jlm

sort of a double reply: charles: i have a walter for sale; of course you would have to re-fit a lens to it for your own prescription. worked very well for my astigmatism. e-mail me if interested (jm@milich.com) i then recently had cataract surgery and a toric? stigmatic correcting lens fitted. now distance vision is like 30 years ago, astigmatism is corrected and i can use a simple diopter on the viewfinder for nearer vision.

thanks Mark; i've not been doing much Leica shooting, did transition to an M7 though and as i recall, you were the seminal influence for the WATE adapter

jono: every now and then I do get a big moment... and sometimes can make a buck, but the real thrill is getting something out there quickly that fills a need the big boys don't have time for. like the WATE filter adapter. what usually happens is i engineer one of these doodads and sell a few, and then find it is now getting made in asia and sells on e-bay for about 20% of what it costs me to make it. in the context of the new M: what adapters are you looking for? i already have the engineering and cnc work done for the M side of the flange...in 5, 9, or 13.5 cm frameline options. cheers

not so easy to go from a 50 frameline to 28/90. my suggestion: use two adapters: on the lens: your lens to leica 39mm thread, to which is attached the L39-LM adapter with 28/90 framelines and coded recesses. jm

just saw this. the 21, 28 and Wate all bring up the same framelines, whether you use them in the viewfinder or not. The internal frameline lever triggers a switch that is part of the lens ID coding. you could code your 18mm zeiss as any of the above lenses, but NOT the Leica 18 which brings up a different set of framelines. the advantage of the milled recesses is that you can code with paint and it will not rub off. I use black and white nail polish applied with a toothpick jm

that flange, and the limited availablility of the Leica flanges that are machinable for coding is why i produced my own adapter from scratch

i haven't see a flange of any sort yet (leica, Zeiss, C/V, that was too thin jm

milich here...thanks for the props. i have had a few examples of lenses, (CV 35/1.4) where the flange actually contains part of the helicoid focusing threads and therefore needs to be rotated after you remove the four screws, and basically unthreaded from the helicoid. once off, it is difficult to restore the correct orientation, as the helical threads have many start points, only one of which is correct. be forewarned. most lenses are pretty simple as far as flange removal. some of the zeiss lenses use a threadlocking compound which needs to be softened by applying a drop of acetone on the screw, maybe a bit more as you loosen it.

$350 for a one year extended warranty, alignment and CLA seems about right...and they throw in the vulcanite

i wonder if going for the simpler upgrades only (Vulcanite) still gets the alignment, CLA, etc. and extends the warranty another year? hard to believe

i would urge the moderator to remove the crook allegation from the header. such labeling, not proven, is a great disservice.

jm-at-milich-dot-com

for the WATE filter adapter, you can reach me at: jm-at-milich-dot-com

i haven't seen the new CV flange, but i understand it has a continuous groove around the mating surface providing a recessed area for the coding marks. a potential problem is that the illumination from an individual photodetector is not masked from it's neighbor with such a groove. in the old days, i found that the CV adapters that had a relieved area around the outside of the mating surface allowed ambient light to leak onto the detectors confusing the code reading you didn't mention it, but you are getting the 28mm framelines, right?

i can be reached at jm-at-milich-dot-com