LTM 21, 4.0 SA

[stephen_w.]

I have a 21 as above. Is it the same optically as the M-Mount?

 

Funny thing with this lens: It stops down (right to left) in the

opposite direction than any Leitz/Leica lens I've ever seen. Is this

a mistake? I've seen a mistake on a Leitz LTM 50 collapsible

Summicron before: f2.8 was engraved "2".

 

Steve

[jay_.]

Look around the flange on your lens for a little threaded hole. If there's one it *is* an M version, many of the early M lenses were LTM with M adaptors mounted with a grub screw to keep them from unthreading. No there was no difference optically. I can't recall the direction of the aperture ring as I haven't had one of those lenses in my hands in quite a spell. I recall seeing a 90 Summicron on KEH not long ago where the aperture ring was the reverse of normal. I don't know how that sort of thing would have happened, it seems unlike the usual Leica QC lens f-up of dirt, misaligned, too-loose or too-tight. Most of the 21/4 S/A's in good shape are in the hands of collectors, as well they should be since the C/V 21/4 is in another universe better optically, costs $300 and also takes 39mm filters.

[daniel_fusion]

The Super-Angulon 4,0-21 stops down (right to left) in the opposite direction than any Leitz/Leica lens because it was designed and built by Schneider/Kreuznach. Leitz couldn't manufacture themself a Super-Angulon at that time, but they needed something in opposite to the Zeiss/Contax 21mm.

[stephen_w.]

No grub screw on this one; focuses to 16".