JeTexas Posted March 8, 2013 Share #61 Posted March 8, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) Your criticism of my methods and results does absolutely nothing to actually help find an M-mount tube ... but thanks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted March 8, 2013 Posted March 8, 2013 Hi JeTexas, Take a look here Non Leica slr lenses on the new M. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
AlanJW Posted March 8, 2013 Share #62 Posted March 8, 2013 Your criticism of my methods and results does absolutely nothing to actually help find an M-mount tube ... but thanks. Don't take it personally. O1af is our house curmedgeon. You might look for OUFRO/1646, which may or may not solve your problem, and may or may not be available. But I think it was an extension tube for M mount. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeTexas Posted March 8, 2013 Share #63 Posted March 8, 2013 I came across an M bellows at $200 and an M lens adapter for the end of the bellows at another $200, but I was really hoping to just find another $10 set of tubes that I can throw in a pocket of my bag. I might just have to buy an M to LTM adapter and bond a filter ring of the correct size for the tubes I've got onto it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted March 8, 2013 Share #64 Posted March 8, 2013 The M bellows will not fit directly on the front of an M due to the lower guide bar. However a Novoflex Bellows will. The downside is that the Novoflex is LTM/LTM. No problem at the camera end as you just use a LTM to LM adapter ring. At the other end you have to use either LTM lenses/lens heads or the very rare and often expensive Novoflex adapters, such as LEIEL or LEIMAR. It took me 2 years to find a LEIMAR. Wilson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
k-hawinkler Posted March 8, 2013 Share #65 Posted March 8, 2013 Hi JeTexas, Maybe this helps http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/customer-forum/198139-m-extension-tube-question.html Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted March 8, 2013 Share #66 Posted March 8, 2013 Here is a picture of the M with a Novoflex bellows and Tele-Elmar 135 head mounted on it. Wilson 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/199842-non-leica-slr-lenses-on-the-new-m/?do=findComment&comment=2265024'>More sharing options...
k-hawinkler Posted March 8, 2013 Share #67 Posted March 8, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) Looks terrific! Thanks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonoslack Posted March 8, 2013 Share #68 Posted March 8, 2013 I came across an M bellows at $200 and an M lens adapter for the end of the bellows at another $200, but I was really hoping to just find another $10 set of tubes that I can throw in a pocket of my bag. I might just have to buy an M to LTM adapter and bond a filter ring of the correct size for the tubes I've got onto it. HI There I've been having a lot of fun with the OUFRO - not quite $10, but small and cheap, and works great with wider lenses especially. I've had quite good results with it too all the best Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
plewislambert Posted March 8, 2013 Share #69 Posted March 8, 2013 I recently photographed the interior of Southwark Cathedral (permit costs £2) using a Tokina 17mm (Olympus mount) with a cheap OM to M9 adapter and the results were good. No vignetting. Presumably the results on the new M would be the same. Previously I used a 15mm Voigtlander Heliar - the results might have been sharper but I had to use Cornerfix to deal with the dim, discoloured edges of the images. The results weren't as good due to noise around the edges, although extra exposure did help with that (but the windows looked burned out). I haven't tried the Nikon 18mm or Tamron 17mm . However I used a 28mm Nikkor f2 that had just been CLA'd using a Nikon to Leica adapter and that worked well, although the bulky lens was seen in the viewfinder and focusing was by guess/scale. A Leica 28mm is smaller, operates the rangefinder, images probably sharper. I bought the adapters from China, and also several adapters for my Micro 4/3 Olympus and every one worked. Philip Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknorton Posted March 8, 2013 Share #70 Posted March 8, 2013 Just continuing Wilson's efforts to get his adapter recognised as a lens, it turns out you can fool the camera into thinking there's a lens attached by holding a silver coin to the lens sensor or even a piece of white paper. So it's not metal being detected, it is light reflected back to the lens sensor. The missing piece of the puzzle is why my black Novoflex adapters work. If I insert them into the lens throat without turning to engage the framelines lever, I can still start LV. Take the adapter out and the shutter closes. Maybe the Novoflex black paint is reflective to IR. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
01af Posted March 8, 2013 Share #71 Posted March 8, 2013 I've had quite good results with it too Sure the results will be quite good. But when using regular M glass—as opposed to glass specifically meant for photomacrography use—then with achromatic close-up lenses the results (at moderate magnifications not beyond life-size) will be even better. Moreover, those diopter lenses are easier to find, easier to carry, and easier to use. So why would someone want to use extension tubes? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
k-hawinkler Posted March 8, 2013 Share #72 Posted March 8, 2013 Sure the results will be quite good. But when using regular M glass—as opposed to glass specifically meant for photomacrography use—then with achromatic close-up lenses the results (at moderate magnifications not beyond life-size) will be even better. Moreover, those diopter lenses are easier to find, easier to carry, and easier to use. So why would someone want to use extension tubes? So, which close-up and diopter lenses do you recommend? Thanks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted March 8, 2013 Share #73 Posted March 8, 2013 dThe M bellows will not fit directly on the front of an M due to the lower guide bar.... Wilson HAY HAY... a bad news... you mean, I suppose, that the guide bar interferes with the body... I hope it is for few mms... so that a simple M spacer (OUFRO) makes it possible to mount... it's the only bellows I have... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted March 8, 2013 Share #74 Posted March 8, 2013 HAY HAY... a bad news... you mean, I suppose, that the guide bar interferes with the body... I hope it is for few mms... so that a simple M spacer (OUFRO) makes it possible to mount... it's the only bellows I have... Luigi, I don't know how deep an OUFRO is. From memory, the guide bar of the Leica Bellows projects about 15mm beyond the bayonet. Of course with a Visoflex, you don't need to turn the bellows to lock it. I have to admit I bought the Novoflex years ago, because it was dead cheap. Now looking like a smart purchase. The micrometer focus on the end of the square guide bar, together with the 10X zoom is spectacularly accurate. I was looking at a flower pasted flat into an old flower book. You could detect the difference in focus between the cartridge paper backing sheet and the petal pasted onto it, with the 135 T-E. Wilson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted March 9, 2013 Share #75 Posted March 9, 2013 Wilson, I have just checked Bellows II with OUFRO as back spacer and my M8 : it does mount with good "room to maneuver" : I do suppose that works with M too. OUFRO has a chrome flange which does cover the 6 bit sensor... there ought not to be problems with LV, hopingfully. To dismount, accessing the BM release button on the body isn't so easy... a "standard finger" doesn' fit into... but you can do it with the aid of trivial tools (any rigid flat "lever" like a key) Of course, the "Viso tube" is a valid and more elegant alternative : with it, one can also use the 90° rotating facility of the Bellows II, which is impossible with the narrow depth of the OUFRO. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted March 9, 2013 Share #76 Posted March 9, 2013 Sure the results will be quite good. But when using regular M glass—as opposed to glass specifically meant for photomacrography use—then with achromatic close-up lenses the results (at moderate magnifications not beyond life-size) will be even better. Moreover, those diopter lenses are easier to find, easier to carry, and easier to use. So why would someone want to use extension tubes?[/quote] Can be you're right (I never used close up lenses, apart toying with the historical ones for the Elmar...) : but, logically or not, amny people dosn't like by principle to put another glass element in front of their lenses... axpecially if "universal" and 3rd party... and extension tubes are a lot easy to carry. About extension tubes... I wonder if some chinese shop (or some good european artisan) could think to make an adapter to mount M lenses in front of an extensible tube like the OTZFO... ... it could have a sense... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted March 9, 2013 Share #77 Posted March 9, 2013 Sure the results will be quite good. But when using regular M glass—as opposed to glass specifically meant for photomacrography use—then with achromatic close-up lenses the results (at moderate magnifications not beyond life-size) will be even better. Moreover, those diopter lenses are easier to find, easier to carry, and easier to use. So why would someone want to use extension tubes?[/quote] Can be you're right (I never used close up lenses, apart toying with the historical ones for the Elmar...) : but, logically or not, amny people dosn't like by principle to put another glass element in front of their lenses... axpecially if "universal" and 3rd party... and extension tubes are a lot easy to carry. About extension tubes... I wonder if some chinese shop (or some good european artisan) could think to make an adapter to mount M lenses in front of an extensible tube like the OTZFO... ... it could have a sense... Luigi, Another plus for the Novoflex Bellows, the little knurled knob on the top, when released, permits rotation of the camera body to any angle. I am not sure of the benefit of an M mount for the OTZFO/16464K focusing mount for the 65/3.5 and 135/4 heads. Would it not just be easier to use a "dumb" extension tube and focus with the built in helical on the M lens. Once Amadeo has got his bayonets correct (the male is too loose and the female too tight), it will be easy for him to turn out M to M extension tubes of any length anyone wants. Wilson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
k-hawinkler Posted March 9, 2013 Share #78 Posted March 9, 2013 Sure the results will be quite good. But when using regular M glass—as opposed to glass specifically meant for photomacrography use—then with achromatic close-up lenses the results (at moderate magnifications not beyond life-size) will be even better. Moreover, those diopter lenses are easier to find, easier to carry, and easier to use. So why would someone want to use extension tubes?]quote] Can be you're right (I never used close up lenses, apart toying with the historical ones for the Elmar...) : but, logically or not, amny people dosn't like by principle to put another glass element in front of their lenses... axpecially if "universal" and 3rd party... and extension tubes are a lot easy to carry. About extension tubes... I wonder if some chinese shop (or some good european artisan) could think to make an adapter to mount M lenses in front of an extensible tube like the OTZFO... ... it could have a sense... To avoid being stung by bees! :D http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/nature-wildlife/181512-bees-dark-light-3-images.html Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted March 9, 2013 Share #79 Posted March 9, 2013 Luigi, Another plus for the Novoflex Bellows, the little knurled knob on the top, when released, permits rotation of the camera body to any angle. I am not sure of the benefit of an M mount for the OTZFO/16464K focusing mount for the 65/3.5 and 135/4 heads. Would it not just be easier to use a "dumb" extension tube and focus with the built in helical on the M lens. Once Amadeo has got his bayonets correct (the male is too loose and the female too tight), it will be easy for him to turn out M to M extension tubes of any length anyone wants. Wilson Well... I admit it would result in an odd setup;)... it came to my mind just for the reason that looking for my OUFRO, this morning, the OTZFO (next to it in the same drawer) caught my sight... its helicoid has a very long throw (much more than the OUAGO, which too was next to... ) and it could result in a rather simple and light extension set... decently usable even hand held, maybe. A set of modern tubes by Amadeo is surely the same flexible, functional and light... but finding a way to use those old devices like the OTZFO has always a special flavor... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeTexas Posted March 11, 2013 Share #80 Posted March 11, 2013 My local resale shop didn't have an OUFRO, but they did have an old Leica bellows (with a few taped-up light leaks) for $50. No adapters to mount a lens on it, though. They also had a very strange system with long rods that screwed into different M-adapter things, but I couldn't figure out how to mount a lens on the adapters and there were no instructions. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.