aboodchy Posted July 26, 2012 Share #1 Â Posted July 26, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hi everybody. I've had an M9 for a couple of years now along and have bought and sold multiple M-Mount lenses (Voigtlander, Leica, Zeiss) and am finally content with my Nocti and 24 Summilux. While I would never sell those two lenses, I'm intriguied by trying out other lenses made for different camera mounts on my M9. A few R lenses and the Voigt 25 0.95 are just two that pop into my head right now. Â My question, is it possible to use any lens but with the use of an adapter, or are there limitations? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted July 26, 2012 Posted July 26, 2012 Hi aboodchy, Take a look here Adapters for different camera mounts on M9?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
bocaburger Posted July 27, 2012 Share #2 Â Posted July 27, 2012 Any lens whose register is equal or longer than the M and whose image circle covers at least the 35mm frame should in theory be adaptible. The main limitation would be lack of rangefinder coupling, and a focal length not covered by either the camera frame lines or an available shoe mount finder. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
someonenameddavid Posted July 27, 2012 Share #3 Â Posted July 27, 2012 Hi everybody. I've had an M9 for a couple of years now along and have bought and sold multiple M-Mount lenses (Voigtlander, Leica, Zeiss) and am finally content with my Nocti and 24 Summilux. While I would never sell those two lenses, I'm intriguied by trying out other lenses made for different camera mounts on my M9. A few R lenses and the Voigt 25 0.95 are just two that pop into my head right now. Â My question, is it possible to use any lens but with the use of an adapter, or are there limitations? Â The voigtlander 25 f0.95 only covers micro 4/3 format so even if you could mount it on an M, the flange to sensor distance on micro 4/3 is about 18mm and on an M it is about 28mm so your maximum distance you would be able to focus at would be ( very roughly) 170mm away from the lens. Most (old mechanical)slr manufacturers lenses can be adapted, and the Amadeo adapter from Venezuela can adapt ancient Contax lenses. Search the net. Â David Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted July 27, 2012 Share #4 Â Posted July 27, 2012 I'd recommend Novoflex adapters. Best quality there is. Steady old German company. Â A coming M with live view may at least partially solve the focusing problem. Â The old man from the Novoflex Age Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
aboodchy Posted July 27, 2012 Author Share #5  Posted July 27, 2012 Any lens whose register is equal or longer than the M and whose image circle covers at least the 35mm frame should in theory be adaptible. The main limitation would be lack of rangefinder coupling, and a focal length not covered by either the camera frame lines or an available shoe mount finder.  The voigtlander 25 f0.95 only covers micro 4/3 format so even if you could mount it on an M, the flange to sensor distance on micro 4/3 is about 18mm and on an M it is about 28mm so your maximum distance you would be able to focus at would be ( very roughly) 170mm away from the lens. Most (old mechanical)slr manufacturers lenses can be adapted, and the Amadeo adapter from Venezuela can adapt ancient Contax lenses. Search the net. David  I'd recommend Novoflex adapters. Best quality there is. Steady old German company. A coming M with live view may at least partially solve the focusing problem.  The old man from the Novoflex Age  Thank you all for your very insightful responses. I guess I'll just have to wait and see if the new M10 has live view. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted July 27, 2012 Share #6  Posted July 27, 2012 The voigtlander 25 f0.95 only covers micro 4/3 format so even if you could mount it on an M, the flange to sensor distance on micro 4/3 is about 18mm and on an M it is about 28mm so your maximum distance you would be able to focus at would be ( very roughly) 170mm away from the lens. Most (old mechanical)slr manufacturers lenses can be adapted, and the Amadeo adapter from Venezuela can adapt ancient Contax lenses. Search the net. David The lens will not cover the sensor. It was designed for a sensor half the size. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruhayat Posted July 28, 2012 Share #7  Posted July 28, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) I've been using all sorts of odd lenses on my M's. You might find these helpful.  28mm Elmarit-R on Leica M:  Stall in the Russian Market, Phnom Penh, Cambodia by Ramayana X., on Flickr  Bean counter in Russian Market, Phnom Penh, Cambodia by Ramayana X., on Flickr  28mm Elmarit-R on a Leica M6TTL body by Ramayana X., on Flickr Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruhayat Posted July 28, 2012 Share #8  Posted July 28, 2012 50mm Summicron-R on Leica M:  Untitled-180 by Ramayana X., on Flickr  Untitled-99 by Ramayana X., on Flickr  Untitled-108 by Ramayana X., on Flickr Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruhayat Posted July 28, 2012 Share #9  Posted July 28, 2012 What they look like:  Leica R lenses on Leica M body (The 28mm and 50mm are R lenses) 2-camera 28-50-90 kit by Ramayana X., on Flickr  Pentax m42 Super Takumars on Leica M4-P (28-35-55) A trio of Takumars by Ramayana X., on Flickr  Carl Zeiss Jena 29/2.8 m42 lens on Leica M4-P CZJ 29/2.8 on the M4-P by Ramayana X., on Flickr  Carl Zeiss Jena 50/2.8 Tessar (12 blades version) m42 lens on Leica M4-P CZJ 50/2.8 Tessar on M4-P by Ramayana X., on Flickr Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruhayat Posted July 28, 2012 Share #10  Posted July 28, 2012 The 55/2.0 Super Takumar looks like a Nokton on the M4-P. Balances beautifully in my hands.  Pentax Super Takumar on Leica M4-P by Ramayana X., on Flickr  So why bother with m42 lenses? 1. So cheap (and plentiful), they make LTM lenses seem exorbitant. 2. Many m42 lenses have their special characteristics, particularly the Russian ones. 3. No mirror slap on the M bodies, so you can go with slower shutter speeds. 4. m42 lenses are among the smallest SLR lenses, so if you want to try alternative lenses, these are the best options to keep the size down (compared to, say, Leica R or Zeiss Contax). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
aboodchy Posted July 29, 2012 Author Share #11 Â Posted July 29, 2012 Thank you so much Ruhayat for your insightful and informative post. I tried to post my reply around 30 times but I think the site's server was down or something yesterday. Anyway, I really love the results of your pictures of the R-lenses and the M. If you don't mind me asking: do you need an adapter to fit R-lenses and if they need coding for the M9. Â That super rare Zeiss is sure something! I've never seen 29mm focal length before! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruhayat Posted July 29, 2012 Share #12  Posted July 29, 2012 Thank you so much Ruhayat for your insightful and informative post. I tried to post my reply around 30 times but I think the site's server was down or something yesterday. Anyway, I really love the results of your pictures of the R-lenses and the M. If you don't mind me asking: do you need an adapter to fit R-lenses and if they need coding for the M9. That super rare Zeiss is sure something! I've never seen 29mm focal length before!  You need a Leica R to Leica M adapter. They are quite quite easy to find. I'm not sure if coding works if you want to use them on the M9 - on the film M's, the camera doesn't detect the focal lengths, so you will always get the 50mm frameline no matter which lens you put on.  That 29mm/2.8 Zeiss apparently is not a Zeiss design. It's widely believed to be a copy of the Pentacon Electric 29/2.8, using the CZJ name after the factories merged. The Pentacopn 29mm was a design based on the Meyer Orestagon design. Not that it matters - the lens is still very sharp, with colours and rendition that is quite Zeiss like. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
aboodchy Posted July 30, 2012 Author Share #13 Â Posted July 30, 2012 Thanks once again Ruhayat I just ordered an R-to-M adapter online and I plan to use my brother's R 80mm Summilux once it gets here. Stayed tuned for results! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianv Posted July 30, 2012 Share #14 Â Posted July 30, 2012 I picked up a Konica to M adapter. The idea is to RF couple the 50/1.7 by making a coupling for it. The Konica is a nominal 51.6mm lens. A nice rainy day project. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted July 30, 2012 Share #15  Posted July 30, 2012 I picked up a Konica to M adapter. The idea is to RF couple the 50/1.7 by making a coupling for it. The Konica is a nominal 51.6mm lens. A nice rainy day project.  Sounds more like a rainy month …  The old man with a file Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruhayat Posted July 30, 2012 Share #16 Â Posted July 30, 2012 Thanks once again Ruhayat I just ordered an R-to-M adapter online and I plan to use my brother's R 80mm Summilux once it gets here. Stayed tuned for results! Â Wow. Talk about going in at the deep end. Â The Summilux-R will be a challenge because: Â 1. It's an 80mm focal length. DOF will be narrower, so focus will be harder to nail than wide angles. It can be done - I have used my 90mm Summicron with hyperfocal focusing before. But you probably need to keep it to f4.0 and +20 feet as a bare minimum. Â 2. It's an f1.4. I have never attempted hyperfocal at below f2.0. I'm guessing at medium distances the hit rate would be fair. But below +6 feet might require some kind of a precise ruler! Some people can't even focus at f1.4 with the rangefinder. Â But really, as long as you take into account the limitations, any lens can be used with the hyperfocal technique. Have fun! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruhayat Posted July 30, 2012 Share #17 Â Posted July 30, 2012 I picked up a Konica to M adapter. The idea is to RF couple the 50/1.7 by making a coupling for it. The Konica is a nominal 51.6mm lens. A nice rainy day project. Â I think someone over at the Rangefinder Forum has done something similar. And it works. Â EDIT: I found it! Not a Konica, but a Pentax M 50/1.2... Â http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=113676 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianv Posted July 30, 2012 Share #18  Posted July 30, 2012 Sounds more like a rainy month … The old man with a file   I converted a Helios-103 to RF coupled Leica Mount in an afternoon. Dremel required! My wife asked "WHY?". "Because no one else made one".  Fit a Leica 5cm f3.5 Varob to RF coupled mount- an afternoon.  Leitz Varob 5cm F3.5, converted to RF coupled Leica mount - Mu-43 Gallery  Schneider 5cm F2.8 Karat-Xenar to RF coupled LTM, afternoon.  Karat Xenar 5cm F2.8 converted to Leica mount, on the EP2 and M9. - Mu-43 Gallery  Disassembling a Contax mount Sonnar, cleaning, and converting to Leica mount- an afternoon.  Carl Zeiss Jena 5cm F1.5 converted to Leica mount, 198x - Mu-43 Gallery  The retaining ring from an Industar-61 fits nicely over the rear of the Konica. Just need to attach it, and file down.  Old FORTRAN programmer with a Spanner and many Files. This stuff is just not hard to do. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruhayat Posted July 31, 2012 Share #19 Â Posted July 31, 2012 At times like these I wish I had opted for machining instead of writing workshops at school. I have a Jupiter 9 that I would dearly love to get RF coupled. It's a rather special lens with 2 different characters at wide open and smaller apertures. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.