Telyt-R 560/6.8 Puzzle

[CaptainYooh]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi all:

 

I need help solving a puzzle. I've just come into possession of this Telyt lens and it is a bit weird looking to me. It has a 560/6.8 head but the aperture ring goes to 5.6. That's not all though. The focusing tube has no name on it. I would have bet it's been made by Novoflex, because it does look like a Novoflex and accepts Novoflex adapter rings for Leica-R and Nikon. But it doesn't say Novoflex anywhere. The tube is very well made and the black mounting flanges are practically identical to the flanges on my other Novoflex adapters (e.g. Hasselblad to Nikon and Hasselblad to Leica adapters); but, again, no brand name anywhere. I just don't believe this is a knock-off; it's made so well.

 

Also, the tripod mount on the lens head does not align straight with the focusing screws. I mean, when the lens is mounted, focusing screws look straight down, but the tripod mount is approx. 30 degrees off to the side (it is visible on the second photo). I am not sure what would be the right way to mount this lens with a camera on a tripod, as it would be out of balance on either camera or the lens head mount?

 

I took a few test handheld shots of the downtown highrise buildings from about 20km away. Using focusing screws handheld is practically impossible, so I focused by pulling the head, which moved reasonably smooth. Images looked sharp and had almost no chromatic aberrations even enlarged to the pixel level. Anyway, any help solving this lens puzzle would be very much appreciated.

 

(BTW, I also have a 560/5.6 Telyt-R on a Televyt pilgriff. This is a totally different lens.)

 

Please disregard the quality of the snapshots, they're just for reference.

 

 

 

[Advertisement]

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

[wildlightphoto]

I believe this is a Novoflex focussing mount - the name escapes me, but I'l certain I've seen it in a Novoflex catalog somewhere. It's meant to be used for situations where fine focus control is more important than quick focus. I wouldn't mind getting hold of one myself. The 560mm lens head also fits on the PIGRIFF-C rapid focus grip.

 

The Novoflex aperture ring needs to be "interpreted" when used with the f/6.8 lens heads. Figure marked f/5.6 = actual f/6.8

 

I haven't seen that tripod mount before. Is there a way to loosen it and adjust its position? Novoflex made a tripod ring for the PIGRIFF-B that allowed this sort of adjustment.

 

EDIT: you will find some spherochromatic aberration in the background when there are high-contrast objects in the OOF areas, such as in the upper portion of this heavily cropped photo:

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!

[CaptainYooh]

Thanks for the quick reply, Doug.

 

There is no way I can think of that would have the angle of the tripod mount adjusted to line up with the focusing screws. The lens consists of four main parts:

 

 

1. Lens head
   
2. The ring with the tripod mount
   
3. Two-ring element: one ring controlling aperture and another being a "Hasselblad-type" half-turn mount.
   
4. Focusing tube itself
   

Lens head screws into the tripod mount ring tight - there is no way to alter the position of the mount, I believe. Two-ring element screws into the tripod mount ring the same way and stays on tight. Aperture ring is right at the end of this ring. Aperture blades are accessible, open and somewhat unprotected, which is strange but OK, I guess, considering that this end of the ring rarely stays open. The focusing tube has four protruding "teeth" split in the middle that go into the half-turn mount ring. The opening in the middle of each mount fits a small pin in the mounting ring, so the tube can be mounted four different ways on this ring. Again, none of the four positions line the focusing screws straight with the tripod mount. So, to answer your question, no, I cannot wiggle the lens head.

 

I have a strong suspicion, that the angle of the tripod mount is specifically made for the hand-shoulder grip that is similar (or the same?) as the one used for the Telyt 400/6.8. If I recall correctly, those grips do go into the lens at an angle.

 

This is where it gets complicated for me. One has got to be able to mount this lens on a tripod. Or not??? If there is no sensible way to mount this lens on a tripod without running a risk of breaking the camera/lens mount, I might have to sell the whole thing. Holding a camera with one hand and focusing such a long lens with another is no longer an easy task for me, unfortunately...

 

Also, could you, please clarify your comment about "interpretation". Leica engineers are not sloppy, normally. Why did they leave this discrepancy in the aperture numbers? Plus, if 5.6 = 6.8, what about the rest of the stops? Should I be transposing all of them one stop or does 8 = 8?

 

Please and thanks.

[wildlightphoto]

Thanks for the quick reply, Doug.

 

There is no way I can think of that would have the angle of the tripod mount adjusted to line up with the focusing screws. The lens consists of four main parts:

 

 

1. Lens head
   
2. The ring with the tripod mount
   
3. Two-ring element: one ring controlling aperture and another being a "Hasselblad-type" half-turn mount.
   
4. Focusing tube itself
   

Lens head screws into the tripod mount ring tight - there is no way to alter the position of the mount, I believe. Two-ring element screws into the tripod mount ring the same way and stays on tight. Aperture ring is right at the end of this ring. Aperture blades are accessible, open and somewhat unprotected, which is strange but OK, I guess, considering that this end of the ring rarely stays open.

 

On my aperture unit (which looks identical to yours) there is a small screw in the ring just forward of the aperture ring, not quite top dead center. I wonder if this is a set screw that would allow adjustment of the tripod mount position?

 

The focusing tube has four protruding "teeth" split in the middle that go into the half-turn mount ring. The opening in the middle of each mount fits a small pin in the mounting ring, so the tube can be mounted four different ways on this ring.

 

This is not the same as my PIGRIFF-C. The PIGRIFF-C has three of these teeth, only one of which is split in the middle.

 

I have a strong suspicion, that the angle of the tripod mount is specifically made for the hand-shoulder grip that is similar (or the same?) as the one used for the Telyt 400/6.8. If I recall correctly, those grips do go into the lens at an angle.

 

The tripod mount of the f/6.8 Telyts is at the bottom of the camera mount tube, not at an angle.

 

Also, could you, please clarify your comment about "interpretation". Leica engineers are not sloppy, normally. Why did they leave this discrepancy in the aperture numbers? Plus, if 5.6 = 6.8, what about the rest of the stops? Should I be transposing all of them one stop?

 

This is a Novoflex product using the Leitz optical unit so it's Novoflex being sloppy. Leica also sold a version of the Novoflex follow-focus grip with the 400mm and 560mm f/6.8 lens heads; these lens heads do not fit the focussing grips sold by Novoflex, and IIRC these heads have the correct f/stop markings. F/6.8 is halfway between f/5.6 and f/8 so the entire scale of the aperture units is off by about 1/2 stop. If you are using the camera's TTL light meter it doesn't matter what the number on the aperture ring is.

 

I believe Novoflex sold the lens this way because the aperture unit is identical to the aperture unit Novoflex made for their own brand 400mm f/5.6 lenses.

[CaptainYooh]

On my aperture unit (which looks identical to yours) there is a small screw in the ring just forward of the aperture ring, not quite top dead center. I wonder if this is a set screw that would allow adjustment of the tripod mount position?..

Oh, my. That was an ordeal. Yes, I found a screw and got it out. It fell on the carpet off the screwdriver tip and literally disappeared. It took me, my son, a flashlight and, finally, a strong magnet to find it. Unfortunately, it didn't do the trick after all. This screw holds firm yet another ring, which is somewhat of a spacer between the aperture ring and the lens head. It goes right through both and holds it from turning.

 

This is not the same as my PIGRIFF-C. The PIGRIFF-C has three of these teeth, only one of which is split in the middle...

Don't know why I wrote "four", there are only three teeth; thus, three turning positions. Sorry.

 

...The tripod mount of the f/6.8 Telyts is at the bottom of the camera mount tube, not at an angle...

Then, I don't understand a purpose of this off-set angle at all...

 

...This is a Novoflex product using the Leitz optical unit so it's Novoflex being sloppy. ...

You're right, of course. Although, some of them guys were formerly Leica engineers, I heard.

 

Thanks again for your quick replies. At least I understand the logic and origin of the 5.6/6.8 discrepancy.

 

But the rest of the puzzle remains unsolved for now: how to properly mount this lens with camera on a tripod and why is there an off-set?

[Nick_S]

Why not drop Novoflex an email. They were able to answer my queries a few years ago regarding compatibility of difference generations of follow-focus systems with the Leica M system's Visoflex.

 

Nick

[tobey bilek]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The 6.8 400 mm and 560 mm are actually faster as measured in actual light transmission as they are two elements only.

 

Only the first 3" or so is from the 560 Leitz lens. The rest is Novoflex product.

[viooh]

The Telyt 6.8/560 is optically identical with the old 5.6/560; Leitz simply reduced the maximum aperture because wide open the 5.6 was less than satisfactory due to curvature of field. If this Novoflex-hybrid can be opened to 5.6, maybe it works at the actual aperture of 5.6 even if it says 6.8 on the lens.

 

Peter

[wildlightphoto]

The Telyt 6.8/560 is optically identical with the old 5.6/560; Leitz simply reduced the maximum aperture because wide open the 5.6 was less than satisfactory due to curvature of field. If this Novoflex-hybrid can be opened to 5.6, maybe it works at the actual aperture of 5.6 even if it says 6.8 on the lens.

 

Peter

 

I don't know where you are getting this information, but I've used all three of these lenses: Leitz 560mm f/5.6, Leitz 560mm f/6.8, and Leitz/Novoflex 560mm f/6.8. The 560mm f/5.6 and 560mm f/6.8 are similar but not identical. The optical cells of the Novoflex-mount 560mm f/6.8 and the Leitz-mount 560mm f/6.8 are literally interchangeable. The older 560mm f/5.6 is physically larger. It is extremely unlikely that the 560mm f/6.8 optical cell becomes f/5.6 when used in the Novoflex mount. This would alter the laws of physics.

[viooh]

I don't know where you are getting this information.

 

I may have misinterpreted information from Erwin Puts' "Leica Lens Compendium", whrere the author describes the 5,6 and 6,8/560 Telyt lenses as optically identical (if I remember correctly). I was not aware that they differ physically, if so; I can't compare them myself because I only have the newer one. It would not be unusual to limit the maximum aperture of a lens artificially if performance at the "true" maximum aperture is suboptimal.

 

Peter

[CaptainYooh]

They are two very different lenses for sure. 560mm/5.6 front element is massive compared to the 560/6.8. As I said, I have both lenses they are not the same.

[jaapv]

A quick comparison shot of the 400 lens heads. For the 560 the difference is even more marked:

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!

[CaptainYooh]

I...The 560mm lens head also fits on the PIGRIFF-C rapid focus grip....

Doug, do you think it would fit this one?

 

[wildlightphoto]

Doug, do you think it would fit this one?

 

 

This appears to be a PIGRIFF-C. You mentioned the camera-end tube on your lens has four protruding teeth that line up with the aperture unit. My lens head fits on the 3-tooth PIGRIFF-C, this might be a problem. The tripod mount of your lens might also interfere with the forward grip of the PIGRIFF-C.

[CaptainYooh]

It's three teeth, I've corrected myself right away above.

 

Now, just to be sure we are talking about the same thing: the focusing tube I've got now would have to go off if this grip is used, correct?

 

Thanks, Doug.

[wildlightphoto]

It's three teeth, I've corrected myself right away above. .

 

Ah, shouldn't be a problem then.

 

Now, just to be sure we are talking about the same thing: the focusing tube I've got now would have to go off if this grip is used, correct?

 

Yup, and after reviewing the photo of your lens it looks like the tripod mount on the lens is far enough forward that it won't be a problem when the forward grip of the PIGRIFF-C is in the position shown, and if the tripod mount remains off to the side when mounted on the PIGRIFF-C it won't be a problem at all.

[k-hawinkler]

Hi all:

 

I need help solving a puzzle. I've just come into possession of this Telyt lens and it is a bit weird looking to me. It has a 560/6.8 head but the aperture ring goes to 5.6. That's not all though. The focusing tube has no name on it. I would have bet it's been made by Novoflex, because it does look like a Novoflex and accepts Novoflex adapter rings for Leica-R and Nikon. But it doesn't say Novoflex anywhere. The tube is very well made and the black mounting flanges are practically identical to the flanges on my other Novoflex adapters (e.g. Hasselblad to Nikon and Hasselblad to Leica adapters); but, again, no brand name anywhere. I just don't believe this is a knock-off; it's made so well.

 

Also, the tripod mount on the lens head does not align straight with the focusing screws. I mean, when the lens is mounted, focusing screws look straight down, but the tripod mount is approx. 30 degrees off to the side (it is visible on the second photo). I am not sure what would be the right way to mount this lens with a camera on a tripod, as it would be out of balance on either camera or the lens head mount?

 

I took a few test handheld shots of the downtown highrise buildings from about 20km away. Using focusing screws handheld is practically impossible, so I focused by pulling the head, which moved reasonably smooth. Images looked sharp and had almost no chromatic aberrations even enlarged to the pixel level. Anyway, any help solving this lens puzzle would be very much appreciated.

 

(BTW, I also have a 560/5.6 Telyt-R on a Televyt pilgriff. This is a totally different lens.)

 

Please disregard the quality of the snapshots, they're just for reference.

 

 

 

 

 

Here is a hummingbird, shot with this very lens and focusing tube on Olympus OM-D E-M5.

 

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!