Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/03/04

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] Expensive 35mm Summicron, a sad tale
From: john <bosjohn@mediaone.net>
Date: Sat, 04 Mar 2000 09:07:02 +0000

John Collier wrote:
> 
> I would get that 90mm looked at right away before any permanent damage is
> done. Stephen Gandy's Classic Camera site* talks about the rear element of
> the tele-elmarit often being damaged and good only for a paperweight!
> 
> John Collier
> 
> I will ship them today and you can refund the shipping after you see the
> items for yourself. I am going to ship it by the "slow boat" if you do not
> mind. Here is my info, send me yours.
> 
> *URL is: http://www.cameraquest.com/classics.htm
> 
> > From: john <bosjohn@mediaone.net>
> >
> > I just purchased, so to speak, a very expensive 35mm Summicron, not the Asph.
> > I had inherited my father's Leica collection, which included a new unused M4-P
> > 70th year commerative, with three lenses.  The camera is still sealed in a
> > plastic bag. I took out the lenses to examin them.  The Tele-Elmarit has some
> > kind hazing which looks spotty.  I think this is the same as was discussed
> > here a few weeks ago.  The fifty seemed perfect. But when I took out the 35mm,
> > the focusing tab was loose. On closer examination I found the tab had broken
> > in half. This lens was valued at $1400 in perfect condition for the estate by
> > a Leica expert.  About the same as a new Asph.  With the broken tab who knows.
> > I could probably get a the tab fixed, but the lens would no longer be perfect
> > and I could not, in good conscience sell it as new. I decided, therefore to
> > use the lens as I do not presently have a 35mm user. I glued the tab back on
> > and have shot several rolls.  The negs, of course, look great. So maybe the
> > tale is not so sad after all.
> >
> > Bosjohn
Hi John Collier,
The problem, what ever it is is near the front element, but think I should get
the lens cleaned. I don't understand the second paragraph. Is this possibly
ment for a different person?
Bosjohn