas hasta el final de mis días *Saludos desde México*

[@philwoodall9023]

Although having the same thread and flange distance (distance from film to mount) Soviet "50mm" lenses had a slightly longer nominal focal length than Leica "50mm" lenses (52.4 vs 51.6 mm as witnessed by the "passports" distributed with each new Soviet lens) so they travel further when focussing over the same distance range; thus, moving the Leica rangefinder lever more than it should. Equally a Leica lens will not quite push a Soviet rangefinder lever far enough. Typically this results in small errors at one end of the focussing range or the other. If you have good focus at 2m wide open, chances are you will be slightly out at infinity, but usually for infinity you don't shoot wide open so the errors are masked by depth of field. Also these are nominal focal lengths, so a slightly short (or previously adapted) Soviet lens can work well on a Leica. I have a number of Soviet lenses (>5) and when my (well adjusted) M10 is at exactly 2m from the target (I have a long stick for the purpose) the Soviet lenses tend to give a rangefinder match a few cm over 2m but they are not optically focussed; however if I move them to 2m on the distance scale the image is sharp but the rangefinder will be out. For the same setup my Leica lenses give rangefinder focussing and a sharp image at exactly 2m. Of course, on film and when stopped down this will not be evident most of the time, and for those using digital mirrorless it doesn't matter at all, as both will use the same adapter.

[@philwoodall9023]

​@@NoToobForYou Very well and simply put. Words like register get thrown around a lot and can cause confusion.

[@charleslawrence7327]

🌯