M Adapter Thickness

[psasse]

Hi everybody,

I'm Matthias (or Matthew in englisch ) from Germany. Like many of you I'm using Leica M (and also Canon FD) lenses on my new G1.

I just wanted to report that there seems to be a new series of Novoflex adapters. I just got mine today and it's thickness is about 8.5 to 8.6 millimeters (i don't have a very exact caliper).
My 35mm Nokton focusses just a tiny bit past infinity with the Novoflex, and the distance scale is absolutely usable.

Novoflex has also eliminated the issue with the locking pin, that prevented a lens from being detached with the adapter still on the cam.


I also got the Novoflex LEM/CAN for using FD lenses with both adapters stacked together, and I don't have any focussing issues with this combination either.

Best regards,
Matthias

 

[cap'n bill]

Well I have just ordered an adapter from jinfinance for M lenses and a Panasonic 4/3 adapter but at present can't use anything but the kit lens and it is VERY FRUSTRATING!!!

Yes, the kit lens is OK but I want to play and I can't.

When the jinfinance adapter arrives I'll check the thickness. Do you recommend that I return it if it is too thick or is it fairly easy to turn it down a few thou?

 

[Ranger 9]

Jin is aware of the problem and says he's working with his manufacturer to get the correct dimensions, so yours may well be fine. If you do get an "off" one at this point, though, and are not in a hurry, I would suggest returning it so he will be aware that the problem hasn't been solved. He seems determined to get this right.

If you do need to reduce one, though, it's quite easy-- although the results are a bit ugly as it involves removing some of the chrome plating from the face of the front flange.

I didn't turn mine down, not having a lathe; I used #600 wet abrasive paper laid on a flat surface, and rubbed the front flange of the adapter against it. I rubbed in a circular motion and changed my grip frequently to avoid introducing "skew" into the face of the adapter. It took about a half-hour to thin the adapter sufficiently, including frequent stops to clean off the flange, reassemble the adapter, and check infinity focus with the camera. You could do it more quickly by using coarser abrasive paper, but then there would be more risk of removing too much.

I would suggest removing the front flange, rather than leaving the adapter assembled; this should reduce the risk of getting abrasive dust and swarf trapped inside the adapter, eventually to be transferred to the camera. Clean the flange very thoroughly before putting everything back together.

And of course I disclaim all responsibility if anything should go wrong!!

 

[wilsonlaidlaw]

Has anyone taken photos with a WATE yet on the G1 with any of the adapters? Having read Sean Reid's review of the G1 and adapters, I am wondering if the results will be poor, which would put me off getting any of the MFT cameras plus adapter. It would be nice to able to get good results with a WATE as that would mean I could have the WATE on a G1 or other MFT camera and keep either the MATE or 35 Summilux on my M8, without having to bother to mount the Frankenfinder. I am in Japan next week and I understand that I might just be able to find a G1HD, which were due out at the end of February.

Wilson

 

[scho]

Has anyone taken photos with a WATE yet on the G1 with any of the adapters? Having read Sean Reid's review of the G1 and adapters, I am wondering if the results will be poor, which would put me off getting any of the MFT cameras plus adapter. It would be nice to able to get good results with a WATE as that would mean I could have the WATE on a G1 or other MFT camera and keep either the MATE or 35 Summilux on my M8, without having to bother to mount the Frankenfinder. I am in Japan next week and I understand that I might just be able to find a G1HD, which were due out at the end of February.

Wilson

Bill (fordfanjpn) reported in this forum that his G1, purchased in Tokyo, was only available with Japanese language menus. He also found that the language could not be changed in the firmware.

 

[wilsonlaidlaw]

Bill (fordfanjpn) reported in this forum that his G1, purchased in Tokyo, was only available with Japanese language menus. He also found that the language could not be changed in the firmware.

Thanks for that warning. I am told that if you go to BIC camera at 1-11-1 Yurakucho, Chiyoda-Ku, not only do they have one or two salesmen who speak English (this is good, as my Japanese is limited to the usual civilities and saying "Excuse me I am afraid I don't speak Japanese, do you speak English?), but they also stock international versions of some of the cameras they sell.

Wilson

 

[vanhulsenbeek]

Has anyone taken photos with a WATE yet on the G1 with any of the adapters? Having read Sean Reid's review of the G1 and adapters, I am wondering if the results will be poor, which would put me off getting any of the MFT cameras plus adapter. It would be nice to able to get good results with a WATE as that would mean I could have the WATE on a G1 or other MFT camera and keep either the MATE or 35 Summilux on my M8, without having to bother to mount the Frankenfinder. I am in Japan next week and I understand that I might just be able to find a G1HD, which were due out at the end of February.

Wilson

The results are not poor. In fact snappier and more Leica looking than with the KIT-lens. A matter of tast of course. Rayqual adapter. UV/IR filter left mounted. 900 pix wide does not do the picture much justice.

 

[wilsonlaidlaw]

Sander,

May I ask you to post some corner crops of that photo. Sean's G1 test results showed that with a 28 Summicron, the corners were quite soft. Sean wondered if this was due to the standard telecentric lenses on the G1, not requiring such offset microlenses as we find on the Kodak M8 sensor. Obviously on the WATE, the exit pupil is even nearer the sensor than on the 28 Summicron, so if that is the cause of the soft corners, the WATE should be worse. On the other hand, the DOF of the WATE and therefore focus latitude is greater, also taking into account the f4 maximum aperture. I am going to have to buy a DSLRish camera for the classes I am going to be teaching this summer in Provence and if I can get one that takes my M lenses, that would suit nicely. It also would mean I could bring all my fancy Cokin filters out of their retirement in the drawer. Division 469 of the rumour mill has Leica bringing out an MFT PanaLeica with Leica lenses at PMA.

Wilson

 

[vanhulsenbeek]

Sander,

May I ask you to post some corner crops of that photo. Sean's G1 test results showed that with a 28 Summicron, the corners were quite soft. Sean wondered if this was due to the standard telecentric lenses on the G1, not requiring such offset microlenses as we find on the Kodak M8 sensor. Obviously on the WATE, the exit pupil is even nearer the sensor than on the 28 Summicron, so if that is the cause of the soft corners, the WATE should be worse. On the other hand, the DOF of the WATE and therefore focus latitude is greater, also taking into account the f4 maximum aperture. .......

Wilson

OK. My conclusions after last picture. How boring: I will now read Sean's reviews with even more pleasure!

WATE cropping at 100% not good here: see in 4th post: much better.

 

[vanhulsenbeek]

Second Lot, conclusions after last.
Sorry: Picture P1000148K: 100 ISO of course

 

[vanhulsenbeek]

Third lot: All focused at the middle of the picture (windowsill). Rayqual adapter.
All imported in LR, no preset.No processing done except up the the exposure of the WATE 1 stop.
I am a little disappointed by the WATE, or the G1 does much more post processing than the M8.
The WATE gives a snappier picture though.
The WATE on the G1 does show some smearing in the corners, more at 16 mm than at 21mm. No surprise
if that incidense/microlense theory proves to be true. The Lumix lense on the G1 does well,
but it has a surplus of pixels compared to the M8.

 

[vanhulsenbeek]

4th lot: gave the WATE a second chance on the M8: much better, do not know what happened at the first batch. Full size pictures included. WATE on M8 at 330 ISO.

 

[woodyspedden]

Perhaps the culprit in your first batch was camera shake. Doesn't take much to get some serious smearing.

Woody

 

[vanhulsenbeek]

Perhaps the culprit in your first batch was camera shake. Doesn't take much to get some serious smearing.

Woody

Hmm. tripod shake that was. Second batch: from hand, good old Leica habit

 

[cap'n bill]

I'm still waiting for my adapter from jmfinance after a month so I decided to make one. I couldn't manage an M mount but a LTM looked easy enough. Just by chance I bought an M42 to MFT from a dissatisfied G1 user so was able to slice it in two and machine a sleeve to fit into the barrel to take an LTM body mount from a scrapped Fed (or Zorki?)

A few tests in fading light with a 50mm suggest 9.500mm is pretty close (remember this is LTM so 1mm thicker than an M mount) but I'll wait till daylight then I can either skim a little off or shim the LTM mount to get it exactly right.

It has turned out well, worth an hour or two on the lathe. I took a couple of pics with my CV 15mm and results look great.

 

[Kachadurian]

what does WATE stand for? Wide Angle Tri Elmarit?

 

[petermcwerner]

I am not too unhappy with the first series Novoflex. In some lenses, what has described happens, i.e. infinite setting reading as,e.g. 1.5m on the lens distance scale. It allows to focus past infinity and at times makes it easier to find exact focus when the lens + adapters combinations + camera are within tolerances. For such lenses/adapter combinations/camera I prefer the jinfinance adapter, which is right on the spot at infinity.

Other lenses, such as the 16mm/2.8 Zenitar, that need 3 adapters
- Leica R to LSM
- LSM to M
- M to G1
can more easily be out of tolerance and I cannot focus to Infinity with a "correct" Jinfinance adapter, but can achieve correct infinity with the Novoflex.

Conclusion: I keep both adapters as they are and use them where appropriate,

 

[Per Ofverbeck]

I am not too unhappy with the first series Novoflex. In some lenses, what has described happens, i.e. infinite setting reading as,e.g. 1.5m on the lens distance scale. It allows to focus past infinity and at times makes it easier to find exact focus when the lens + adapters combinations + camera are within tolerances.....

I´ve arrived at a similar conclusion. I can live with the quite marginal loss of close focus, and I stay well on the "safe side" with all combinations I´ve tried.

After a period of testing, I´ve more or less settled on using my old M glass instead of R; I do lose some corner sharpness, but for my kind of use, this is unimportant. And they are lighter and balance better on the G1.

First, I planned to shim the adapter to get closer to correct spacing (I don´t want to send it in for replacement), but I´ve decided not to, for a rather curious reason: I´ve always hated the infinity locks on some of the lenses; now I never have to engage the lock, even for distant subjects...

 

[gDallasK]

The flange to flange thickness of my J Milich adapter is 8.52mm compared to the 8.71mm of the Jinfinance adapter I also own. The Milich adapter focuses a little past infinity - but not enough to worry about. The Jinfinance adapter does not reach infinity (though it is good for close up work!).

I'll keep them both.

 

[gDallasK]

what does WATE stand for? Wide Angle Tri Elmarit?

Wide Angle Tele-Elmar