jerry_pfile3

Those that have Lietz or Leica stamped somewhere on them would number slightly less than say 1.7-1.8 million.

No idea what the others total. Remember that the M's started at 700,000, and all the slrs, P&S, and digitals share

the 'block' usage of serials. So the 3.25 million that they are around now, less the 700,000 LTMs, means a max of

around that above number.

Jerry

David,

I doubt if Leica cut and sewed any cases for its products, either eveready or

compartment cases.

That said, they marketed many system cases in their catalogs, both for screw

mount, M and R cases.

There were actually three cases for M's made in the style you showed, differing

only on the size of the 90mm in your kit. The earliest fit no larger than the f/4

Elmar 90. The next up was the one you show that fit the 90mm Elmarit f/2.8.

Finally the largest fit the 90mm Summicron (E-48 filter size.

All were beautifly made. (I have the middle sized one like yours). Only the last

for the large 90 are rare. I've only seen one in 50 years or so.

Best,

Jerry

Best bang for the buck is the original Leica 'Mini'. Think it was Leica's first point and shoot. 3.5 Elmar w/autofocus and built in flash, UVa filter, databack. etc. The lens IS sharp.

Only fault on a $100 camera like it is auto wind, which I never really liked in any camera.

Second choice is a Olympus XA. But really that's not a P&S/

Jerry

I have no information as to why Leitz made the two (w/M mount adaptor and without) but would suspect they had their reasons.

I'm sure the 'pure' LTM Summicron w/o adaptor was a cheaper lens. After all the production costs of a lens w/o were less as obviously less work and material required. For screw mount body users it would have been a better deal.

As the M bodies had been in production for a few years when the 35mm Summicron was introduced, I suspect the 'light went on in Wetzlar' when someone thought 'Why not make one lens that satisfies both M and LTM users'?

They only had to serial manufacture (and inventory) one lens configuration to satisfy both. Thus the LTM user would pay a little more of course, but as LTM body sales phased out, it would entice more to move into M bodies, with the ability to carry over the lens and use it on their M. Recall the M3 needed an aux finder for 35 also.

New Leica purchasers were then offered the goggled Summicron.

So everyone was happy and we can speculate on the net almost 50 years from the 35 Summicrons introduction.

Jerry

If you believe several sources on 'true' LTM v1 35mm Summicrons made by Leitz, there were apparently about 500 produced. They can be identified by the lack of a female pocket made for the 'grib' screw that held the M bayonet fitting in place.

Jerry

L should have added that when the LTM lenses were mounted on the IIIf (with no need for an adaptor), they to tighened exactly at the 12 o'clock DOF mark on the lenses. So perhaps I shouldn't have been surprised when they did on the M2 w/adaptors.

There is so much DOF on the CV 15, even when wide open, I doubt there would ever be a problem w/focus. Especially when it isn't RF coupled on Ms anyway.

Jerry

Continuing with A.J.s comment: In the early 60's I transitioned from a IIIf to an M2. I had 35/50/and 90mm Leitz lenses at the time, so I purchased an adaptor for each.

I was kind of amazed to find that when the adaptors were mounted to the LTM Leitz lenses, the exact center of the DOF field was at 12 o'clock, and the proper frames were in place.

Say what you will about the Germans. They know/knew how to machine.

Jerry

Get a finger tab installed on the 6 bit lens. Since optically they are the same, then you'll have both.

Jerry

I think Peter is on to it. No tooling costs to speak of. Think M2 of almost 50 years ago now.

No frills of course. Black only, no engraving. Next years Photokina?

BTW-Saw in the LHSA flier for the annual meeting that Leica manufacturing is moving out of Solms and back to Wetzlar in'Leitz Industrial Park'.

Jerry

Terri,

To the best of my knowledge and data (neither by no means complete) all the pieces for the Visoflex were sold individually, including the case. It was a moduler 'system'.

Jerry

Terri,

The 13.5 cm lens was made in 1941, the 20cm lens in 1950. They dust can be removed fairly easily, but let a professional do it. Search DAG, Sherry Krauter, or John Shelton on Google.

Dust is just a product of being 'old'. Given the condition of the kit as a whole, I suspect the lens glass (cleaning marks, scratches, etc.) is good. I wouldn't bother doing it though. Leave it to the purchaser.

I may have been partially misleading in that the Visoflex was a macro photography (close up) item. When used without the Bellows I shown, it used the two lenses for telephoto photography also.

You mentioned an Oubio attachment also. While you kit is for the Leica screw mount bodies, the Oubio is an attachment made for Leica M bodies, and used with the Visoflex II/III.

Lastly is the 20cm finder. Seems to have the box for it also. That is kind of rare, and you may wish to separate it before sale. Check completed sales on e-bay for pricing. You won't find many complete sets.

Best,

Jerry

Terri,

What you have is a very clean, and complete, Visoflex I kit. It was used for macro (close up) photography with the screw mount Leica cameras.

Rare? Yes, in that not that many were produced, and fewer are around today that are as complete and appear in such good shape.

Value? Tough to say. I'm sure there is some Leitz collector out there who wants one of these sets. Hopefully, if you wish, you'll meet them on e-bay or such.

Good luck,

Jerry

Tim,

While the Focuslide could conceivably be used to copy slides, its general use was to provide closer focus for macro-photography.

Options held Leitz lenses (generally 50mm but perhaps other focal lengths), that allowed these lenses to be extended and focused further from the film plane than they could be were they mounted directly to the body.

With the lens and camera mounted (this is the spring arrangement you noted, holding the camera on its back), focus was obtained using the viewer from the Visoflex using the ground glass. When focus was obtained, the camera was slid over (the slide part of focuslide), and the shot made.

As an aside, the Visoflex I needed a special two part activation cable to operate. One cable to retract the mirror, and another to trip the camera shutter.

Like so much of the old Leitz stuff, fiddly to operate, but incredibly well made. Getting there was half the fun I guess.

Best,

Jerry

Tim,

You have a Bellows I with shade, a Visoflex I w/verticle finder, and Focoslide copying attachment.

All appear to be LTM (screwmount). Were used for macro photography work. Not hi value items if thay's what your looking for.

Best,

Jerry

As has been covered many times before, the RF lens cam is cut differently on the goggled 35 vs the non-goggled 35.

They only will focus correctly on the film plane at infinity when shot with wide open aperature on other than M3 bodies. Stopping down will help but the actual depth on the indicated DOF will differ from that when used on the M3. Taking off the eyes will not change focus accuracy at all.

That's the reason the cam is cut differently on goggled 35s, whether Summicron or Summaron. Goggled lenses were made for M3 use, not later M bodies.

As with all goggled lenses, the RF image will be darker also.

Same problem in reverse when you use a non-goggled 35 on the M3.

Jerry

Uuh? Must be a prototype model where you have to hold it that way. Unless I missed it, there doesn't appear to be a vf eyepiece. Maybe the hot shoe vf is really a small mirror.

Jerry

Peter,

Actually I think it probably was cobbled together from some spare. The originals came from the factory with the top plates engraved M6 and with the Red dot Leica script. (See Davids pic)

With a non-script top plate that appears to be of the M4 variety (angled rewind, indented lower style on front plate).

I'd check w/Leica. Perhaps the top plate and black pieces are still available.

Best,

Jerry

At almost 65, I'm sure the M7 is the last M I'll buy (not much of a digital guy. I'll never be able to do all the D2 can do).

My only gripe is a purist one. I wish it was the same height as the M6. As primarily a chrome shooter, I really appreciate the accurate shutter.

Best,

Jerry

I can't help but think that production costs, both direct and indirect, had some bearing on Leica's decision to remove several chrome lenses from their catalog.

Jerry

If that's too much for you, look for the Rokker Minolta version. Also made by Leitz in Germany, with the only differences I'm aware of is multicoating and more easily found filter size.

Otherwise one can't telly the difference unless you look at the engraving on the filter ring.

As noted, a pocketable lens with very good performance. About $50 cheaper in the Rokker version.

Jerry

I don't beleive they are produced currently although there is always the possibility of finding one NOS (remote given the demand)Was lucky to find mine about 1 1/2 years ago for the list of $250.

On a side note I watched a bidding war on the auction site last Fall between two people for a new one. The winner (or the guy who ended up holding the bag) won at $750. It's a marvelous lens, and your only real option for macro work with the D2, but Jeez!

Jerry

The whole M8 saga cries for someone to write their Doctorial thesis on it. Plenty of data vailable. Toughest part would be the Title (and sub titles)

Jerry

The decision has/was made as announced on the first thread.

There would seem to be no need for this to remain in the "Discussion" section.

Just leave it as a "Sticky" somewhere.