Robinyuill Posted May 2, 2016 Share #1 Posted May 2, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hi there I've recently bought a nice version of this lens (made in 2000). I'm aware of the mount/unmount while in the extended position but when collapsing it for transport etc I'm aware of it occasionally catching the rangefinder arm on the M6/M7. I'm being careful and moving the lens barrel slowly but I don't want to damage the camera. Any advice? It's a nice lens with great image quality but it seems to defeat the purpose if you can't collapse it. Thanks and regards Robin. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted May 2, 2016 Posted May 2, 2016 Hi Robinyuill, Take a look here Elmar-M collapsible question.. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
thighslapper Posted May 2, 2016 Share #2 Posted May 2, 2016 I assume the situation is similar to the M8,M9,M240 ...... there is about 0.5mm clearance top and bottom in the camera mouth. If you have a 'wobbly' collapsible elmar 50mm (and most are after 15yrs+ of use) then there is a tendency to touch as it is collapsed ...... nothing that will do lasting damage .... you just have to be careful. Once collapsed there is no problem. I have 3 of these fine little lenses in an effort to get one that is perfect ...... but all are in need of dismantling, adjusting and reassembly. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdlaing Posted May 2, 2016 Share #3 Posted May 2, 2016 I assume the situation is similar to the M8,M9,M240 ...... there is about 0.5mm clearance top and bottom in the camera mouth. If you have a 'wobbly' collapsible elmar 50mm (and most are after 15yrs+ of use) then there is a tendency to touch as it is collapsed ...... nothing that will do lasting damage .... you just have to be careful. Once collapsed there is no problem. I have 3 of these fine little lenses in an effort to get one that is perfect ...... but all are in need of dismantling, adjusting and reassembly. The throats are different from the M8/9 to the 240. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted May 2, 2016 Share #4 Posted May 2, 2016 My (2007) Elmar-M collapses flawlessly on the M8, M9 and M240. The wobbly-mount ones are the earlier Elmar variations, which are a different mount (and optical, btw) design Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gvaliquette Posted May 2, 2016 Share #5 Posted May 2, 2016 I purchased my Elmar-M, new. in 2008, February 19, to be precise, after Leica announced it was being discontinued but while it was still in stock at dealers. It is my favorite and most used 50, and it is still rock solid. No "wobble"at all, extended or collapsed, but I always mount and dismount it extended. Guy Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edmond_terakopian Posted June 8, 2016 Share #6 Posted June 8, 2016 Sorry to slightly hijack this thread.... i have the 50mm Elmar-M; it's a late model as it had factory 6-bit coding. Will this collapse ok with an M240 and M246? The manual says not to use any collapsible lenses (as I recall), so I'd be grateful to hear from owners of this lens and the cameras I mentioned. Many Thanks, Edmond Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ecar Posted June 9, 2016 Share #7 Posted June 9, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) Edmond, It collapses perfectly fine on my M240. Just apply usual care with collapsibles (mount/unmount in extended position). 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted June 9, 2016 Share #8 Posted June 9, 2016 Leica changed the position to mount/unmount uncollapsed. It collapses just fine in all my bodies. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edmond_terakopian Posted June 9, 2016 Share #9 Posted June 9, 2016 Edmond, It collapses perfectly fine on my M240. Just apply usual care with collapsibles (mount/unmount in extended position). Leica changed the position to mount/unmount uncollapsed. It collapses just fine in all my bodies. Thanks :-) Wonder if the M246 is identical to the M240 in respect to the lens collapsing ok? Any M Monochrom owners know? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted June 9, 2016 Share #10 Posted June 9, 2016 That should be the same. The distance to the film/sensor is of course identical on all M bodies from the M3 to today ( and in future) Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted June 9, 2016 Share #11 Posted June 9, 2016 Actually I only read the original warning in the M8 manual after I had been using and collapsing it for quite a while Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdlaing Posted June 9, 2016 Share #12 Posted June 9, 2016 The distance to the sensor is academic in this case. That is not what should concern you. The collapsible lenses won't reach the sensor. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
otto.f Posted June 9, 2016 Share #13 Posted June 9, 2016 Just for your concern edmond, theoretically an MM cannot respond differently than an M9 to mounting an Elmar, but in my practical experience there was never a problem. I use the Elmar more on my MM1 than on my M9. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted June 9, 2016 Share #14 Posted June 9, 2016 The distance to the sensor is academic in this case. That is not what should concern you. The collapsible lenses won't reach the sensor. No, but there are small baffles in front of the shutter. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted June 9, 2016 Share #15 Posted June 9, 2016 Question: Is it safe to collapse a lens with retractable tube (e.g. 50mm Elmar) into the body of the M8 or M9? Answer: First of all, Leica says in the manuals for the M8 and M9: „Lenses with retractable tube can only be used with the tube extended, i.e. their tube must never be retracted into the LEICA M8/M9. This is not the case for the current Macro-Elmar-M 90mm f/4, whose tube does not protrude into the camera body even when retracted. It can therefore be used without any restrictions.“ On the other hand many users have reported in this forum that they regularly retracted the tubes of other lenses into the camera bodies without any problems. Let‘s look for some facts: There are two reasons for Leica‘s warning about collapsible lenses in the manuals: 1. The „throat“ of the digital M (the open space between the bayonet mount and the shutter) is much narrower than with film Ms. If someone would mount or dismount a lens with it‘s tube retracted and hold it in a certain angle it might touch and scratch the sides of the „thoat“. Therefore you should only mount or dismount a lens when the tube is extended. 2. The retracted tube might touch and damage the shutter. If you look into the body without a lens you see two black metal ridges above the shutter. The distance between those two ridges is approx. 25mm. The diameter of a retractable lens tube is at least 27mm (in most cases considerably more). So if the tube hits anything it will be the ridges and not directly the shutter. This does not make it safe, for pressure on these ridges, which are made of rather thin metal, might interfere with or even damage the shutter. Do the tubes of retractable lenses touch the ridges? I measured 24mm as the distance between the surface of the camera‘s bayonet and the ridge both for the M8 and M9. Let us stay on the safe side and say: a tube which enters 22mm or more into the body will be critical or dangerous. That is certainly the case for the collapsible 4/90 Elmar (old type ILNOO; 11631, 11131, which was produced from 1954 to 1968 - so not to be mixed up with the current Makro-Elmar-M, 4/90). How long are the tubes of other collapsible lenses entering into the body? Some examples: For the tube of the collapsible version of the 2/50mm Summicron (screw-mount) I measured less than 14mm when it is collapsed, so I see no risk at all that it could touch the ridges. For the Elmar-M 2.8/50 (last version) it‘s 20.5mm, same for the first version of the 2.8/5cm Elmar with M-mount or it‘s 3.5/5cm M-mount precedessor. But a „red dial“ 3.5/5cm from 1951 (screw-mount) gives a very risky result of 22.5mm; for a nickel 3.5/5cm from 1932 I measure 20.5mm again. The 2.5/5cm Hektor had the longest tube I know: 23mm, which is dangerous! The Summar‘s and the Summitar‘s tubes were shorter than those of the Elmar (18mm). For all screw-mount lenses the adapter, which is necessary to mount them on an M, gives 1mm more space. The different results for the 50mm- or 5cm-Elmars from different times show that individual measurements of certain lens types are not reliable for every other lens of this sort. There may be variants in the tube‘s design, even protruding sharp edges on the ends of a tube. So before retracting a lens into the body of a M8 or M9 one should measure the retracted tube (always fixed on infinity) looking especially for protruding edges. Anything which is 22mm or longer should be never retracted but the extended tube secured by a Dymo band that it won‘t retract accidentially. However, in a later post Uli points out that the back of the Elmar-M is a bit wider, so it is advisable to be careful when mounting it (extended) and make sure that it does not wobble when collapsed. OTOH, the worst it can do is make a small scratch on the inside of the throat and flat black paint is cheap. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdlaing Posted June 9, 2016 Share #16 Posted June 9, 2016 No, but there are small baffles in front of the shutter. That's what I mean. The shutter curtains and messing up the throat are the concerns. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edmond_terakopian Posted June 9, 2016 Share #17 Posted June 9, 2016 I used my lens on my M9 without issue; collapsed just fine. Naturally the sensor distance isn't the issue, but worried about the shutter curtains or the baffles mentioned :-/ Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted June 9, 2016 Share #18 Posted June 9, 2016 The shutter on the 240 series is in the same place as the previous M digitals, there is very little difference if any in throat size, and the roller is obviously exactly in the same place on all M cameras. My Elmar M gives no problems at all on the 240, it is highly unlikely that the 246 is any different. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdlaing Posted June 9, 2016 Share #19 Posted June 9, 2016 The M8/8.2 has a much narrower throat. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
105012 Posted June 9, 2016 Share #20 Posted June 9, 2016 Just for reference, the nickel 50mm f3.5 CV Heliar protrudes 14mm when collapsed so going by the above it is probably safe for digital Leica's. https://web.archive.org/web/20070305152905/http://www.imx.nl/photosite/japan/voigt3550.html Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.