algrove Posted January 8, 2013 Share #21 Â Posted January 8, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) Because it is not an M lens. Being a German firm, Leica can be very stubbornly precise. Â I think someone with influence should move this thread since it is not an M lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 8, 2013 Posted January 8, 2013 Hi algrove, Take a look here Where are all the 40 summicron-c M9 users?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
iedei Posted January 8, 2013 Share #22 Â Posted January 8, 2013 I think someone with influence should move this thread since it is not an M lens. Â that's ridiculous. It is an M-mount lens. Functionally, it is entirely a perfectly RF-coupled M lens. Read JaapV's response earlier about the history. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 8, 2013 Share #23 Â Posted January 8, 2013 I think someone with influence should move this thread since it is not an M lens. You would not make a good German It is not an M but a C lens, but a C lens is by definition an M-mount lens . Logic, my friend Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
algrove Posted January 8, 2013 Share #24 Â Posted January 8, 2013 Thanks. If it is an M mount lens then why did they call it C lens in the first place? I realize it was sold as a companion lens to the CL, could that be why? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 8, 2013 Share #25 Â Posted January 8, 2013 That was precisely the reason. To miniaturize they simplified the focussing mechanism and called it C-mount. In practice the dire predictions about lack of accuracy did not become reality. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tobey bilek Posted January 9, 2013 Share #26 Â Posted January 9, 2013 Leica did not warrantee proper focus on M bodies at the time, 1975. Naturally everyone ignored the warnings, used them anyway and I have not heard a single focusing issue. Â There are two problems, one being the odd filter thread pitch diameter although it is still 39 mm. So you do an adapter thing or screw a filter in 1/2 turn and risk loss or use a 39 mm backwards in the shade or have special series 5.5 made for you special. B+W most likely will still do it and the cost is not much different from a filter of similar size. Â The bigger problem is there are no 40 mm frame lines. Certainly you can cut down a lug and use 35 which are too big. The angle of view actually matches 35 at infinity and 50 in the close range, so there is no perfect match even considering the close /far problem exists for all frame lines. Solution is a 40 mm line finder. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
piblondin Posted January 10, 2013 Share #27 Â Posted January 10, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) I don't understand why people complain about the filter size. 39mm fits well enough for me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
iedei Posted January 10, 2013 Share #28 Â Posted January 10, 2013 I don't understand why people complain about the filter size. 39mm fits well enough for me. Â same here. never had any issues with 39mm. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
algrove Posted January 10, 2013 Share #29 Â Posted January 10, 2013 A B+W 39mm does not screw all the way into mine. Just tried a Leica UVa39mm and it will not seat either. Â Maybe my lens is an early one S/N 2631xxx. Must the thread pitch is different than new 39mm filters. Wiki says 0.75. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 10, 2013 Share #30 Â Posted January 10, 2013 I don't understand why people complain about the filter size. 39mm fits well enough for me. If you screw a .050 pitch thread into a .075 pitch one hard enough and often enough it will " fit" . More or less... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
piblondin Posted January 11, 2013 Share #31 Â Posted January 11, 2013 A B+W 39mm does not screw all the way into mine. Just tried a Leica UVa39mm and it will not seat either. Â This is true, but I haven't found any reason why it needs to be screwed all the way in. I don't get any weird vignetting, and my B+W filter has never fallen out or come loose. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.