The GetDPI Photography Forum
Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
Novoflex M adapter recall?
- Thread starter monza
- Start date
V
Vivek
Guest
If Jono remembers, I predicted this!
Novoflex' adapter is a rehash of their old one (an LTM to M adapter- no infinity focus on it though, I forget the code name for it). They just put the m4/3rds mount instead of the LTM mount. Even the replacement wouldn't cut it (for me), I am sorry to say.
RayQual thought of all the problems and to date remains the best designed m4/3rds to M adapter.
Novoflex' adapter is a rehash of their old one (an LTM to M adapter- no infinity focus on it though, I forget the code name for it). They just put the m4/3rds mount instead of the LTM mount. Even the replacement wouldn't cut it (for me), I am sorry to say.
RayQual thought of all the problems and to date remains the best designed m4/3rds to M adapter.
The description of the problem starts at post #108 ('problem 2'):
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=68082&page=3
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=68082&page=3
Per Ofverbeck
Member
I noticed this at once when I got my adapter. Since the EXACT register distance for MFT seems to be a trade secret (I Googled, and ended up with a document stating that the specs were available to manufacturers taking part in the MFT cooperation), I kind of expected Novoflex to stay slightly on the safe side - but certainly not that much...
I did mention my concerns in another thread about hyperfocal distances
( http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showpost.php?p=70082&postcount=7 ),
but nobody else responded at the time.
For me, this adapter is the "key" to everything else: I´ve got Nikon F-to-M and Leica R-to-M adapters, as well as the usual LTM-to-M one. So, if I return it, I´ll be without all lenses except the kit ones.... I don´t really think I´ll do that; after all, it is a minor nuisance.
I did mention my concerns in another thread about hyperfocal distances
( http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showpost.php?p=70082&postcount=7 ),
but nobody else responded at the time.
For me, this adapter is the "key" to everything else: I´ve got Nikon F-to-M and Leica R-to-M adapters, as well as the usual LTM-to-M one. So, if I return it, I´ll be without all lenses except the kit ones.... I don´t really think I´ll do that; after all, it is a minor nuisance.
"The biggest problem (other than rendering the lens markings useless) is that the lens achieves its field of focus over a much narrower rotational angle. This gives you fewer degrees of rotation per change in focus, which makes focusing a little bit more difficult than it would normally be. Sometimes, just a tiny little nudge to the lens will throw the focus WAY off, rather than changing it subtly. In my focus tests, everything from 4M to beyond 10M was focused within a range of 2M-3M on the adapted Nokton."
Above is the quote From Mr. Nemeth.
I read too much in between the lines and made some crazy assumptions. My fault for overreacting. Basically it is a nuisance and incorrect calibration rather than by using the Novoflex adapter, it will damage your Leica lens... Phew! Got me extremely worried... but I will continue to look for another adapter that will allow hyperfocus and will exchange for a newer Novoflex when I get another M-m4/3 adapter.
Robert.
Above is the quote From Mr. Nemeth.
I read too much in between the lines and made some crazy assumptions. My fault for overreacting. Basically it is a nuisance and incorrect calibration rather than by using the Novoflex adapter, it will damage your Leica lens... Phew! Got me extremely worried... but I will continue to look for another adapter that will allow hyperfocus and will exchange for a newer Novoflex when I get another M-m4/3 adapter.
Robert.
Per Ofverbeck
Member
Yep, the adapter is slightly too thin. This ensures that the lenses will actually be able to focus to infinity (and somewhat beyond). With a normal focussing helicoid, the error will be a constant *angle* (in fact, it should be possible to find and memorize a new "infinity index" somewhere on the DOF scale of the lens (different for different focal lenghts, of course). That same angle error is what´s lost in close focussing capacity; not very much. But the infinity stop (or lock on some Leica lenses) isn´t correct.
In no way will the lens itself be changed or damaged by this. It will work just as before on its "native" camera bodies.
(About that "secret" register distance: on a film body, it would be easy to measure it directly, with good measuring instruments. But the sensor surface is hidden behind the dust shaker glass, the IR and anti-alias filter, microlenses &c., and there just isn´t possible to measure it directly. So if it isn´t public, any 3rd party adapter maker will have to use trial-and-error methods.)
In no way will the lens itself be changed or damaged by this. It will work just as before on its "native" camera bodies.
(About that "secret" register distance: on a film body, it would be easy to measure it directly, with good measuring instruments. But the sensor surface is hidden behind the dust shaker glass, the IR and anti-alias filter, microlenses &c., and there just isn´t possible to measure it directly. So if it isn´t public, any 3rd party adapter maker will have to use trial-and-error methods.)
Last edited:
V
Vivek
Guest
m4/3rds camera registry is 19mm. If I had a working Vernier calipers, I would be more precise.
I have considerable measuring equipment at my disposal, yet it is virtually impossible to directly measure the flange to focal plane distance due to covering layers on the sensor, etc.
with my adapters, i made a few trial versions, mounting a long focus lens and verifying that at the infinity setting of the lens, focus was just achieved. I went a bit past it just to make sure. that manual focus magnifier on the G1 was ideal.
I also made a few trial versions of the M to G1 adapter, but am now modifying the design to accommodate the slight variation among lenses. The newer version will have a leaf spring to hold the lens tightly against the adapter (same as the Lecia method) and be made of black anodized aluminum with a larger lens release button
with my adapters, i made a few trial versions, mounting a long focus lens and verifying that at the infinity setting of the lens, focus was just achieved. I went a bit past it just to make sure. that manual focus magnifier on the G1 was ideal.
I also made a few trial versions of the M to G1 adapter, but am now modifying the design to accommodate the slight variation among lenses. The newer version will have a leaf spring to hold the lens tightly against the adapter (same as the Lecia method) and be made of black anodized aluminum with a larger lens release button
barjohn
New member
If you look at the top left plate of the camera the sensor plane is clearly marked. I have also seen the exact specification published. I will look for it and post it when I find it.
P.S. That explains my earlier post where I said the distance scale appeared to be incorrect and everyone said no it wasn't. I had the Novoflex adapter. I guess I need to get it exchanged.
P.S. That explains my earlier post where I said the distance scale appeared to be incorrect and everyone said no it wasn't. I had the Novoflex adapter. I guess I need to get it exchanged.
Last edited:
V
Vivek
Guest
In addition (to the DMW adapter), actual projection of the kit lens could be used, as well as lenses from other manufacturers where accurate infinity calibration is available to cross check.
Yes, 19mm (plus something) sounds like the real thing. The images John posted give an average measure (for illustration of the new system) and aren't accurate figures.
Hacker
New member
I heeded your advice and got the Rayqual. *Phew*:salute:
V
Vivek
Guest
Glad it worked out for you. 
Since I toiled to make one by hacking pre-existing mounts and adapters (my adapter is more expensive than the RayQual, btw), I could recognize the potential problems and the workmanship that went into the RayQual adapter.
You can be sure that your Noctis would be safe with that one.
Since I toiled to make one by hacking pre-existing mounts and adapters (my adapter is more expensive than the RayQual, btw), I could recognize the potential problems and the workmanship that went into the RayQual adapter.
You can be sure that your Noctis would be safe with that one.