christopher_a._junker1

Arthur, unfortunately John Van Stelten restored my Summarit several years before he retired and to the best of my knowledge, no one acquired his service. Additionally, over the years I've commented in this post regarding use of my LTM Summarit both before and after its restoration. The following may be of interest to anyone contemplating a Summarit restoration. I just reviewed my John Van Stelen Summarit restoration correspondence and the following may be of interest. Upon disassembly, JVS reported my lens was in mechanical good shape with just dried out lubricant. There was no lubricant migration from the shutter leaves onto the adjacent lens elements. With the noticeable exception of the front element, the other lens elements were in good condition. However the front element was in very poor condition due to cleaning erosion of the entire front surface to the extent that the lens coating was almost completely gone and the lens itself extensively scratched. I was informed by JVS that Summarit lens coating and the element itself were soft from new and easily damaged. To complete the restoration, JVS offered to polish and re-coat the front element, then finish the restoration with centering and refocusing. JVS said the result would be close to but not matching Leica standards. However there was one condition regarding the front element restoration: Due the high heat used during the re-coating process, there was a strong possibility that the thermal stress during the re-coating process would crack the front lens for which no replacement was available. I agreed to accept the risk of breakage loss and JVS proceeded with the cleaning, re-polishing, optical bench focusing and fortunately subsequent re-coating proceeded without any problem. As I stated above, I enjoy using the Summarit, but it really is a special purpose lens that gets very careful use. At present I know of no Summarit lens restoration service comparable to that of the retired VanStelten. However you may wish to contact Gus Lazzari for his thoughts on a Summar restoration as he has several on his waiting list.

My Summarit experience mirrors Mark Bohrer's including the effort to have John Van Stelten's restoration. In comparison color shots I made with a Nikon f1.4 50 mm Contax mount, I find both lenses still usable at 1.4 and 1.5 although low contrast and corners reflect their 60+ years. I prefer using the Summarit on an M3 rather than on a Leica LTM as it is easier to hold the M3 and focus. I'm fortunate to have the actual Summarit lens hood as both lenses are flare prone. Buy one only in great condition, badly scratched you'd be wasting film.

Todd, I have three suggestions. All are very low odds of success. I would start with trying to locate the dealer who sold the Leica as a used camera. Chances are if he was a traditional camera dealer he might be out of business, so to find him a forty year old phone book may be needed. If he was a Leica franchised dealer, the records might still be around. Secondly, I would write a letter to the Leica Historical of America and ask for their help. Lastly, there is a forum named "Rangefinder Forum" that might be of some possible help. For a real long shot, put a wanted ad in the Battle Creek newspaper. I sympathize with you as I wish my Dad had kept his Leica Standard. I'm just glad I have a picture of him with it.

My 1951 is also a 34mm thread. FIKUS hood fits over it.

Although designed to be tight, you may wish to make sure the spool spindle and the inside of the spool are free of any corrosion.

In response to NHSN and JDMvW I've communicated with Tuulikki through Rapidwinder.com and there are no plans to resume production. The 25 LTM versions are long gone. I began with a Leicavit baseplate IIIg which as a lefty made it a better camera for me. As I stated above, I quickly found the Rapidwinder made my M4-2 into a really usable camera. I realize that demand and a resulting production run for any Rapidwinder version would be limited, but I've found a precision tooling firm willing to look at small pre-paid production runs. This post is to determine whether any interest exists at all for either type of Rapidwinder.

I have and use a black Rapidwinder II as developed and manufactured by Tom Abrahamsson in Vancouver CDN. As I am left eyed, the baseplate replacement trigger film advance means I don't have to take my M4-2 away from my face when shooting multiple images. However with Tom's passing they are no longer made. For those that have one or more, did it work out well? Also is there any demand among Leica film camera users for them as replacements for M and LTM Leicavits that are now broken or considered too valuable to use. As I would like at least two for LTM cameras, I'm hoping there are still those who want one if they went back into production at the same quality level. Mine has made my M4-2 a wonderful user camera.

Maid my day:)

My M4-2 was CLA'd 10 year ago and it still has a nice smooth shutter release as described above. I found it possible to get crisp shots at 1/30th if I was careful, well braced and hadn't had too much coffee. Very nice camera for low light shots. Good luck with yours.

If you like the idea of a base plate winder, look up Tom Abrahamsson's Rapidwinder instead of the late series Leicavit. Rapidwinder made a series that fits the M4-2. Good website if you want to take a look. At one time Steve Gandy carried them.

Bill and Glenn, thanks for your answers. Cost sounds reasonable. I have read the same about the M4-2 motors but never had any issues with mine. The motor drive pins have to be firmly seated in the camera's film advance drive slot. The engagement that works for me is to slowly lever advance the film until the motor engages the drive slot. You can feel the motor drive pin engage the slot as the resistance goes way up and you can feel it.

Can the M4-2 be retrofitted with the RF condenser and if so, any idea regarding the cost? With the flair minimized, and a Rapidwinder or Leica motor that would eliminate any issues I have with my M4-2 and make it a perfect 35 body for a left eyed street shooter.

I also use an M4-2 and it is my "go to" camera which I use for 35mm and 28mm lenses. As I shoot color, I do have and use the clip on shutter speed linked MR4 meter. As a left eyed shooter, I use the motor winder. The only issue I have with the camera is the viewfinder/rangefinder that tends to flare out when hit with angled sunlight. In low light it is a wonderful camera to use. I leave an Abrahamsson black Softie shutter release button screwed into the shutter release which allows me to shoot winter pictures without having to take off gloves. Often regarded as one of the "red haired triplets" along with the Leica M5 and Leica CL, one in good repair is often cheaper than the same vintage M4 series. Your lens choice is a good one. If you decide to shoot available light B/W, the 35mm Summicron f2 series do a wonderful job. I use an M3 for 50mm and 90mm work, others may wish to comment on how well they work on the M4-2. Good camera choice.

M4-2, MR-4 meter, 50 Summilux, 135 f2.8 Elmarit goggles, M4-2 winder, Rollei 35S;$750 total; an old style photo shop trying to avoid bankruptcy;1980. Summarit 50 1.5 cast lens hood, $7.50 1982. Nobody back then wanted old Leica stuff. Garage sale Leica IIIc, good f3.5 Elmar 50 with cap; $25. Dad bought it in 1974. Rochester NY garage sales were a gold mine for old Leica cameras in the 70s and 80s. Not anymore though.

I suggest you ask Bill Blackwell if DAG gave him a CLA estimate for his lens.

If the lens is one of your favorites and you plan to use and keep it, send it off for a CLA to a pro repair facility, especially if it has a few years on it.

Great shot of the gull, the spread wings are exquisite.

Seeing your New York IMARECT I looked at mine and it is the German version. I also mounted my Steinheil universal turret viewfinder that has a magnifying lens for 85/90 focal length lenses. The finder is a perfect fit on the Kiev with additional 35 and 135 magnifiers and also has a parallax adjustment lever and ramp. It mounts very well and displays a bright image. Actually nicer to use than the Leitz as it is slightly smaller, sits lower, and is brighter with a larger image. Leica users here were fortunate that Leitz USA was set up as a separate corporation and not seized as foreign property at the beginning of WWII. The wartime history of Leitz USA would be an interesting item. I understand the repair section was operating, but I've never seen the catalog for what was actually produced. What I do recall hearing is that Leitz USA continued to make filters.

JDMvW: Did you have to do any reworking of the Jupiter-9 so that it worked well on your Kiev/Contax? I have a "No Name" 1963 Kiev that is so easy to focus that I think it might work well with a Jupiter-9 or the Nikon 85 f2. By the way, did you mount a Leica IMARECT for accurate framing?

Thanks Brian. I have an Elmar with a SN above 905000 which I will have CLA'd. I'm fortunate to have a full set of Elmar filters.Good story on the IIIc/IIIf.

Thanks for the comments. In the past I had Sherry Krauter rebuild a IIIg. Prior to his retirement, John Van Stelten restored both an 50 Elmar f2.8 and 50 Summarit f1.5, which are used on the IIIg. Both lenses now give wonderful results, especially the Summarit which had its front element scratches polished out and the element re-coated. As a hobbyist still shooting film, I enjoy using the very small Elmar 3.5 and having several unrestored versions of ages from 1946 to 1957, all of which should be CLA'd. I thought I'd restore the one held in highest regard. Niel's comment is relevant. Being very familiar with 50 Elmar f3.5 family photos dating back to the 1930's, my goal is to emulate the Elmar image as best I can starting with a clean lens. However my skills do not rise to the lovely level of Erik Van Straten's, they are stunning.

Assuming you have several f3.5 Elmar 50 LTM lenses in comparable condition, is it possible to see any real difference in image quality regardless of the lens age? If it is possible, in what serial number series will you find the best overall image quality?

If JDMvW bought that Ricoh 500 for $1, there is indeed a Santa!

Jaguar XK120 OTS? Great red! Icon car like the XK-E Type. Wish I looked that good at 68 or so.

My understanding is the M2 was requested by, and developed for photojournalists who wanted a Leica camera designed specifically for 35mm wide angle lens use. If most of your photography is B/W and you prefer the 50 mm focal length, I can see why you prefer the SP. However my 35mm rangefinder setup is with an M4-2 which, like an M2, came with the 35mm viewfinder and I use a 35 f2.8 Summaron. As a lefty I use a base plate winder so I can shoot without taking my face away from the camera. I prefer it for low light usage due to the 35 mm focal length specific bright viewfinder. In addition to the Leitz and Nikon rangefinder lenses, Canon made some nice rangefinder 35 lenses that work great on M bodies with the LTM to M converters. The later Canon LTM black lenses are especially nice and not too expensive. Perhaps other forum members can comment on the inexpensive Jupiter lenses for Leica LTM and M cameras.