Jump to content

OUFRO 16469Y 16469 Differences


Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

OUFRO : Large Knob : Large Red Pin : Ernst Leitz Wetzlar Germany

16469Y : Small Knob : Large Red Pin : Ernst Leitz Wetzlar Germany

16469 : Small Knob : Small Red Pin : Leitz Wetzlar Germany

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

M9 + Visoflex III + Elmar 65/3.5

 

Provided these are indeed original items, when were the different versions made?

 

Best, K-H.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

A fine multistrate extension tube...:)... I think in the right time order - oldest at the top and all the weight on the shoulders of the youngest :p : I am not 100% sure, but by logic the 5 letters code were the first, then the 5 digits with letter (whose significance, btw, has been always unclear to me... I have never seen 2 identical set of digits with a different letter), then the "modern" (still used) 5 digits-only code... imho, the obliteration of the name "Ernst" is also a sign of a later build.

Edited by luigi bertolotti
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Luigi,

 

You are quite right. That's how I sometimes use them.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Here coupled with some Kenko extension tubes for Nikon mounts and Leica to Nikon and Nikon to Leica adapters on M9, Viso, and 400/5.6.

 

Some images obtained with this rig:

 

 

 

 

A couple more images are posted here: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/nature-wildlife/181512-bees-dark-light-3-images.html

 

Bees need water too.

 

Best, K-H.

  • Like 8
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

Hello K-H.,

thank you for the pictures of the stacked rings and the bees.

The rings have a small shift in the position of the locking mechanism.

 

Does somebody now the reason why the rings have a misalignment of about 0.5mm / circa ~1.5° in the same direction?

 

Greeting Thorsten

Edited by Dao De Leitz
___
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hello K-H.,

thank you for the pictures of the stacked rings and the bees.

The rings have a small shift in the position of the locking mechanism.

 

Does somebody now the reason why the rings have a misalignment of about 0.5mm / circa ~1.5° ?

 

Greeting Thorsten

 

I'm not sure is like you say... can be a "taking effect"... imho, if one takes a precisely composed picture (stacked knobs along the vertical axis of the frame, center of the frame at 1/2 of the height of the stack) they probably result perfectly aligned... the tolerancing of the bayonet engagement must be very strict... of course, is not like this for the position of the red dot, which can have a rather rough tolerancing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I have stacked up my 10 rings, namely 3 OUFRO, 5 16469Y, and 2 16469.

The only rings that stack up without a shift are the two 16469. :)

The other eight seem to be shifted by about the same amount and line up at a slight angle with little variation.

One of the 16469Y rings seems to be shifted hardly at all.

 

Of course, there is some play.

However, even if I force the rings to line up as much as possible the slight shift remains. :eek:

 

Could it just be a slight misalignment in the manufacturing setup from batch to batch?

 

Funny but unimportant in using the rings. :D

 

K-H.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well... indeed, thinking well of it, my considerations about tolerancing were not 100% correct... :o: strict tolerancing is needed in the angular positioning of the slot towards the male bayonet (bottom part of the ring) and, same way, the knob towards the female bayonet (top part of the ring) , but the two parts, in itselves, can afford a certain misalignement of some degree, one to each other: as noted above, this does not compromise the functionality of the device... the only inconvenient with a std. lens mounted onto is to have, say, the focus datum line not exactly at 12 o'clock... minor issue.

Edited by luigi bertolotti
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 years later...

How much closer (or magnification) do you get with a single OUFRO ring?  Does one ring buy any macro effect, say with a 75mm summicron?  Does one need to stack multiple rings for a significant macro function?

Thanks,

Gary

 

Probably better off with the newer Macro-Adapter-M which can vary between 18mm and 30mm

http://en.leica-camera.com/Photography/Leica-M/Technical-Equipment/Close-Up-Accessories/Macro-adapter-M

john

Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably better off with the newer Macro-Adapter-M which can vary between 18mm and 30mm

http://en.leica-camera.com/Photography/Leica-M/Technical-Equipment/Close-Up-Accessories/Macro-adapter-M

john

Surely... and for about 1/3 of its price one can buy the Novoflex LEM/VIS-II... not continuous variation like the Leica Macro Adapter (is a set of rings), but well made, functional, and even with a plus of its own (the full set of rings has a length equal to the Visoflex II/III)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...