Komura 105mm 3.5 ltm on Leica M9

raid

raid

Dad Photographer
Local time
3:08 AM
Joined
Nov 2, 2005
Messages
36,146
I used yesterday a forgotten lens in my lens cabinet. It is the Komura 105mm 3.5 ltm. I should have cleaned the lens a little before using it, but the lower contrast will be there anyways. I had the wrong lens hood on the lens as it gave some vignetting with small apertures. I also had the wrong ltm-M adapter as it was a 50-75 adapter, so I had to "think" of 105mm as I focused.

I left all images untouched and without PP so that you can see what this does.

link: https://raid.smugmug.com/Leica-M9-Komura-105-2021/i-5zjsG9G/A

lens-X3.jpg


lens3-X3.jpg


lens2-X3.jpg
 
This lens has given me several years ago some nice looking portraits, I recall. I have any lenses, but I know them well.
 
Komura lenses were a dream for me in 1963. I was just dying to get one, but college fees came first so I never bought one. Their brochure was real GAS.
 
There exists a Komura 105/2 that is pricey. It looks to big and heavy to be useful with a RF camera. The 105/3.5 is not that heavy.

Why did you want Komura lenses?
 
I was more interested in the 35mm Komura. They, in 1963, were cheaper than the Leica lenses. And in Portland Oregon nobody had even heard of Canon ltm lenses (maybe still haven't).
 
Wide-Open on the Leica M9,







This is a good lens- not as sharp as a Canon 100/3.5 in good condition. I picked this one up for ~$100, needed a CLA.



Worth as much as a Nikkor 10.5cm F2.5? No.
 
I have one very like this Raid but labelled Super Acall. It is one of those lenses I snapped up when it became available because I am addicted to lenses of this focal length but just have not had the opportunity to really put it trhough its paces or to use well.

But my preliminary testing has results somewhat similar to yours. Somewhat low contrast (as are most lenses of this type of that era) and really quite sharp while producing nice colors. As with other f3.5 lenses in the 100mm/105mm class the photos of it on the web are deceptive - it is really very small - a bit larger than the older Leitz 90mm f4 Elmars. I have its matching partner in identical silver / black livery the Super Acall 135mm f3.5 except mine has a third party name on the front ring (Super Acall seemed to license other companies to do this quite a bit in that market).

I was lucky, mine came with its original hood and optically looks very good though cosmetically it has had some wear and tear - though only to the black pain - no dings etc. Your thread has inspired me to take it out and use it. But my longer lenses are like a family of young kids - all screaming at me "Daddy take me, take me, take me!"

Oh, OK perhaps that is anthropomorphising a bit too much. :)
 
charjohncarter said:
I was more interested in the 35mm Komura. They, in 1963, were cheaper than the Leica lenses. And in Portland Oregon nobody had even heard of Canon ltm lenses (maybe still haven't).
Click to expand...


For good or bad, at least some folks in Portland are quite aware of Canon LTM lenses today...although I did get my little Canon 28mm/3.5 (with finder in a little fitted case) in the Portland area several years ago, and the seller told me he had literally 20-30 of people come by with their EOS cameras and actually check to see if it would attach.
 
I'm glad that they know what an LTM Canon is in Portland today. I certainly was one that didn't in 1963 and I was into that stuff back then. I'm not even sure I knew Canon was in that business.

I do have a Serenar (Canon) LTM 35 f3.5 which is reasonably good, in fact I like it except I have to clean it once every use.

Serenar wide open:

Neopan Acros 100 expired by John Carter, on Flickr

and a general photo:

Kodak Gold 100 by John Carter, on Flickr

I dreamed back then that the Komura 35mm would be this good.
 
raid said:
Some komura lenses are costly to get now.
Click to expand...

I have a Komura 80/1.8 in LTM. I like the lens, and Raid has inspired me to take it out and use it on Canon P. This lens is not very common on ebay, asking price is generally between $800 to $1100. I wish I could get a matching finder. That said, I like the results from the Nikon 85/2 better, and they are usually cheaper than the Komuras.
 
I have a Nikon 85/2. It is a very good lens. Your komura lens is collectible.
Is the Nikon lens sharper?
 
raid said:
Is the Nikon lens sharper?
Click to expand...

Yes, the Nikon is slightly sharper across the board than the Komura, especially in the corners at larger apertures, and is higher contrast (although the Komura is not bad in this regard). My CZJ 85/2 in LTM performs about as well as the Nikon, but the Nikon gets the edge probably due to to better/more coated lens surfaces.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top