Leica IIIf and collapsible Summicron 50/2 survival : a short story

[nicolas_douez]

Sorry for those who will have to clean up their keyboards from sweat

and fingerprints and change undershorts while seeing the first

picture :-))

 

Here is the story of my Leica IIIf (that I got totally by chance in

1994) and of its collapsible 2/50 Summicron whom front element was

deadly scratched.

 

So, as it was definitely unusable, I have it repolished...<div></div>

[nicolas_douez]

Yes, absolutely, repolished.

 

That's the story of my Leica IIIf collapsible 50/2 Summicron front lens.

 

The previous owner of the camera (a friend of my father in law) has been living in the Republique de Centrafrique (main town : Bangui, and former leader : Bokassa) for decades with a Leica IIIf. It was his unique camera he sold to me for a symbolic price in 1994.

Thanks to (well, I don't believe in God, so, thanks to... the facts !) the weather of this African country is generally reasonably hot and very dry with no rain season. So, no fungus or any other bad thing got I with the camera.

But the front lens element looked exactly as if it had been regularly cleaned with a Brillo pad, as Mike Elek recently said on the forum. Decades of cleaning with lens tissue and dust, and that's it. The lens was covered with hundreds of (clearly visible from the front & through the rear) hairline scratches and when seen from an oblique angle, it has a mate and milky appearance (too bad I have not made good pictures of the former condition ; I had made some of the camera, to show my Leica around, but one couldn't see the actual lens condition on them).

 

So, once paid, I put in in the cupboard, and never used it apart for a unique rollfilm to test the shutter (that needed service too).

 

I finally had the shutter serviced in 1998 by a local collector and the front lens repolished in 1999, when I heard from a French repairman who could do such a delicate job, and the results were wonderful. It shines like a new one - and, among the cosmetics, takes now great pictures. Some years later I picked-up a matching Leitz UV filter that is always left on the lens - no more scratches to fear...

 

I was told by the tech. that repolishing was possible on this one since it had not received an original multi-coating in the Leitz factory. Just a mono-layer coating (with a soft pink rendition) that is still there after the repolishing job - how surprising, but true. The coating layer must have been quite thick, and the scratches were rather in the coating material than in the glass itself.

So, it might not be possible to get such a good result on a scratched multi-coated lens (example : post war Zeiss Opton). But on a prewar uncoated one, surely. At least, repolishing a multi-coated lens would change it into an uncoated lens, but would certainly bring unexpected light spectrum transmission problems through the whole lens, as the lens design certainly includes the coating data.

 

Well, attached is a recent picture of the Summicron front lens element that is better than a tirade of an explanation !

 

And in the following posts, I will shop up six pictures : three pictures from the sole rollfilm I had shot before having the lens serviced, and three pictures from a rollfilm shot last summer. Both films were Fuji Reala II, and the uploaded pictures are 10x15cm color prints scanned two days ago (the scanner did not give justice to the last three that are absolutely outstanding : a 30x45 cm enlargement of the picture of my wife & son refreshing themselves in the river is framed on the living-room's wall).

 

:))=<div></div>

[nicolas_douez]

And now, the results. Before (1)<div></div>

[nicolas_douez]

Before (2)<div></div>

[nicolas_douez]

Before (3)<div></div>

[nicolas_douez]

And now, after ! (1)<div></div>

[nicolas_douez]

After (2)<div></div>

[nicolas_douez]

After (3 and last).

 

Thanks for looking, and : do not throw any heavily scratched lens away, ever !

 

:))=<div></div>

[nicolas_douez]

Hah ! I couldn't help posting at least a wrong picture. Belongs to the "after" series though...

 

You saw it climbing on a wooden bear :-)).

 

The previously described picture is the following one...

 

So sorry :-)<div></div>

[jeff bishop]

>"So, as it was definitely unusable, I have it repolished..."

 

It's more than pretty, it's actually sexy.

[michaelging]

Nicolas, a beautiful camera and photographs. I would never have thought that repolishing would make that big of a difference. If you don't mind me asking how much did it cost to be repolished?

thanks for the story.

[nicolas_douez]

Michael, it costed me 650.00 francs that are the exact equivelant of 100.00 euros. In 1999 the USD rated higher than today, so it was about $85.00. I did not hesitate to make that investment as I had paid almost nothing for the camera and also a ridiculous price for the shutter overhaul. But if it has to be added to a generally high sale price for a post war Leica SM camera, it might be different. In addition, I do not know about US techs. who could do the same job, but there are certainly some.

Thanks for the answer !

[awahlster]

Nicolas, I tend not to judge much of anything from photo's posted on the web but these look quite a bit softer then what I get from my 5cm f2.8 Elmar which has never had to be polished or recieved any scratches. Are you scanning machine prints or something that would account for the soft nature of these shots?

 

I had the same combo minus the ST and with the Elmar but once I bought my Canon Model III I found the Leicas I had a 1951 IIIf RD and 1959 IIIg such a pain in the butt to use in comparision I sold the Leicas and invested in more Canon RF glass and Now have a 1957 L-1 whic once I have it tuned up will become my primary RF body. I did keep a couple of Leica lenses the 5cm f2.8 Elmar and 9cm F4.0 Elmar A36 but I generally prefer the better Canon optics of the late 50's early 60's to the Leica screw mount stuff.

[nicolas_douez]

Yes they are scanned machine prints and I didn't do anything with any PC software to increase the sharpness and contrast of the "after" series shots.

 

Regarding the comparison between the 50/2.8 Elmar and the SM collapsible 50/2 Summicron, it's well known that a good Elmar is better than a good Summicron, even if this one hasn't gone into the repolishing process.

 

The collapsible SM Summicron was the first Summicron 50 and has a special rendition, that I like : plenty of details, sharp, but in the same time, not too contrasted - but not soft, IMHO.

 

In addition and as said in the story, I have scanned the prints myself with an average Epson office scanner that was certainly more able to show up the rendition of the fuzzy "before" series pictures than the actually outstanding "after" ones'.

 

I'll try to have some scanned a better way. I also have slides shot with the repolished Summicron (and in this case, very sharp Velvia 50) but alas I don't have any slides scanner available.

 

But when looking at the picture of my wife alone over the waterfall I frankly can't say that this picture is not sharp.

 

:))=

[luis triguez]

Nice pictures Nicolas.

 

My collapsible Summicron is the worst lens I have. (hope no any crazy-Leica-user will try to kill me for my words)

 

Same like Mark: I prefer the Canon ones even some of the cheap russian. Mine has no scratches but it's not of my taste. So mild.<div></div>

[nicolas_douez]

Hah ! I can breath now... :-))

 

The repolishing process finally might have upraded my lens quality to a level it would never have had, even if unscratched...

 

So : go ahead, have fun scratching your lenses, and then have them repolished ! They will be better :-) !

 

Very nice portrait Luis.

 

:-)

[luis triguez]

I'll consider that good idea, Nicolas :-)

[summitar]

Thanks for sharing the intimate photos. You are a lucky man.

[mike_elek]

Nicolas, you can really see the difference in the shot where there is sunlight striking something. The shot with the stairs shows a lot of ghosting while the children in the white reproduce the specular highlights quite nicely. That was the best test.

[lex_jenkins]

My trick for repolishing damaged lenses or filters - since I don't like to spend more money than an inexpensive item is worth - is to use the lightest grade polish Flitz makes.

 

This polish - recommended for plastics, fiberglas, etc. - is so light and, as the manufacturer claims, free of abrasives, it takes about an hour of continuous polishing with a cotton ball and cotton swabs to remove optical coatings damaged by fingerprints, improper cleaning or fungus.

 

The result is a clean, crystal clear but uncoated lens or filter. I used this trick to rescue one of my Rolleiflex TLR filters that had badly damaged coating as well as to clean up minor scratches on the front element of my Isolette's lens. I haven't bothered to have either recoated - I simply avoid flare inducing situations or shade the lens with my hand or hat. I have a lens hood for the Rollei which does a good enough job preventing flare with this filter.

[mikel r.]

I actually like the look of all the photos. On of my favorites is before #3. Looks great. I almost took some sanpaper to an older lens to try and duplicate it. :) I love the look of the new repolished lens photos as well. Great look and great location. It reminds me a bit of some of the spots we have here in Oregon. Thank you for sharing.

 

Mike

 

ps. Thanks for including your family in the shots. I get so wrapped up taking photos of nature, etc. that I frequently forget to add people in my pics. My wife pointed this out to me the other day when I brought 3 rolls of film and not one pic of my wife or son.

[connealy]

Lex, that's the first I've heard of Flitz. I've got a Xenar with surface cleaning scratches that is a candidate. Kind of a long shot I suppose, but I'm sure it is lonely sitting on that shelf.

[nicolas_douez]

I just looked at my pictures on my office cathodic average quality PC screen. Now I understand why they all might appear soft, even the "after" series ones. What a difference with my LCD Sony screen I use at home. So I'd recommend to see them on a great LCD screen.

 

About the DIY yourself polishing : as the front element was so scratched that it was totally unusable "as is" I had tried to do it myself with a soft polish cream and cotton balls, too. Even after many hours of polishing, no interesting result. In addition some polishing cream had gone under the front lens ring so that the tech. had to clean it.

 

I got no detailed technical info about how the job was processed but I can figure out that the front lens was removed from the lens barrel and polished with a machine that controls the regularity of the process in order not to get an unexpected "aspherical" design afterwards.

 

The collector who (grantly) serviced the Leica IIIf shutter had told me that he could have done the repolishing job if my purpose had been to put the camera on a shelf, but he told me that if it was for taking pictures he'd send it to the same tech. I have sent the lens to.

 

Thank you for all your comments !

[larry davis]

Nicolas, you give me hope. I have a Leica III, which my father acquired in the late 1930's and documented a family's growth over about 30 years. It has the collapsible 50/2 Summar which is fairly well scratched, too. Can you share the name of the French repairman? Or does anyone have someone in the U.S. to recommend?<div></div>

[nicolas_douez]

Larry, you must keep hope as your Summar seems to be much less scratched than my Summicron was.

 

About you question, yes of course : Marc Nicolas Reparations, 33 rue Paul-Louis Lande, F-33000 Bordeaux, France, phone 33 5 56 92 14 91.

 

:)=