Nippon Kogaku Leica Bayonet Mount

[scsambrook]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

This is very late but it may help FiZZ to accept that there isn't a deeper story - if he hasn't already done so, of course.

 

It is indeed universally accepted by photographic historians and collectors that Nikon never made M fitting lenses, but nobody in the preceeding thread has actually told FiZZ why that was. He has almost certainly asked himself why, if they made Leica screw lenses, why shouldn't they have made M mount ones as well - even if only prototypes. It's a reasonable question to pose.

 

The answer is that when that particular Nikkor lens was made (as a screw mount lens, I think it must be admitted), any patents Leitz might have held on their thread mount would have lapsed, either because of time or because they had been revoked internationally during or after World War II. But the M bayonet was a post-1945 production entity protected by an all-encompassing range of new, postwar international patents held by Leitz. Consequently, Nikon, being a responsible company, trading internationally adn looking to enhance its reputation, would not have been able to make the M mount without a licence from Leitz, something which would no doubt have been refused at the time when the M camera was still rleatively new and - no doubt - a jealously guarded design.

[someonenameddavid]

This is very late but it may help FiZZ to accept that there isn't a deeper story - if he hasn't already done so, of course.

 

It is indeed universally accepted by photographic historians and collectors that Nikon never made M fitting lenses, but nobody in the preceeding thread has actually told FiZZ why that was. He has almost certainly asked himself why, if they made Leica screw lenses, why shouldn't they have made M mount ones as well - even if only prototypes. It's a reasonable question to pose.

 

The answer is that when that particular Nikkor lens was made (as a screw mount lens, I think it must be admitted), any patents Leitz might have held on their thread mount would have lapsed, either because of time or because they had been revoked internationally during or after World War II. But the M bayonet was a post-1945 production entity protected by an all-encompassing range of new, postwar international patents held by Leitz. Consequently, Nikon, being a responsible company, trading internationally adn looking to enhance its reputation, would not have been able to make the M mount without a licence from Leitz, something which would no doubt have been refused at the time when the M camera was still rleatively new and - no doubt - a jealously guarded design.

 

And indeed Nikon was somewhat punished by the German market for being close in name to Ikon so that when they started producing the "F", in Germany it had to be named the "Nikkor F". Another collectable.

 

 

David

[Xmas]

Hi

 

An LTM lens is much more useful than a M lens as you can mount it on a LTM camera as well as a M camera.

The adapter can be milled for M8/M9 coding, without risk to the lens.

If you dont want the M adapter to unscrew accidently a single dab of nail varnish (lacquer) after the adapter has been tightened, applied on the exposed threads, from the rear, is sufficient and can be removed with nail varnish remover, easily.

Glue on the threads before mating will be rather more permenant...

Leica made several lenses in LTM and M mount for an interval.

 

Noel

[philcycles]

I have both a Nikkor 50/1.4 and an 85/2.0 in LTM and they are both fantastic. Not Summilux/Summicron sharp wide open but what is?

And they feel wonderful to use.

Phil Brown