Elmar C Equivelent in a LTM Mount

Discussion in 'Leica and Rangefinders' started by steve_mareno, Jun 17, 2008.

  1. I am thinking of
    going to a LTM
    camera because I
    really like the
    looks of the Elmar
    50 3.5 photos I have
    seen. My other
    favorite Leitz lens
    is the Elmar C, but
    it can't be made to
    work on a LTM body.
    Is there a LTM 90
    Leitz lens that will
    give an old style
    signature similar to
    the Elmar C?
  2. Why not get an LTM-M adapter and use an Elmar 50mm f/3.5 on an M body, which will also accommodate your Elmar-C?
  3. 90 4.0 Elmar was made for decades in screw and bayonet. 36mm filter and a few with 39 that were bayonet. They are fairly cheap. spend a little of the savings on the 50/90/135 sliding lens shade. It will work well and is very deep for the 50 3.5 if it is screw with 36 mm front.

    My experiences with screw mt cameras have not been too good. Both are working well now after tons of money and multiple repairs. I like the small size, but recommend you get screw to bayonet Leitz or Voitlander adapters and use an M.

    Later 50 3.5 were available in bayonet also.
  4. Well, I have used the M3 and it is a fine camera, but it is expensive. The screw mount cameras are cheap, especially the industrial type Russian ones. I can only justify so many systems. Right now I have an R5 w/ a 50 Summi and an Elmarit 90. The 50 is superb, but the Elmarit is a hit or miss lens for some reason, and that is my preferred focal length. My old photos of the Elmar C were consistently great, as was my identical Rokkor M 90. I could buy a Zorki or Fed or other Leica copy camera and have lots of money left for lenses.
  5. Ronald, I forgot to say thanks for the info on the 90 4 lens and shade. Those lenses seem to extend quite a bit on the camera though. Maybe a 90 collapsible would do the trick. I may have to face up to the fact that if I really like the Elmar C I'll have to buy another M body.
  6. The collapsible 90mm Elmar only exists in M mount. All the LTM 90mm Elmars are rigid. They are really pretty small, if rather dense. They're long focus, not telephoto, that's why they are rather long.

    One alternative, that's lighter, smaller, sharper, and higher contrast than the 90mm Elmar is the 100mm f/3.5 Canon RF lens. Still a 1950's design, so it won't look too modern. Cute as a button.

    There are newer LTM Leica 90mm lenses, but they are rare and pricey. There's the improved 3-element Elmar, and the f/2.8 Elmarit.
  7. mpo



    When you talk about the "Elmar C", you mean the one made for the Leica CL, right?
    Or, as some answers imply, you are refering to the Collapsible Elmar?
  8. What do you mean by "old style signature similar to the Elmar C"? The Elmar C is a fairly high performance lens that does not have anything such as an "old style" performance. For a comparable performance of an ltm lens consider a CV 3,5/90 Apo-Lanthar (which I own, but do not like very much as the short throw makes precise focussing difficult). All of the old 4/90 LTM Elmars - maybe with the exception of the rare three element Elmar that is said to have much better performance - do indeed give an "old style" signature, which doesn't even come close to the C-Elmar's performance.
  9. After I made the post I realized that there is no collapsible 90 4 in LTM. I wish there were. Peter, what I mean by "old style signature like the Elmar C' is that regardless of when that lens was made it renders images in what I see as old Leica style. I like that. Has that 3D effect at times and basically just has a look like the older glass. I ended up buying a Bessa R and an Elmar 50 3.5 from KEH. The lens is uncoated and has quite a bit of dust inside (bought for $155 at Bgn rating) but it produces very nice shots even w/o a hood. The aperture control is a bad idea, which makes buying a hood far too expensive. I'll make something that will work myself. I prefer my Summicron 50 R lens, but that lens on an R5 is a heavy setup. The Bessa R is light and cheap. It doesn't feel like it will last very long, but while it does it's ok for the LTM glass. I also have a Canon 100 3.5 and an older black Elmar 90 4.0 on the way, so I am set for LTM shooting. I decided to get a Rokkor M 90 4.0 as well, even though I don't have a M mount camera. Now to figure out how to get it mated to an inexpensive M mount camera, if there is such a thing. I could go w/ a Bessa R3a, but that isn't my idea of cheap. On the whole I am pleased w/ the Elmar 50 3.5. Great little lens, if a bit peculiar to use.
  10. One more w/ the Elmar.

Share This Page