Are Leica fans still using the fast Hektor 50mm f2.5 ?

[Kamepa]

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2472/...d42937a6_o.jpg

This is a better view of the lens^

The beastie I am talking about is the Hektor f2.5 50mm. Mine I think dates from 1932 but might be a tad earlier. I bought it on ebay with a rather beat up but still working black Leica II. Here are some of my very amateur efforts with this lens:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3449/...ac1f6585e4.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3575/...689cb7c0ef.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3653/...466e9ff9a7.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3315/...5b9b876ab4.jpg

I use this lens a lot and was wondering if anybody else still does or has the Elmar pushed it to one side? If so it is a great shame?

[TimF]

I've not heard of anyone using that lens, but almost certainly it will have its advocates.

The other day I saw a picture taken with the old 73mm Hektor (1931-42) on an M9. It was very decent indeed. The print was b&w, so it may be a colour version would be lacking of course. Those old Leica lenses can still stand their ground.

[Kamepa]

I've not heard of anyone using that lens, but almost certainly it will have its advocates.

The other day I saw a picture taken with the old 73mm Hektor (1931-42) on an M9. It was very decent indeed. The print was b&w, so it may be a colour version would be lacking of course. Those old Leica lenses can still stand their ground.

From what little history I have found I believe the 50mm f2.5 Hektor was in its day(late 1920's early 1930's) considered to be a very fast lens. As are the f1 types we see today. From my experiences colour photography on these uncoated lenses is not problematic as the manufacturers would like you to believe. Flare is the main problem, highlight bright edges and a haze in certain shooting conditions. A bit like them digital problems we have now

[TimF]

My sources suggest that the f/2.5 Hektor standard is not an especially common lens on the used market - the factory records give production figures of 10,655, compared with nearly 117,000 of the 50mm Elmar during the same period!

The Hektor was Leitz's first attempt at a higher speed lens, and it was perhaps overcooked at f/2.5. Sticking to f/2.8 might have improved the wide open performance. As it was the lens suffered in comparison to the Zeiss f/2.8 Tessar and especially the f/2 Sonnar for the Contax. The Leitz f/2 Summar, designed as a counter to the Sonnar was not very successful due to softness.

I have an f/1.5 Summarit, which is also pretty soft at wide apertures. Stop down to about f/4 though, and it's like a different lens.

[Kamepa]

My sources suggest that the f/2.5 Hektor standard is not an especially common lens on the used market - the factory records give production figures of 10,655, compared with nearly 117,000 of the 50mm Elmar during the same period!

The Hektor was Leitz's first attempt at a higher speed lens, and it was perhaps overcooked at f/2.5. Sticking to f/2.8 might have improved the wide open performance. As it was the lens suffered in comparison to the Zeiss f/2.8 Tessar and especially the f/2 Sonnar for the Contax. The Leitz f/2 Summar, designed as a counter to the Sonnar was not very successful due to softness.

I have an f/1.5 Summarit, which is also pretty soft at wide apertures. Stop down to about f/4 though, and it's like a different lens.

I think it is a similar story with the Hektor, once you reach f4-f5.6 it reasonably sharp. However softness is a good trait if you use your lens for portraits in natural light situations.

From memory these two were taken at f2.5



http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3109/...681ee690_b.jpg



http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3224/...365f0811_o.jpg

How do you date the lenses. The camera body it came on was originally a Leica I updated to a II in 1932. I assume the Hektor came with the camera and so may date from the same period?

[TimF]

How do you date the lenses

From the serial number; see here for example.

[Kamepa]

How do you date the lenses

From the serial number; see here for example.

Thanks very interesting site. My lens appears to be worth more than than the £169 I paid for the Leica II and lens. I think the prices are a tad Optimistic?

"50 Hektor F2.5 Nickel $400"

Lens Serial Number:

161258 - I think might be 1933?

Body is:

73177 - 1932?

I do not know if it just me but I cannot find the serial number list?

[TimF]

They're below the list of values!

Yes, the lens has a 1933 number (though with lenses it doesn't always guarantee they were built in that year). The camera is a Leica II (Model D) from 1932. I think if it had been an upgraded Leica I it would have retained its original serial. One of our longer-standing members here (Brian T a.k.a. Slimey) has/had a Leica IIIf Red Dial which began its life as a If if memory serves, and retained its If serial.

[Brian]

One of our longer-standing members here (Brian T a.k.a. Slimey) has/had a Leica IIIf Red Dial which began its life as a If if memory serves, and retained its If serial.

and yes it did, but if you remember Tim it also spent some time as a 11f. Nice camera as it's also still got the original Specialites Tiranty certificate issued when it was a mere stripling, before it became a 111f RD D/A.

Slimey.

[Brian]

[image]

Here you go. 1f 1956.

[TimF]

My lens appears to be worth more than than the £169 I paid for the Leica II and lens. I think the prices are a tad Optimistic?

You reckon? I reckon you got a bargain! A quick (not exhaustive) search at dealers has turned up one lens in London at £499, and one in Germany at an eye-watering €1950 (c£1700).

[TimF]

One of our longer-standing members here (Brian T a.k.a. Slimey) has/had a Leica IIIf Red Dial which began its life as a If if memory serves, and retained its If serial.

and yes it did, but if you remember Tim it also spent some time as a 11f. Nice camera as it's also still got the original Specialites Tiranty certificate issued when it was a mere stripling, before it became a 111f RD D/A.

Slimey.

Hello Brian - I'd forgotten the intervening period!

[Kamepa]

My lens appears to be worth more than than the £169 I paid for the Leica II and lens. I think the prices are a tad Optimistic?

You reckon? I reckon you got a bargain! A quick (not exhaustive) search at dealers has turned up one lens in London at £499, and one in Germany at an eye-watering €1950 (c£1700).

Thanks for that information I am really surprised I own something that might be valuable



I take it my II body not worth a lot then? It has had a hole drilled into the top plate, which I guess was for flash attachment? It also has a flash pc socket located on the front of the body. The shiny lens is a Russian Industar-22

[TimF]

Certainly not as much as the lens. The flash alteration won't help, but the hole in the top is sacrilege! Collectors tend to like things in "as new" or close as possible condition, and they're the ones who'll pay the bigger bucks. Most regular users after an old pre-war screw mount 50mm would be happy with the f/3.5 Elmar, which can be picked up for £200 give or take from a dealer (and quite probably less privately).

[Zou]

Hmm, that ristretto-black finish going gold at the edges is drool inducingly attractive.

[zx9]

Hmm, that ristretto-black finish going gold at the edges is drool inducingly attractive.

If JPS made cameras