Lens modification for older lenses on M9

[JCharlton]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Could we list the lenses that are not safe or ready to mount on the Leica M9. For ones that require modification - why do they need it and where to obtain the mod.

 

I believe the pre-asph 35mm summilux has and issue with focusing to infinity, could someone please elaborate why this is so.

 

Thanks in advance.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[tobey bilek]

Collapsible lenses can be used, but not collapsed except partially. The safe distance will be so it does not protrude into the camera at all. Find that point with lens off camera, then afix dymo label maker tape to the tube to limit how far the tube travels.

 

Some lenses may safely go deeper and you need to find the point empirically.

 

The newest 50 and 90 collapse fully.

 

Certain fast/long focal lenses might be not adjusted for digital RF.

 

Visoflex screens may be off reportedly. You need to reshim.

 

Lenses without screw attached flanges need a hand Dremel job to code or send to Leica. Uncoded lenses need to be done by Leica or done yourself or replace the flanges and paints the pits If the focus is already ok If not, repair person work. If the focus changed, then you need to thin the new flange or shim it up.

 

Older screw mounts need a screw to bayonet adapter from Jinfinance ebay and you paint the pits/

 

I use GM Black and Artic White. Others us other paints.

 

You really need to be more specific.

[!Nomad64]

If memory serves me well, both Summilux 35 PreAsph & Summicron DR have an issue with infinity focusing because there's some internal part of the camera that interferes with the focusing cam. The hack for the 'lux consists in profiling the cam, but I do not exactly know how to. The DR close focus attachment also doesn't properly work with M9 as it's misaligned with the rangefinder windows.

 

Based on my samples some LTM lenses either vintage and not can be safely collapsed. Those I own and successfully tried on either M8 and M9 are Summitar 50/2, Elmar 50/3.5 - both normal and red scale versions - and CV Heliar 50/3.5 101st anniversary.

 

M3 goggled lenses such as the Summaron 35/2.8 work well and require that the goggles be left where they are. Removing them would lead to wrong framing as the flange is profiled to bring up the 50 mm frames instead of 35.

 

Elmarit 135/2.8 works well provided that it's a healthy sample. To my knowledge these suffer from two issues: internal lens separation (collated elements detach) and the goggles that are very prone to go off alignment after knocking them and cannot be fixed.

 

Summicron 35/2 v4 "King of Bokeh" made in Canada whose serial numbers are not engraved on the front ring but on the lower side of the aperture ring had internal plastic parts which were prone to break. I don't know if they can be fixed.

 

Older LTM lenses such as Summaron 35/3.5 and 28/5.6 are very prone to internal fogging and normally require CLA. They're extremely well built.

The same goes for the Summitar 50. This latter might also require CLA because the aperture ring can become extremely stiff.

 

Summitar 50 and earlier Summicron 50 front lenses are quite soft therefore it's very difficult to find one without scratches and cleaning signs.

 

There's been a run of early Summicron 50 whose glass formula was based on thorium instead of lanthanium and they are mildly radioactive. I'm not sure about this but Leica recommended to not to keep films too close to these lenses for extended periods. Even if they make good collectibles I don't thing I'd like having anything radioactive at home...

 

Zeiss Sonnar 50 ZM are known for focus shift issues. They must be optimized upon request for aperture f1.5 or 2.8.

 

Some CV and Zeiss ZM lenses built by CV also have a tendency to develop play and wobble in the front section and must be periodically CLAed for retightening.

 

There have been endless debates about Leica M compatibility of lenses originally intended for the Leica CL and of Konica M lenses. This latter turned to be just bull and there's an excellent article of Dante Stella to substantiate that. Leica CL lenses are generally reported to work well on M bodies but to be on the safe side one should take lab tests of whose existence I'm unaware.

 

Hope this helps,

Bruno

[JCharlton]

Hi Bruno, Tobey,

 

Thanks, this is exactly what I needed to know - that one should not be slapping on just any m-mount lens to the M9. What is the best older 35mm non-asph lens for the M9, and by best, I mean rich bokeh and reliable.

 

Justin

[250swb]

What is the best older 35mm non-asph lens for the M9, and by best, I mean rich bokeh and reliable.

 

Well as the 'King of Bokeh' has recently been 'outed' as a total crock of bs by the person who coined the term you may as well buy the latest Aspherical version. And it is reliable.

 

Steve

[!Nomad64]

Hi Justin,

 

that's a big question I can't satisfactorily answer since I'm after "the" 35mm myself and according exactly to your criteria therefore it becomes very personal...

 

Reliability is a slippery concept. If it were for me I'd say that vintage lenses were built more solidly but it's based only on a tactile impression and absolutely not substantiated by any evidence.

I can just say that whilst any qualified repairer can CLA vintage lenses, modern lenses are better left to the care of Leica.

In any case I (and I stress the "I") would steer clear of CV and Zeiss lenses due to their intrinsic mechanical issues. Zeiss lenses are however better built than LTM CV. These latter also suffered from crappy control quality and showed performance discrepancies from sample to sample.

 

User reports show that the CV Nokton 35 1.2 is well made but I never handled nor tried it and I don't like too much the Asph CV lenses rendition. To me they're often flat where by "flat" I mean the fact that there's an abrupt transition from in-focus to out-of-focus that makes in-focus elemens look like sharp figures glued on a fuzzy background. Buh-bye conveying an impression of plasticity and tridimensionality...

 

Modern lenses have better glass and better performance. Older lenses have often weaker performance but might have more character. What matters more to you?

 

Bokeh is also a slippery criterium as is extremely subjective. What one likes another dislikes. Just for instance, under certain circumstances the bokeh of 'cron 35 v4, the one dubbed "King of Bokeh", seems quite crappy to me. The bokeh of the Asph 'cron is quite harsh and generally speaking I find that the bokeh of the 35 'crons can be quite crummy. But as said, that's MY impression, based on the pics I could find on Flickr. Whoever else might have a different opinion and blame me.

 

If you need the speed then your candidate might be the 'lux PreAsph. The fact that it's been in production from '61 to '95 must mean something... If you can live with the soft focus and Leica glow at f1.4, it'll reward you at f2 with a better image than any version of the Summicron 35 at the same aperture maybe barring the Asph.

This latter has been reported by Sean Reid to have some minor focus shift issues.

Some users also reported the same for the 'lux PreAsph but some others ran some tests and proved it was not true at least on their own sample.

Instead the 'lux Asph 2nd version was affected by focus shift. It was so much that at a certain point Leica had to review the design and came with the 'lux Asph FLE. Buying one would cost me a kidney but that's another matter.

 

Summicron v2 - which here in Italy is dubbed "Big Tooth" after the knob commanding the aperture ring - and v3 are often despised in favor of the mythical v1 8 lenses and the v4 "King of Bokeh" but their MTF curves resemble very closely those of the lens I love most, the 'lux 50 PreAsph therefore I'd expect their rendition being quite similar, but whilst I own the 'lux 50 myself and I know that at f8 it's sharp from end to end I know nothing of the 'crons at that aperture. Also based on the images I could find on Flickr it seems that the v2 Big Tooth has a (very) slightly better rendition than the v3 but I might be proved miserably wrong.

 

Another solid candidate is the more modern Summarit. Sharp, cheap (for Leica standards) and with quite pleasant bokeh. It's only inconvenient is some barrel distortion.

 

I have both the LTM Summaron 35/3.5 and the M3 Summaron 35/2.8.

Both are beautifully built, they remind me of pieces of haute horologerie.

Optically speaking the 2.8 is better than its brethren as stopping down it provides more even performance on the field whilst the 3.5 is never sharp from end to end at any aperture. Let's say that the 3.5. is more of a portrait/street lens whilst the 2.8 can be also used as a landscape tool.

Both have a peculiar rendering at full aperture, namely they're very sharp on axis but performance decreases quite abruptly going towards the sides so one ends having a sharp center spot surrounded by increasingly fuzzy areas.

Hope this helps. The rest is up to you.

 

Cheers,

Bruno

[farnz]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

... What is the best older 35mm non-asph lens for the M9, and by best, I mean rich bokeh and reliable.

Justin,

 

If rich bokeh is was what I was specifically after then I'd look no further than a Sonnar design, which are renowned for their gentle and attractive bokeh. Problem is that the widest Sonnar is the Rollei 40/2.8 in LTM, which was made to Zeiss specifications under licence by Rollei. It is an excellent lens and can be found at a reasonable price on lists from time to time. If you were happy to consider 50 mm lenses then there is no shortage of excellent Sonnars to consider, dating from the 1930's to the present day.

 

Bruno mentioned the CV 35/1.2 Nokton, and I have the first version. I think it has attractive bokeh under most conditions but it doesn't appeal to everyone and there are those who give it a bad rep based on its size and weight.

 

One that you might like to consider is the 35/2.8 Summaron form which I've seen some very nice shots although I've never owned one. Unfortunately the price on those is steadily rising as their reputation grows ...

 

Pete.

[farnz]

Here's an example from the 35/2 Summicron pre-asph version 4 wide open and showing what I consider to be its signature: a gentle transition from in-focus to out-of-focus areas with an absence of jarring double lines in the out of focus areas. This is not meant to be artistic or anything more than a test shot that I took when I first bought the lens. Unfortunately there are no specular highlights in shot so you can't see how it handles those.

 

Pete.

 

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!

[JCharlton]

For the sake of simplicity and sanity. I think I'll go with the following for my M9:

 

35mm 1.4 Summilux Pre-ASPH

50mm 1.4 Summilux Pre-ASPH

 

Does anyone know the serial range or version of the 35mm 1.4 Summilux Pre-ASPH, that will work with the M9. Is it the one without the infinity lock?

 

I've spent 12 hours each day for the past week learning all about the different lenses, and I'm about to go cross-eyed with all the information and opinions to digest. Ultimately, after seeing images of what those lenses are capable of, I see no reason to search further.

 

Thanks for all the informative help. Hopefully we can continue to add information on the forum about this topic to better inform new members like myself.

 

Justin

[farnz]

... Does anyone know the serial range or version of the 35mm 1.4 Summilux Pre-ASPH, that will work with the M9. Is it the one without the infinity lock?

...

This one surprised me when it was mentioned earlier because I can't recall it being raised elsewhere. I just checked my M9-P's manual and the 35/1.4 Summilux is not listed under "Cannot Be Used". Only the 15/8 Hologon, dual-range 50/2 Summicron, and the 90/4 Elmar (collapsible) are listed. Are you referring to the goggled version of the 35 Summilux for the M3 but without the goggles (which I didn't think were detachable)? Hove gives the code for that one as 11871 but doesn't specify a serial number range.

 

Pete.

[Erik Gunst Lund]

There is a very nice Leica Forum WIKI

With information on all lenses, there you find this information for the 35 Summilux II:

Compatibility - ELC versions cannot be used on M9 cameras without modification by Leica service facility.

[JCharlton]

There is a very nice Leica Forum WIKI

With information on all lenses, there you find this information for the 35 Summilux II:

Compatibility - ELC versions cannot be used on M9 cameras without modification by Leica service facility.

 

You Sir, have just answered my question. Thank you, and thanks for the link, this is incredibly helpful. There goes the rest of the afternoon ; )

[ModernMan]

There is a very nice Leica Forum WIKI

With information on all lenses, there you find this information for the 35 Summilux II:

Compatibility - ELC versions cannot be used on M9 cameras without modification by Leica service facility.

 

Couterexample: I have an ELC 35/1.4 which I have owned since well prior to the M8's introduction and it fits fine on my M9. Accordingly, I think the WIKI is incorrect on this point and the fact is that *SOME* ELC 35/1.4's may require modification prior to use on the M9.

[menos I M6]

Hi Bruno, Tobey,

 

Thanks, this is exactly what I needed to know - that one should not be slapping on just any m-mount lens to the M9. What is the best older 35mm non-asph lens for the M9, and by best, I mean rich bokeh and reliable.

 

Justin

 

Dustin, this is a question, absolutely impossible to get a reliable answer for.

 

The characteristics involved are so absolutely subjective, that you will get as many answers, as there are different 35 f2 lens choices.

 

Personally, I own and use (depending on daily mood) more than 10 different 35mm lenses and love each and every one of them for their specific characteristics.

 

I couldn't find "The Best" or even "The Perfect" 35mm lens yet, but I have a three strong favourites:

 

Konica 35 f2 UC-Hexanon LTM

(lightest, smallest, best built, modern looking non ASPH lens, but no 0.7m focussing)

 

W-Nikkor 35 ƒ1.8 LTM

(nicest image character of them all - subjective of course - but no 0.7m focussing and least ergonomic)

 

35 Summilux ASPH

(nice mixture of image character, close focussing and ergonomics - a workhorse lens with less character than the others but no surprises either - nicer rendering than the later FLE version, important to get a sample, that doesn't show focussing issues with your camera)

 

I think each of these three lenses has an overall strong set of characteristics, to make them an easy favourite.

 

The "Bokeh King" thingy is an internet myth - sadly as it is debunked now staining the reputation of an otherwise very fine lens (and easily within my personal list above).

 

It really comes down all to personal preferences.

 

If it would be so easy as asking for laboratory optically highest performing 35/2 lens, the answer would be likely easy:

 

Just buy an 35/2 ASPH or 35/1.4 ASPH FLE and be done with it.

 

Lucky for us though, it ain't that easy a choice.