Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Travenar A.Schacht ULM 135MM F3.5 L/M 39
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Tue May 05, 2015 7:59 pm    Post subject: Travenar A.Schacht ULM 135MM F3.5 L/M 39 Reply with quote
I got my Travenar A.Schacht ULM 135MM F3.5 L/M39 mount.

Some pictures of the lens. I could use a dusting... but it doesn't show wide open.

















Pictures taken wide open. Exported from raw no processing.

























A few shots Processed.













Enjoy.


PostPosted: Tue May 05, 2015 10:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
This is cool find. Never i have seen zebra rangefinder coupled. Or possibly just extender? Fine results too.


PostPosted: Tue May 05, 2015 11:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
My 100 3.3 is a two part lens, but normal M42. I suspect it was made to have different length rear tube sections. I think this series of Schacht lenses were designed to be adaptable ? Maybe the front optics and aperture were designed for use with a bellows without the rear tube?
They are decent lenses though, as Roger is finding out.


PostPosted: Wed May 06, 2015 7:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
This lens was designed for use on Leica screw rangefinder cameras. It's very unusual in that the rear section unscrews so that the front focusing part will fit directly onto a Leitz Visoflex I reflex housing. It would need a spacer ring to focus correctly on the Visoflex II and III models but I can't recall if one was ever made to do that.

By no means common these days - Roger has a very nice lens there. This lens, and its companion 90/2.8 and 35/3.5 siblings, were endorsed by Leitz and, in the UK at least, sold by Leitz themselves in the mid- to late-1960s to meet the remaining demand for screw-fit rangefinder lenses.

I'm happy to give him a 50% profit on what he paid Very Happy


PostPosted: Wed May 06, 2015 8:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Beautiful looking lens with very nice results.
Good find Roger
OH


PostPosted: Wed May 06, 2015 1:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
The thread joining the two sections together on the 100mm is M39, but there is no coupling for use on a rangefinder camera. The empty tube does make a useful macro helical for M39 lenses though.


PostPosted: Fri May 08, 2015 2:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Guess i'll have to watch for the others in the family.


PostPosted: Fri May 08, 2015 3:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Lloydy wrote:
The thread joining the two sections together on the 100mm is M39, but there is no coupling for use on a rangefinder camera. The empty tube does make a useful macro helical for M39 lenses though.


That's funny. I have an old Leica Elmar 90mm lens and it's similar constructed in two parts. Same design. But the thread is smaller than M39. It's simply the way of construction without any further sense. There is no way to use those parts separately.


PostPosted: Fri May 08, 2015 9:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Just for curiosity I looked around for the prices of this Schacht lenses. The discussed lens is available from nearly free of charge up to insane prices, mainly dependent on the mount of the lens. However, M39/LTM lenses are always in the highest price ranges, as you have to pay the "Leica tax".
Are you open to share the price you have paid for this lens, Roger?


PostPosted: Fri May 08, 2015 11:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
tb_a wrote:
Just for curiosity I looked around for the prices of this Schacht lenses. The discussed lens is available from nearly free of charge up to insane prices, mainly dependent on the mount of the lens. However, M39/LTM lenses are always in the highest price ranges, as you have to pay the "Leica tax".
Are you open to share the price you have paid for this lens, Roger?


It was $37 shipped.


PostPosted: Fri May 08, 2015 11:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
vroger wrote:

It was $37 shipped.


Thanks for your answer.
That's a real bargain. Congratulations! I think the lens is somehow comparable with the old Leica Elmar 135mm lens. It's a similar construction. It's very prone to flare. You should always use a proper lens shade to avoid flare and increase the contrast. A cheap Chinese rubber hood for a few bucks should do the trick.


PostPosted: Fri May 08, 2015 1:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
tb_a wrote:
Lloydy wrote:
The thread joining the two sections together on the 100mm is M39, but there is no coupling for use on a rangefinder camera. The empty tube does make a useful macro helical for M39 lenses though.


That's funny. I have an old Leica Elmar 90mm lens and it's similar constructed in two parts. Same design. But the thread is smaller than M39. It's simply the way of construction without any further sense. There is no way to use those parts separately.


I'm sorry, Thomas, but that certainly isn't so in the case of the 90mm Elmar. The lens head removes in order to be used on a bellows unit or other focusing mount with the Visoflex reflex housing.


PostPosted: Fri May 08, 2015 1:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Yes, I think the 100 is designed to be used on a M39 bellows. Which I haven't got, but I do have a few cheap M42 so I'll hack one of those.


PostPosted: Fri May 08, 2015 2:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
scsambrook wrote:
tb_a wrote:
Lloydy wrote:
The thread joining the two sections together on the 100mm is M39, but there is no coupling for use on a rangefinder camera. The empty tube does make a useful macro helical for M39 lenses though.


That's funny. I have an old Leica Elmar 90mm lens and it's similar constructed in two parts. Same design. But the thread is smaller than M39. It's simply the way of construction without any further sense. There is no way to use those parts separately.


I'm sorry, Thomas, but that certainly isn't so in the case of the 90mm Elmar. The lens head removes in order to be used on a bellows unit or other focusing mount with the Visoflex reflex housing.


The mount of my Leitz lens I have on hand: Elmar 9cm 1:4 Nr. 1558891 is M32 between the focusing part and the actual lens whereas Visoflex is M39. So there is no chance at all to mount this Elmar onto a Visoflex or bellows unit. That I know for sure because it's right now in my hands and I just measured the inner diameter of the mount. The lens is awful anyway, why I have added a Elmarit 90mm/F2.8 to my collection, which is a totally fixed design.
On the other hand there was obviously a 135mm Elmar F4.5 in a "coupled" version available (pre war from the 1930's) which was either normal or in connection with Visoflex usable. The later Elmar 135mm F4 was available in both versions either normal or as Visoflex but no coupled one. I have the newer one and there you have no chance to disassemble the lens in two parts without proper tools.
So maybe you mix it up with the old 135mm Elmar.
That's all I know about these Lenses. However, I cannot eliminate the possibility that there was sometimes any prototype also in 90mm around. But not in normal production, there I am relatively sure about. However, I didn't study any Leica-"bible" for that specific question.
I'm sorry too....


PostPosted: Fri May 08, 2015 7:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
tb_a writes

The mount of my Leitz lens I have on hand: Elmar 9cm 1:4 Nr. 1558891 is M32 between the focusing part and the actual lens whereas Visoflex is M39. So there is no chance at all to mount this Elmar onto a Visoflex or bellows unit. That I know for sure because it's right now in my hands and I just measured the inner diameter of the mount. The lens is awful anyway, why I have added a Elmarit 90mm/F2.8 to my collection, which is a totally fixed design.
On the other hand there was obviously a 135mm Elmar F4.5 in a "coupled" version available (pre war from the 1930's) which was either normal or in connection with Visoflex usable. The later Elmar 135mm F4 was available in both versions either normal or as Visoflex but no coupled one. I have the newer one and there you have no chance to disassemble the lens in two parts without proper tools.
So maybe you mix it up with the old 135mm Elmar.
That's all I know about these Lenses. However, I cannot eliminate the possibility that there was sometimes any prototype also in 90mm around. But not in normal production, there I am relatively sure about. However, I didn't study any Leica-"bible" for that specific question.
I'm sorry too....

Thanks for your reply Thomas, but no, I'm not mixed up. I trust Thomas will not take exception to the matter being set straight for the benefit of other readers who aren't familiar with this equipment.

The lens head from the 90mm Elmar is always used in conjuction with one or other adapters on the Visoflexes, depending on what the user wants to do and which model of the reflex housing is being used. For instance, one of these - code named 'OUAGO' - was a short focusing mount which allowed the 90mm lens head to focus from infinity down to approximately one meter on the Visolfex II and III models. Another adapter allowed the Elmar lens head to be used on the Leitz bellows units for close-up or macro photography. The same principle (using a different focusing mount) applied to the original 90/2.8 Elmarit (but not the Tele Elmarits or the Elmarit-M whose lens heads were not removable) AND to the pre- and post-war 135 Hektors, the 1960s 135/4 Elmar, the first family of 135/4 Tele Elmars and also the first version of the 135/2.8 Elmarit. The 90/2 Summicron in its first two versions also had a detachable lens head that could similarly be used on the Visoflexes.

Leitz did indeed - as Thomas correctly says - supply some 135mm lenses in rangefinder-coupled and 'short' versions to use on the Visoflexes. Anyone buying the 'short' version could later have it converted to a rangefinder-coupled version. The 90/2 Summicron was also available in those configurations.

The Leica system was very extensive in the way it allowed the user to tackle longe-range and close-up photography. Even when I was selling the equipment in the 60s and 70s, keeping track of all the permutations was very hard and having the relevant literature to hand was pretty much essential Wink

And Thomas - I'm sorry your 90/4 Elmar is in poor condition - do consider looking for a nice clean one, it really does perform well.


PostPosted: Fri May 08, 2015 8:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Stephen, that's quite interesting what you're stating here. I never found any information about that.
I've looked again at my lenses and obviously the lenses can be disassembled from the focusing helical tube. I've tried it a bit too low before, it's best to do that on the aperture ring.
However, the mount on the Elmarit 90/2.8 is equal to the Elmar 90/4 in 32mm and for the Elmar 135/4 in 42mm.
I am wondering how the adapters for the Visoflex and the bellow have to be designed to handle those different diameters. Just like step-up or step-down rings most probably. I've never looked into those accessories as I don't have Visoflex and I never used Leica lenses for macro as I have a very extensive macro equipment from Minolta including special lens heads.
Anyway, it's funny, as on the focusing tube from the 135mm lens you can easily insert any M42 lens and use the tube as a macro focusing tool for such a lens. I've just inserted a little Westron (Isco-Goettingen) 35/3.5 into the Elmar tube. That works.
I've done a test picture with that combination. The object is a old metal millimeter gauge which I used to measure the different diameters:




Actually it's from the wrong side not showing the mm scale. However the measured field of view is apprx. 10mm. LED light from the smart phone was used. So it's more than 2:1 (above 200% magnification). That's not bad. Camera Ricoh GXR-M. That's the whole picture only resized; just quick and dirty to show the theoretical possibilities.

Thanks for the information. I've been never a Leica expert. This equipment was always far to expensive for me. However, since I have my beloved Ricoh GXR-M I've aquired also some Leica lenses for this camera, especially for the longer focus lengths. The shorter ones are Voigtlaenders. In 50mm I have both the CV 50/1.5 and the Summicron 50/2.

As I have the Elmarit 90/2.8 already, I don't care about the Elmar 90mm any longer. I don't think that a nice Elmar is better than the Elmarit.

The learning will never stop. Wink


PostPosted: Sat May 09, 2015 7:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Hello Thomas!

The world of Leitz adapters is - even now - uncharted territory for me Very Happy If you have a look at http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-wiki.en/index.php/Visoflex_Accessories you might get some sort of idea about what they made back in the 'good old days'.

Good for you, thinking of using an M42 lens in the focusing section of your 135 - I'd never have thought of that. Your first result certainly looks encouraging - bettter keep it a secret, though, or it may drive up the prices even higher than they are now !

And, yes, if you have a nice 90/2.8 Elmarit you don't need to get a nice 90/4 Elmar. Looks like you have some really nice equipment to use. Do you see much difference berween the 50/1/5 Nokton and the 50/2 Summicron at equal apertures? I've never used the Nokton.


PostPosted: Sat May 09, 2015 9:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Hi Stephen,

Thanks for the link.
As I am an old macro freak, that was certainly my first idea when I looked at the naked tube and realizing the M42 thread....

Regarding Nokton-Summicron: Although I didn't make a direct comparison betwen these lenses so far, I have already planned to do that during the course of my intended big 50mm lens test. I really want to find out the differences of all of these lenses in an equal testing environment. Maybe you've read my comments on 50mm lenses in general in an other recent thread, where I stated that I've found an old test report about those lenses from the 80's of last century. Based on that my curiosity awakened as to find out myself, where the differences of at least my lenses in this focus range might be. My impressions in general are that the Nokton is a very fine lens although it's certainly more heavy and bulkier than the Summicron. The Summicron is rather prone to flare and looses contrast under difficult light condition and must be used very carefully in that respect, but delivers definitely very good results either. Maybe I will do the direct comparison between those two a little bit earlier. However, I will post my findings anyway here and split the test between RF- and SLR-lenses. I have to split it somehow anyway as I do not have a FF mirrorless up to now and all my lenses are not usable on the FF SLR I have. So I can test ALL of my lenses on my Sony NEX, the Panasonic GF and the Ricoh GXR-M but not all of them on the Sony FF SLR. However, this might also be interesting to see the possible different behavior on the different sensor sizes. I am not yet convinced to add a Sony FF mirrorless out of the A7 family to my collection of cameras to enable the use of all of my lenses on a single FF camera. Maybe this test will help me also in this process. Wink


PostPosted: Sat Feb 17, 2018 2:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
vroger wrote:
tb_a wrote:
Just for curiosity I looked around for the prices of this Schacht lenses. The discussed lens is available from nearly free of charge up to insane prices, mainly dependent on the mount of the lens. However, M39/LTM lenses are always in the highest price ranges, as you have to pay the "Leica tax".
Are you open to share the price you have paid for this lens, Roger?


It was $37 shipped.


Sorry to dig up such an old thread. A month ago, I found my 135mm f3.5 LTM while repacking my dry cabinet. It was given to me 5 years ago, and I did take a few shots with it then stored it away. For the past month, I have been shooting it every time I get the chance, mostly low light. It is surprisingly very, very good.

I would have posted the pics but somehow don't seem to be able to.


PostPosted: Sat Feb 17, 2018 2:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
ziggyzag wrote:


I would have posted the pics but somehow don't seem to be able to.


can there be a reason in the first message? most likely the forum blocks photos in the first message.


PostPosted: Sat Feb 17, 2018 2:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
sergtum wrote:
ziggyzag wrote:


I would have posted the pics but somehow don't seem to be able to.


can there be a reason in the first message? most likely the forum blocks photos in the first message.


Thanks. Let me try again.


PostPosted: Sat Feb 17, 2018 2:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
ziggyzag wrote:
sergtum wrote:
ziggyzag wrote:


I would have posted the pics but somehow don't seem to be able to.


can there be a reason in the first message? most likely the forum blocks photos in the first message.


Thanks. Let me try again.


Both shot on Sony A7II with the Schacht 135mm f3.5. Exposure : 1) Lanterns - iso1000 f8 1/160s, 2) Night scene - iso6400 f5.6 1/80s


PostPosted: Sat Feb 17, 2018 3:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Nice shots, ziggyzag! Nothing wrong with tose old Schacht lenses,


PostPosted: Sat Feb 17, 2018 4:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
scsambrook wrote:
Nice shots, ziggyzag! Nothing wrong with tose old Schacht lenses,


Thanks scsambrook. The Schacht 135 seems to have that 'moody' feel, especially night shots, that none of my old lenses can replicate except for maybe a Leica M50mm lux v2.


PostPosted: Fri May 21, 2021 11:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I've just seen one for sale...£80. I'm very tempted. Rolling Eyes
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2