Jinfinance OUFRO - Caveat Emptor

[ayewing]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Within the past week, I also received the Jinfinance OUFRO. My decision to purchase and try this product was based on the inability to find a used Leica OUFRO for sale on EBay US for the past 5 months and the few listed had sold in the $180-200 USD range.

 

My initial impressions were that the finish was very good. On the Leica M (240) the fit was suboptimal in OUFRO to camera body. Although it would attach and the depth was not as issue, rotation was very tight. The OUFRO to lens attach was looser with very slight rotational play after lens "lock" with no for and aft or vertical play.

 

The major fit issue on the camera attachment end seemed to be the overall diameter perhaps the thickness of the chrome coating over the brass. With careful attachment and subsequent rotation there was some wear on the soft chrome and fit and rotation became increasingly easier. Total attachment and rotations about 5-7. I then applied a DuPont product which is a dry Teflon lubricant carefully to the rotation hub on the OUFRO. Although still slightly tight, it attaches, rotates and locks into place with acceptable mild effort. I expect as more wear occurs on the soft chrome plating with use this will improve further.

 

Function in a few test shots was as expected, and totally acceptable. It is, just a spacer tube. My example, in conclusion, is usable but suffered some fit issues. I will be keeping it and using it.

 

I get the impression that some of my lenses are a tighter fit on my new M240 than on my old M9. This may simply be to newness and lack of wear but it could be that Leica tolerances have been tightened up.

[farnz]

... I think I will stick to my Leica Bellows II as I already have quite a collection of rings and adapters for it. ...

Archie,

 

Beware: the Leica Bellows II will certainly fit onto a Leica M (typ 240) but the rear flange completely and perfectly covers the lens release button so you'll have to disassemble the Bellows to remove it. (I know because it happened to me.)

 

Pete.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[ayewing]

Thanks Pete,

I am aware having read your earlier warning. I use the bellows with my 41mm Visoflex spacer which allows plenty of room to access the lens release button on the camera. The use of an OUFRO is the other possibility if less extension is required.

[Karl G]

I get the impression that some of my lenses are a tighter fit on my new M240 than on my old M9. This may simply be to newness and lack of wear but it could be that Leica tolerances have been tightened up.

 

Archie, I have no fit issues with my Leica lenses to the M (240) including a brand new 21MM SEL, the others had been used on a ME/M9 prior to the M(240). As I stated in my (mini) review of the Jinfinance OUFRO, I was unable to obtain a Leica OUFRO so can't comment on the fit in comparison. The fit of the JInfinance OOB was tight to camera but loosened with use/wear. The lens side of the Jinfinance OUFRO allows about 3 degrees of lens rotational play in the lock position which is not present in the Leica lens to Leica camera body locked attachment. This would not effect focussing as only fore and aft movement would create that problem.

[ayewing]

Karl,

I have spent a few minutes trying different lenses on my M240. All the Leica lenses mount easily. My 2 year old Summilux (my only new Leica lens) is just a little stiffer than my other Leica lenses which are much older.

 

A year old Voigtlander 25mm M mount is a bit stiffer than any of the Leica lenses. A Voigtlander 15mm fitted with a Jnfinance 6 bit screw to LM adapter is the stiffest of all my lenses.

 

My OUFRO is quite old but in near mint condition and it mounts easily on the camera with no rotation or wobble once it has clicked into place. On the lens side there is no rotation or measurable movement but feels just a little less solid than the camera mount.

 

The unsurprising conclusion is that genuine Leica mounts are best. I still think that my new camera mount is a little stiffer than the M9. Some other users have commented that hand coding with a Sharpie is both more difficult and the coding marks wear off more quickly than with the M9.

 

It is good that you found the jinfinance version of the OUFRO useable. Let us hope that they can improve their tolerances in future.

[Karl G]

Thanks Archie,

 

Here are a few shots from today using the Jinfinance OUFRO with the 90mm Macro Elmar in this thread:

 

Milk Weed Seeds and Pods

[ayewing]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Lovely pictures. Your Jinfinance OUFRO is working well.

[tobey bilek]

Within the past week, I also received the Jinfinance OUFRO. My decision to purchase and try this product was based on the inability to find a used Leica OUFRO for sale on EBay US for the past 5 months and the few listed had sold in the $180-200 USD range.

 

My initial impressions were that the finish was very good. On the Leica M (240) the fit was suboptimal in OUFRO to camera body. Although it would attach and the depth was not as issue, rotation was very tight. The OUFRO to lens attach was looser with very slight rotational play after lens "lock" with no for and aft or vertical play.

 

The major fit issue on the camera attachment end seemed to be the overall diameter perhaps the thickness of the chrome coating over the brass. With careful attachment and subsequent rotation there was some wear on the soft chrome and fit and rotation became increasingly easier. Total attachment and rotations about 5-7. I then applied a DuPont product which is a dry Teflon lubricant carefully to the rotation hub on the OUFRO. Although still slightly tight, it attaches, rotates and locks into place with acceptable mild effort. I expect as more wear occurs on the soft chrome plating with use this will improve further.

 

Function in a few test shots was as expected, and totally acceptable. It is, just a spacer tube. My example, in conclusion, is usable but suffered some fit issues. I will be keeping it and using it.

 

How do you know the camera mount is not being worn ?

[Karl G]

How do you know the camera mount is not being worn ?

Tobey,

I actually, for 100% sure, do not. Whenever there is one material rubbed against another wear occurs but the harder material wears less.

 

On material hardness scales:

low cost decorative chrome plating (probably not chromium)< steel mounting ring (camera body)

 

You can actually see the wear line on the OUFRO ring attachment.

Edited October 4, 2013 by Karl G

[jaques]

If the chrome is poor quality and already wearing off- perhaps- to avoid getting little flakes of it inside the camera- you should get some wet and dry sandpaper of various grits and sand away the chrome now? Take it back to brass, polish it, wash to remove all traces of fine metal, and dry, etc.

 

or ask Jinfinance to make a brass only version...

[Karl G]

If the chrome is poor quality and already wearing off- perhaps- to avoid getting little flakes of it inside the camera- you should get some wet and dry sandpaper of various grits and sand away the chrome now? Take it back to brass, polish it, wash to remove all traces of fine metal, and dry, etc.

 

or ask Jinfinance to make a brass only version...

 

The plating does not look to be poor quality such that flaking would occur but in reality, only time will tell. It is really easy to scratch soft chrome, like the top of a Leica silver camera or chrome bits on a motorcycle. I have seen nasty scratches in chrome on autos and bikes left by brass boot buckles and medium Scotch-Brite pads, it is that soft.

[dante]

Tobey,

I actually, for 100% sure, do not. Whenever there is one material rubbed against another wear occurs but the harder material wears less.

 

On material hardness scales:

low cost decorative chrome plating (probably not chromium)< steel mounting ring (camera body)

 

You can actually see the wear line on the OUFRO ring attachment.

 

Chrome is a Mohs of 9, the 300-series stainless of the lens mount is 5. Are you sure the OUFRO's mount is not aluminum?

 

Dante

Edited October 5, 2013 by dante

[Karl G]

Chrome is a Mohs of 9, the 300-series stainless of the lens mount is 5. Are you sure the OUFRO's mount is not aluminum?

 

Dante

 

Definitely not aluminum construction, the description states plated (plating not specified) brass and the weight in hand feels right for brass.

 

Regarding Chrome plating, you are absolutely correct on the hardness of pure Chromium.

 

That high degree of hardness is indicative of high quality, Industrial "Hard" chromium plating like is used in wear parts, rifle barrels etc.

 

This would be "Decorative" chrome plating, (if chrome plated at all), which is sometimes called nickel-chrome plating because it always involves electroplating nickel onto the object before plating the chrome (it sometimes also involves electroplating copper onto the object before the nickel, too). The nickel plating provides the smoothness, much of the corrosion resistance, and most of the reflectivity. The chrome plating is exceptionally thin, measured in millionths of an inch rather than in thousandths. This would be the plating you see on decorative parts like auto parts and motorcycles.

 

This is if the surface on this OUFRO is even a real decorative chrome. It may be just a single coating such as nickel, which would be cheaper and less time intensive. Certainly the brass has been coated with some silver colored finish by electroplating.

 

I would think in the 4ish range on the Mohr scale.

 

You have thoroughly exhausted my knowledge on this subject. I had chemistry through Physical Chemistry, and some geology but never worked in those fields or electroplating.

Edited October 5, 2013 by Karl G

[marcg]

Original Leica 16469 OUFRO adapter extension ring Leica M | eBay

[Karl G]

Original Leica 16469 OUFRO adapter extension ring Leica M | eBay

 

Ended and sold for $250USD

[marcg]

Well done - if the buyer came from here

[Bernhard K.F.]

same problem with mine, to tight! does only turn half way. works fine on the m3; but thats not why I bought it for.

[parigby]

Wondering if the OP has had any feedback from Jinfinance yet ?

[cswanson]

Yesterday I received the Jinfinance OUFRO and also experienced the problem with the too tight fit. I decided that perhaps it was the chrome plating on the flange that was the problem. I decided to remove it with some rather fine emery paper and muscle power, knowing that I probably could not return it for a refund if I did so. After a half hour or so, I had removed the rather soft chrome down to the brass beneath. There are now superficial scratches on the surface but no gouges or such. Lo and behold, the OUFRO fits, rather snugly, but it fits. I communicated this to Jinfinance and they want me to send them a photo, which I will be glad to do. I do not claim that this method would work for anyone else with the same problem, so only attempt it at your own risk.

Curt

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[jpfisher]

Wondering if the OP has had any feedback from Jinfinance yet ?

 

He accepted the return without any hassle and I shipped it back to him this past weekend.