Site Sponsors
Results 1 to 25 of 25

Thread: Converting to a Coded M Lens Mount

  1. #1
    Not Available
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    1,864
    Post Thanks / Like

    Converting to a Coded M Lens Mount

    FYI, guys. Just wrote this up...

    If you have a relatively recent Leica lens but it's not coded... You can either temporarily code it with a black marker - or permanently with a properly machined mount flange. The problem is, this procedure can be expensive and lay up your lens for many weeks.

    Follow along with this illustrated HOW-TO to convert your lens using a third-party mount flange. $15 and 15 minutes is all it takes.

    Converting to a Coded M Lens Mount
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  2. #2
    Senior Member JoelM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    San Diego, CA USA
    Posts
    264
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Converting to a Coded M Lens Mount

    Funny, I just bought 3 flanges from Jin last night. I was wondering about paint or sharpie so your article is most timely and appreciated. I needed a type II for my 75mm Summilux and his response was really fast and informative. I also got the Zeiss 50mm Planar and 90mm macro. Good to know I gambled well since I thought I'd just take a chance.

    Thanks,

    Joel

  3. #3
    Not Available
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    1,864
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Converting to a Coded M Lens Mount

    Right on, Joel!

    Yes, paint is a better idea, though a Sharpie would work. Since the pits are recessed below the mount flange it won't wear off as quickly - but wear off it will eventually. Since you've gone this far, might as well use paint and be done with it!

    I'll be doing a 135mm conversion next. Jin's also got some ZM/CV flanges.

    P.S. PetaPixel picked up the story.

  4. #4
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,603
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: Converting to a Coded M Lens Mount

    DN,

    I did not read your post. Today I received jinfinances flanges (ordered ~10 days ago) and it took <1 minute and a sharpie after reading the codes listed here:

    Leica Lens Codes - Leica Forum Blog - Leica Forum Blog

    Finally, I have the right frame for the Jupiter-3 (last week in India, it was showing a 35mm frame due to an old original Leica flange I had!) and could even be set to register as a Summilux. The auto detect appears to do something for the contrast from the Jupiter-3. The Rong Jin (jinfinances on ebay) adapters are very well made and pose no problems with the registry distances at all - meaning they are precision machined. A real bargain as well.

    I also have a focus mount from Hawk for 50mm lenses. I want to mount a 50/2 Schneider on it and add another 50mm flange.

  5. #5
    Senior Member JoelM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    San Diego, CA USA
    Posts
    264
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Converting to a Coded M Lens Mount

    Congrats DN on your story being picked up. I didn't know that there was one for 135. I have the f3.4 version so I don't think that there is a code, but I wouldn't mind putting something on it so my EXIF data at least shows 135mm.

    Thanks,

    Joel

  6. #6
    Senior Member segedi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Calgary, Canada
    Posts
    363
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Converting to a Coded M Lens Mount

    Does anyone know if the Voigtlander 4 screw flanges will work on the Zeiss ZM 21mm /4.5 and 25mm /2.8? The flanges look identical to me, 4 screws in the same places.

  7. #7
    Not Available
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    1,864
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Converting to a Coded M Lens Mount

    Quote Originally Posted by Vivek View Post
    ...after reading the codes listed here: LUF
    Vivek, that page is woefully out of date. Use Leica Lens Codes instead. It has the new Super-Elmar-M 21mm f/3.4 and APO-Telyt-M 135mm f/4, among other updates.

    Quote Originally Posted by JoelM View Post
    Congrats DN on your story being picked up. I didn't know that there was one for 135. I have the f3.4 version so I don't think that there is a code, but I wouldn't mind putting something on it so my EXIF data at least shows 135mm.
    Thanks!

    Yes - the APO-Telyt-M has a code, which is listed as 110101 (or ⬛⬛⬜⬛⬜⬛). <- This looks reversed on GetDPI and is seen as ⬜⬜⬛⬜⬛⬜
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Brampton, ON Canada
    Posts
    175
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Converting to a Coded M Lens Mount

    Quote Originally Posted by segedi View Post
    Does anyone know if the Voigtlander 4 screw flanges will work on the Zeiss ZM 21mm /4.5 and 25mm /2.8? The flanges look identical to me, 4 screws in the same places.
    Just a word of caution on the ZM21/4.5. I owned one for a while and considered a coded flange, but the information I received indicated that this wasn't possible for this lens. I wrote to Zeiss about getting a replacement flange(to have coded) and this was the response:

    "Thank you for your inquiry to Carl Zeiss.
    Due to the very compact construction of the C-Biogon T* 4,5/21 ZM, the inner part of the focusing helicoid and the bayonet mount ring are one part only.
    To replace the bayonet mount ring of this lens, the complete barrel has to be disassembled. For adjusting and re-assembling, special experience and measuring equipment is necessary.
    So we do not offer those parts separately to non-authorized service centres."

    It would seem that the ZM 21/4.5 would be a problem.

  9. #9
    Senior Member segedi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Calgary, Canada
    Posts
    363
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Converting to a Coded M Lens Mount

    Well that answers that! Thanks for the info. I'll just marker that one up then.

  10. #10
    Not Available
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    1,864
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Converting to a Coded M Lens Mount

    What a shame on the C Biogon. It's been painful since the get go with digital and doesn't look any better on the latest M. Go figure, the f/2.8 version is a peach!

    Anyone have the code for the 50 APO?

  11. #11
    Senior Member segedi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Calgary, Canada
    Posts
    363
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Converting to a Coded M Lens Mount

    Quote Originally Posted by Double Negative View Post
    Anyone have the code for the 50 APO?
    Yes, but it will cost you $7,195...
    Segedi.com

    flickr
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  12. #12
    Not Available
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    1,864
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Converting to a Coded M Lens Mount

    Nevermind; 110101 & 50/75.

  13. #13
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    3,673
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Converting to a Coded M Lens Mount

    Nice articles Michael and very useful too. I would just mention that when looking at the right hand side of the coding table (chart) for non Leica lenses to see what to code them...not always is the corresponding Leica lens listed on the same line, the best code to use for that non Leica lens. Case in point: The Zeiss Zm 21mm f2.8 does much better coded as a Leica 21mm f2.8 Elmariit-M (non asph) as it does much better in eliminating "red-edge issues" as opposed to the suggested coding as a Leica 21mm f2.8 Elmarit-M asph. A few other examples like this also exist.

    Dave (D&A)

  14. #14
    Senior Member segedi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Calgary, Canada
    Posts
    363
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Converting to a Coded M Lens Mount

    Thanks for the nudge. I contacted Jin and ended up buying 3 flanges. 90mm Summicron, 40mm Nokton and CV 21/4. My Zeiss 25mm already has the recessed flang so I'll just sharpie it in. And the ZM 21/4.5, well, might just be for film. Will see how it works out on the M if that ever arrives.

  15. #15
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,603
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: Converting to a Coded M Lens Mount

    Quote Originally Posted by Double Negative View Post
    Vivek, that page is woefully out of date. Use Leica Lens Codes instead. It has the new Super-Elmar-M 21mm f/3.4 and APO-Telyt-M 135mm f/4, among other updates.


    Thanks, DN!

    Bookmarked!

  16. #16
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    3,673
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Converting to a Coded M Lens Mount

    Quote Originally Posted by Double Negative View Post
    Vivek, that page is woefully out of date. Use Leica Lens Codes instead. It has the new Super-Elmar-M 21mm f/3.4 and APO-Telyt-M 135mm f/4, among other updates.
    Michael, correct me if I'm wrong but I think in the above "line", you meant "APO-Telyt-M 135mm f/3.4, among other updates", NOT APO-Telyt-M 135mm f4? The APO 135mm is a f3.4 lens, not f4. All versions of the 135mm f4 (pre APO) have never had a 6 bit code.

    Dave (D&A)

  17. #17
    Not Available
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    1,864
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Converting to a Coded M Lens Mount

    Thank you Dave, and you are correct; APO is f/3.4. I will also double-check the "Other Lens" column more thoroughly. A lot of it dates back to the M8 and may not apply to the M9 as well, and it also depends a little on each individual camera. Some work better at one setting than others. Strange but true!

    You're welcome segedi! I ordered my 135mm flange also. If I can just code my CV 21 1.8 now, I'll be one happy lil' clam!

    You're welcome Vivek!

  18. #18
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    3,673
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Converting to a Coded M Lens Mount

    Thanks Michael,

    I sent you an e-mail with some questions and other thoughts and one of the things I mentioned (not sure if you were refering to this in your response above) is sometimes the suggested codings for some non Leica lenses listed in the right hand column aren't the best choices with regards to red-edge seen in some of the wides. Yes, it sometimes does relate back to the early days of the M8.

    Dave (D&A)

  19. #19
    Senior Member JoelM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    San Diego, CA USA
    Posts
    264
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Converting to a Coded M Lens Mount

    Quote Originally Posted by Double Negative View Post
    Nevermind; 110101 & 50/75.
    Ok, I'm a tad confused. The code for:

    APO-Summicron-M 50mm f/2 (VI) 11141 - 110101 ⬛⬛⬜⬛⬜⬛ 50/75 and

    APO-Telyt-M 135mm f/3.4 11889 - 110101 ⬛⬛⬜⬛⬜⬛ 35/135

    are the same. Wouldn't the exif data be wrong for one of the lenses?

    TIA,

    Joel

  20. #20
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    449
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Converting to a Coded M Lens Mount

    Quote Originally Posted by Double Negative View Post
    FYI, guys. Just wrote this up...
    Converting to a Coded M Lens Mount
    Nicely written up.

    I'm glad you mentioned tightening the screws opposite to opposite and gradually.

    Two observations come to mind. When I did mine a few months ago one of my Jin adapters had some flash in the screw holes. This was just enough to force the adapter off centre despite careful tightening, and the result was that the focusing tightened up on my 50mm Summicron. I drilled the holes out a fraction, but putting a fine round file into the holes would do the same job. This fixed it, and I can hardly complain given the bargain price.

    But this led to a second thought, the focusing of my 35mm Summicron had always been slightly notchy and it occured to me it may be for a similar reason. So I simply loosened the screws of the original flange and did them up again gradually and in the right order, and lo and behold the lens became slick and smooth. So for notchy or stiff focusing lenses the first course of action may be to just check the flange screws are tightened properly.

    Steve
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/steve_barnett/
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  21. #21
    Not Available
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    1,864
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Converting to a Coded M Lens Mount

    Quote Originally Posted by JoelM View Post
    Ok, I'm a tad confused. The code for:

    APO-Summicron-M 50mm f/2 (VI) 11141 - 110101 ⬛⬛⬜⬛⬜⬛ 50/75 and

    APO-Telyt-M 135mm f/3.4 11889 - 110101 ⬛⬛⬜⬛⬜⬛ 35/135

    are the same. Wouldn't the exif data be wrong for one of the lenses?
    Nice catch! First instinct is to say, "why yes!" But no. Here's why.

    In order to "code a lens" you need two things. First, the 6-bit code that we all know and love... But also the framelines that are brought up! As you can see, both lenses bring up different framelines - and thus, are different.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  22. #22
    Not Available
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    1,864
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Converting to a Coded M Lens Mount

    Quote Originally Posted by 250swb View Post
    Nicely written up.

    I'm glad you mentioned tightening the screws opposite to opposite and gradually.

    Two observations come to mind. When I did mine a few months ago one of my Jin adapters had some flash in the screw holes. This was just enough to force the adapter off centre despite careful tightening, and the result was that the focusing tightened up on my 50mm Summicron. I drilled the holes out a fraction, but putting a fine round file into the holes would do the same job. This fixed it, and I can hardly complain given the bargain price.

    But this led to a second thought, the focusing of my 35mm Summicron had always been slightly notchy and it occured to me it may be for a similar reason. So I simply loosened the screws of the original flange and did them up again gradually and in the right order, and lo and behold the lens became slick and smooth. So for notchy or stiff focusing lenses the first course of action may be to just check the flange screws are tightened properly.
    Thanks! I used to build race engines - old habit.

    That's interesting regarding the flash/burrs. There was a hint on mine as well... But I merely ran a fingernail around any edges and into the notches. I didn't notice anything in the countersunk screw holes though. I'd say a file would be a better way to go for cleaning them up than drilling. They're not Milich mounts, that's for sure - but like you said - they're also $15-20!

    I can see how certain lenses would improve by re-torquing the mount. It does get a lot of abuse over time. Depends on what the screws go into and how deep, etc. I did try this on a couple of balky ZMs, but nope - still got that crap wobble!

  23. #23
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,603
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: Converting to a Coded M Lens Mount

    Has anyone put a 6 bit code on a Rokkor 40/2? Any pics would be appreciated.

  24. #24
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    185
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Converting to a Coded M Lens Mount

    Can I assume that the machining of these mounts is of the correct and consistent thickness since I haven't seen any mention of problems along that line?

  25. #25
    Not Available
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    1,864
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Converting to a Coded M Lens Mount

    Quote Originally Posted by zombii View Post
    Can I assume that the machining of these mounts is of the correct and consistent thickness since I haven't seen any mention of problems along that line?
    This did worry me, having had a bad experience with such eBay LTM/M adapters centering the lens off the middle... Which is arguably the correct behavior, but not what I was looking for.

    I haven't had any issues so far, and haven't come across any others. So far, so good.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •