jaapv Posted April 11, 2012 Share #21 Posted April 11, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) Yes - that was Leica official position at the time and the RF coupling is indeed simplified. However, nearly all users have no problem. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted April 11, 2012 Posted April 11, 2012 Hi jaapv, Take a look here LEICA ELMAR-C 90mm f/4 with M9. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
tredlie Posted April 11, 2012 Share #22 Posted April 11, 2012 Yes - that was Leica official position at the time and the RF coupling is indeed simplified. However, nearly all users have no problem. So this means, that there is some variation? most have no problems but some have? Tre ps ok, given the current price tags, the max. damage seems to be limited Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted April 11, 2012 Share #23 Posted April 11, 2012 This thread has been dormant for some time and probably for a good reason. But now I have a question that I am sure someone will be able to answer. Somewhere I read: The 90mm Elmar-C, made for the Leica CL camera, also has a very good reputation, but it's rangefinder coupling was not designed to be 100% compatible with M bodies and it seems to be a matter of chance whether it works OK on any given body. can someone comment on this statement? Is it an issue or is it not? Tre -- in the process of getting an ELMAR-C 90mm f/4 That's exactly true : Leitz designed the C lenses for the Leica CL and formally did not guarantee compatibility with M, but usually there isn't problem : surely they did it for commercial reasons, but my speculation (just from me) is also that the adjusting / tuning mechanism of the CL RF is indeed different from M RF, and this justifies the declaration of a certain degree of incompatibility between the two systems... even if this wasn't stated about the M and LTM RF... Leitz said clearly that a LTM lens DOES focus correctly on a M body (with adapter, of course : curiosly, my old Hektor 135 LTM - never maintained - seemed to focus better on the CL with adapter than on any else combination... ). ps : Tre, if you search patiently, time ago this question was deeply scrutinized in a thread.. some years ago, I'd say... 2007 or 2008... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted April 11, 2012 Share #24 Posted April 11, 2012 At least there is zero problem with the Summicron-C 40/2. But i have no experience with the Elmar-C 90/4. It must have a sloping focus cam as well i suppose but i'm not sure of that. Given that its DoF is much thinner i would not swear that it won't have focus issues on M cameras. Reason why i chose the Rokkor 90/4 instead. Great little lens by the way. For those interested, i've found a 40.5mm UV/IR filter for it at a cool price on e**y (40.5mm Rocolax UV-IR CUT filter). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert_M Posted April 12, 2012 Share #25 Posted April 12, 2012 I purchased a Leica CL with 40-C and 90-C lenses in the mid-1970's and still have them. I also have the original manuals and paperwork. It is worth noting that the Leica CL manual does NOT contain a caution about using the CL lenses on the M cameras. There is an extra 1 page (2 sides) leaflet which was added to the manual (as a loose leaf insert) which address this topic. 80% of this leaflet discusses the M lenses which can not be used on the CL or must be restricted to not collapse into the CL body if used. There is a concluding paragraph which addresses the use of the CL lenses on the M and how this may be an adjustment problem. I can post a copy of this page if anyone wants. Take that for what its worth. Those are the facts behind all the discussion which is broght up many times. My personal interpretation is that since this information was not in the original written manual, it was not designed in as a problem when the camera was engineered. I believe that it was not intended to be incompatible. I always suspect that it became a marketing "problem". Those CL lenses sold for significantly less that the M lenses one would compare them to at the time. I now use both of these lenses on the M9 and I can not discern any focus problems. I've even gone to the extend of doing photo tests of calibrated meter sticks, blowing up the images, and searching for focus errors. I find no difference between my several M lenses and the C lenses. I use the 90-C lens when I want to throw it in my pocket and travel light. I also picked up up a used 90/2.8 elmarit-M (latest version) about a decade ago and that is such a fabulous lens that I now use the 90-C only when mass is important. But, I'll add, that there is nothing really to complain about with the 90-C image quality. RM Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Geschlecht Posted April 12, 2012 Share #26 Posted April 12, 2012 Hello Everybody, The 90mm Elmar-C was made by Leitz for the CL's sold outside of Japan. The 90mm M-Rokkors marked "Made By Leitz" are the same lenses. They were made for CL's sold in Japan. Both are the same lens. Both lenses were made in Germany by Leitz. Also: Both lenses are marked "Lens Made In Germany". Best Regards, Michael Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted April 12, 2012 Share #27 Posted April 12, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hi Michael, Rokkors 40/2 and 90/4 for Minolta CLE were made in Japan by Minolta if i'm not wrong. Their optical design must be close if not identical to that of the corresponding Leitz lenses but i'm not sure of that. What is sure is that Rokkors for CLE (28/2.8, 40/2, 90/4) have not the sloping focus cam of the Leitz 40/2 which would cause focus problems on M bodies alledgedly. Do you know if the Leitz 90/4 had such a cam as well? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted April 12, 2012 Share #28 Posted April 12, 2012 ...There is an extra 1 page (2 sides) leaflet which was added to the manual (as a loose leaf insert) which address this topic. 80% of this leaflet discusses the M lenses which can not be used on the CL or must be restricted to not collapse into the CL body if used. There is a concluding paragraph which addresses the use of the CL lenses on the M and how this may be an adjustment problem... It is indeed leaflet # 120-50 which says that accurate focussing of CL lenses on M bodies is "not possible" due to different focus cams. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Geschlecht Posted April 12, 2012 Share #29 Posted April 12, 2012 Hello lct, I don't know anything about the Minolta 28. The 40 & 90 were considered to be quite good but not quite the equals of their Leitz contemporaries. The Leitz 90 F4 was considered to be almost as good as the "thin" 90mm Tele-Elmarit which was pretty much the same size & weight as well as 1 stop faster. I don't know anything about which cam works w/ which camera personally. Some people say some of the Leitz CL lenses work w/ certain cameras & not others. If it were mine I would try it & see. Best Regards, Michael Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
giordano Posted April 12, 2012 Share #30 Posted April 12, 2012 As I understand it, it's not a question whether a particular "C" lens will focus correctly on an M body, it's whether a particular M body will focus "C" lenses accurately enough. Basically - and simplifying somewhat - rangefinder-coupling mechanisms in screw-mount and M bodies were designed on the assumption that the cam on the back of the lens would be square to the lens axis - and therefore that small differences in the left-right position of the cam-following roller didn't matter. In fact, adjusting the rangefinder for correct focus actually results in tiny changes to the left-right position of the roller. With sloping cams, as on the "C" lenses, changing the left-right position of the roller does affect the focusing, so the CL rangefinder linkage and adjustment are designed differently. The 40mm "C" lenses have the least slope in their cams and don't have particularly thin DoF so I would expect that rather few M bodies would have trouble focusing them. The 28mm "C" lenses have more slope but more DoF. Problems seem most likely with the 90mm, with the most slope and least DoF. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted April 12, 2012 Share #31 Posted April 12, 2012 Makes sense, but there is no C-28... so far BTW, are you sure the Elmar-C 90/4 has a sloping cam? Just curious. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
giordano Posted April 12, 2012 Share #32 Posted April 12, 2012 Makes sense, but there is no C-28... so far Sorry, I must have been thinking of the Rokkor. But was there a 28mm Leitz prototype? BTW, are you sure the Elmar-C 90/4 has a sloping cam? Just curious. Yes. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted April 12, 2012 Share #33 Posted April 12, 2012 Ah, interesting thanks. This way both Leitz and Minolta CLE 40/2 and 90/4 are different as the latters have not the sloping cam of the formers. 28mm Leitz prototype for Leica LC? Never heard of this. Would be curious as there is no 28mm frame in the CL's viewfinder. Another difference with the Minolta CLE and its three (28/2.8, 40/2, 90/4) instead of two (40/2 & 90/4) dedicated lenses. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pop Posted April 12, 2012 Share #34 Posted April 12, 2012 I used the 90mm Elmar-C on the M8 a few times. Focusing used to be reasonably accurate. I do think its rear side was sloped. Here are two shots with this outfit: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/nature-wildlife/143941-please-dont-jump-oh-please.html#post1468947 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giacomo.B Posted April 12, 2012 Author Share #35 Posted April 12, 2012 The Leitz 90mm f4 C works well on my M9-P....In this Reportage: Madonna della Desolata - Canosa di Puglia (BT) - Reportages - Giacomo Baldi - giacomobaldi.fotoportal.it The portraits and the details are made with him.. Ciao Giacomo Ps. This lens is a Mandler's project? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
turnerman Posted May 17, 2012 Share #36 Posted May 17, 2012 I have just purchase an Elmar-C 90mm f4 - here are my first shots on an M8. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/174605-leica-elmar-c-90mm-f4-with-m9/?do=findComment&comment=2016407'>More sharing options...
turnerman Posted May 17, 2012 Share #37 Posted May 17, 2012 And the next two: Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/174605-leica-elmar-c-90mm-f4-with-m9/?do=findComment&comment=2016413'>More sharing options...
thoemfredo Posted May 19, 2012 Share #38 Posted May 19, 2012 Hi Robert! I just found your article, which was very helpful for me, and I would like to ask, if you could send me a copy of the leaflet to the following eMail-adress: T.Scherk@gmx.de Many thanks and kind regards, Thomas Scherk Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert_M Posted May 22, 2012 Share #39 Posted May 22, 2012 Hi Robert!I just found your article, which was very helpful for me, and I would like to ask, if you could send me a copy of the leaflet to the following eMail-adress: T.Scherk@gmx.de Many thanks and kind regards, Thomas Scherk Thomas, Attached is a pdf copy of the 120-50/Engl leaflet which is the only official reference I've ever seen to the CL vrs M lens issue. BTW, I've been doing some calibrating recently of my lenses to the M9 body for distance. I measure at infinity, 3 m, and 1 m for calibration. The 40-C and 90-C do just fine. In fact, my only problem lens is my recent acquisition of a used 135 f/3.4 APO which is off and does not agree with other lenses in my bag. I guess I should get that one recalibrated. RM 120-50 CL lens list.PDF Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.