mobeyone Posted April 15, 2010 Share #1 Posted April 15, 2010 Advertisement (gone after registration) Can the Summaron be modified so that it automatically recognizes the 35mm frameline on the M8? And any examples please! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted April 15, 2010 Posted April 15, 2010 Hi mobeyone, Take a look here 35mm Summaron framelines. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jpattison Posted April 15, 2010 Share #2 Posted April 15, 2010 mobeyone, See entry #23 on this page... http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-collectors-historica/45351-summaron-m-35mm-f-3-5-a-2.html Just under the "22" you should see that the bayonet has been filed back a little, to allow this early 3.5 35 Summaron (made for M3 before the goggled version came out) to bring up the 35mm framelines. Just file a little at a time until it works. John Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mobeyone Posted April 15, 2010 Author Share #3 Posted April 15, 2010 mobeyone, See entry #23 on this page... http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-collectors-historica/45351-summaron-m-35mm-f-3-5-a-2.html Just under the "22" you should see that the bayonet has been filed back a little, to allow this early 3.5 35 Summaron (made for M3 before the goggled version came out) to bring up the 35mm framelines. Just file a little at a time until it works. John Fantastic John, thank you! Now and just to clarify, this can be done to the goggled version which is the one I have bought? as seen here: Leica Leitz 35mm f/2.8 Summaron Also, post 40 alludes to the use of the lens minus the eyes, is this correct? as I have read that there are problems as mentioned on the thread? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill Posted April 15, 2010 Share #4 Posted April 15, 2010 PLEASE don't bastardise this lens to fit on an M8 - it doesn't deserve such treatment. Regards, Bill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
doubice Posted April 15, 2010 Share #5 Posted April 15, 2010 The mount of the 2.8/35mm does not need to be modified for any of the M models. The 'non-goggled' version brings up the 35mm frame on all bodies, the goggled version bring up the 50mm frame. This is correct, as the goggles enlarge the view to that of a 35mm lens. If the lens you have is indeed the 2.8 version (goggled or non-goggled) , no modification is necessary. Best, Jan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
giordano Posted April 15, 2010 Share #6 Posted April 15, 2010 Fantastic John, thank you! Now and just to clarify, this can be done to the goggled version which is the one I have bought? as seen here: Leica Leitz 35mm f/2.8 Summaron Also, post 40 alludes to the use of the lens minus the eyes, is this correct? as I have read that there are problems as mentioned on the thread? The goggled 35mm lenses were made for use on the M3, where the widest framelines were 50mm. On M2 and M4-M9, they bring up and work correctly with the 50mm framelines. Using the 35mm framelines through the goggles will show you the approximate field of view of a 24mm lens. The rangefinder cams on these lenses allow for the effect of the goggles, so if you remove the goggles your lens won't focus correctly (and I agree with Bill that it's a crying shame to mutilate these little optomechanical jewels). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mobeyone Posted April 15, 2010 Author Share #7 Posted April 15, 2010 Advertisement (gone after registration) Dilemma time.. I understand where Bill and giordano are coming from and it is a shame to do this... but if I am reading correctly (and apologies if its a stupid and obvious question..), will the M8 still capture/correct in 35mm even though it shows a 50mm frame? I would prefer to use the goggles and do not intend on removing them.. its what the internet does to you.. lots of info.. some right.. some wrong... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
giordano Posted April 15, 2010 Share #8 Posted April 15, 2010 Dilemma time.. I understand where Bill and giordano are coming from and it is a shame to do this... but if I am reading correctly (and apologies if its a stupid and obvious question..), will the M8 still capture/correct in 35mm even though it shows a 50mm frame? I would prefer to use the goggles and do not intend on removing them.. its what the internet does to you.. lots of info.. some right.. some wrong... If you mount a goggled 35mm lens on any M body*, the framelines you see when you look through the viewfinder indicate the 35mm field of view.** It will be the same field of view that the lens takes in and the same that is shown by the 35mm framelines when a non-goggled lens is mounted. *Except the MD and MDa models, which don't have a viewfinder. **Unless some ignorant barbarian has taken a file to the lens mount. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mobeyone Posted April 15, 2010 Author Share #9 Posted April 15, 2010 If you mount a goggled 35mm lens on any M body*, the framelines you see when you look through the viewfinder indicate the 35mm field of view.** It will be the same field of view that the lens takes in and the same that is shown by the 35mm framelines when a non-goggled lens is mounted. *Except the MD and MDa models, which don't have a viewfinder. **Unless some ignorant barbarian has taken a file to the lens mount. Even though it shows 50mm on the M8? sorry if I sound stupid here. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ho_co Posted April 15, 2010 Share #10 Posted April 15, 2010 Yes. Period. The M3 didn't have a 35mm frame. Widest it had was 50mm. The goggles bring in the increased field of view of the 35mm lens, and feed it through the 50 frame. If you hack with it, you'll make the lens unusable. Please, try it, don't shave it. Stop and think: The goggles are there to make it possible to use the 35mm fov with a 50mm frame. Re-read what John said above: The goggled 35mm lenses were made for use on the M3, where the widest framelines were 50mm. On M2 and M4-M9, they bring up and work correctly with the 50mm framelines. Using the 35mm framelines through the goggles will show you the approximate field of view of a 24mm lens... If you file down the lens bayonet, you make the lens unusable on any M camera, because you force the user to hold the frame preview lever to the 50mm position while using the lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mobeyone Posted April 16, 2010 Author Share #11 Posted April 16, 2010 Yes. Period. The M3 didn't have a 35mm frame. Widest it had was 50mm. The goggles bring in the increased field of view of the 35mm lens, and feed it through the 50 frame. If you hack with it, you'll make the lens unusable. Please, try it, don't shave it. Stop and think: The goggles are there to make it possible to use the 35mm fov with a 50mm frame. Re-read what John said above: If you file down the lens bayonet, you make the lens unusable on any M camera, because you force the user to hold the frame preview lever to the 50mm position while using the lens. Thank you! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpattison Posted April 17, 2010 Share #12 Posted April 17, 2010 Sorry, mobeyone, I was referring to the early f3.5 Summaron, which didn't have goggles. All the advice above is correct for the goggled versions, f3.5 and f2.8! John Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.