OUFRO 16469Y 16469 Differences

[k-hawinkler]

Ad

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

2011-05-09_22-18-52-•-M9-Viso_III-65mm-f3.jpg 2011-05-09_22-29-05-•-M9-Viso_III-65mm-f3.jpg
M9 + Visoflex III + Elmar 65/3.5

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

Best, K-H.

[luigi bertolotti]

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 : 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.

[k-hawinkler]

Luigi,

You are quite right. That's how I sometimes use them.
DSC_2633.jpg
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:
2011-05-10_10-23-03 • M9 Viso III extension rings 400mm f5.6 - Bees_00_small.jpg

2011-05-10_10-39-43 • M9 Viso III extension rings 400mm f5.6 - Bees_00_small.jpg

2011-05-10_10-49-52 • M9 Viso III extension rings 400mm f5.6 - Bees_00_small.jpg

2011-05-10_09-40-54 • M9 Viso III extension rings 400mm f5.6 - Bees_00_small.jpg

A couple more images are posted here: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-...-3-images.html

Bees need water too.

Best, K-H.

[jc_braconi]

Impressive results ! Congratulations !

[k-hawinkler]

JC,

Thank you, K-H.

[Leica Dao]

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

[luigi bertolotti]

Originally Posted by Leica Dao

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.

[Leica Dao]

Thank you L.B.,

my first thoughts were the same - but my small stack is rotating the lock a little.


Greeting Thorsten

[k-hawinkler]

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.

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

Funny but unimportant in using the rings.

K-H.

[k-hawinkler]

Originally Posted by Leica Dao

Thank you L.B.,

my first thoughts were the same - but my stack is rotating the lock a little.


Greeting Thorsten

The lock, red markers, and engravings seem to rotate just a little bit.

K-H.

[Leica Dao]

Ad

Originally Posted by k-hawinkler

... Funny but unimportant in using the rings. ...

This is what I wanted to proof. Thanks!

Greeting Thorsten

[luigi bertolotti]

Well... indeed, thinking well of it, my considerations about tolerancing were not 100% correct... : 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.