Jump to content

waiting for the R to M adapter


hejenk

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 464
  • Created
  • Last Reply

The M240’s LED’s are VERY sensitive to any dirt/ink on them. I have sent off all my regularly used hand coded lenses to have coding pits milled in them, because the hand coding Pentel ink was always coming off and upsetting the coding LED’s. My M240 mount like I understand many others, is quite tight.

 

On the other hand, I am having no problems with my Novoflex LEM/CONT adapter, which brings up the 50/75 lines and has a white painted oblong recess in the mount, where you can mark in black codes with a Pentel. As these are recessed, they don’t get rubbed off over the LED’s. My LEM/CONT brings up R lens menu very consistently.

 

Wilson

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Novoflex version is working very nicely for me. I noticed that the Leica-R mount seemed to have a bit more play than ones manufactured by Leica, so I salvaged an old Leica one from an obsolete item and installed it on the Novoflex adapter. A little machining required, but the play is noticeably less now.

 

I also found that a little shimming was required in order to get zoom lenses more exactly parfocal (for which they need to have a reasonably precisely matched infinity focus).

Link to post
Share on other sites

similar registration issues with some Noctilux and 75/2 lenses

 

my opinion is that the coding is ok but the adapter (and the mounts of these other lenses) are not fully activating the frameline actuator switch on the M to register 50/75.

 

........ and furthermore I do NOT think this is a lens or adapter issue ..... I think it is a camera frame line actuator issue.

 

I have problems with the Novoflex R-M adapter, 75/2 and Nocti 0.95 ...... all of which need shoving well home to register the lens/adapter and minimal backward rotation de-selects them. All require the selector 50/75 position. The actuator toggles the levers on two micro -switches with the 50/75 position being both 'off'. The mechanical part of the mechanism in the throat of the camera looks unchanged ...... so I suspect it is a change in the switches and their position on the new circuit board combined with tolerance issues on the camera/lens mounts that is the cause of the trouble in those that have it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to be clear, although the Novoflex is better quality than the other third party adapters, it isn't quite as well made as you would expect an original Leica adapter to be. I base this on comparing the Novoflex with the mounts and flanges on Leica extenders, extension tubes and adapters such as the 14167. The practical effect is that there is a just noticeable amount more play or "mechanical compliance" with the Novoflex adapter, than say a Leica-R extender. To be more specific, the Leica M bayonet on the Novoflex appears near perfect, although it is fabricated from anodized aluminum rather than chromed brass. The Leica-R lens mount on the Novoflex appears to offer a little more play then an original Leica mount, although it is fabricated from chromed brass. Some of this appears to be attributable to the locking pin which is a slightly different shape than the Leica version.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to be clear, although the Novoflex is better quality than the other third party adapters, it isn't quite as well made as you would expect an original Leica adapter to be. I base this on comparing the Novoflex with the mounts and flanges on Leica extenders, extension tubes and adapters such as the 14167. The practical effect is that there is a just noticeable amount more play or "mechanical compliance" with the Novoflex adapter, than say a Leica-R extender. To be more specific, the Leica M bayonet on the Novoflex appears near perfect, although it is fabricated from anodized aluminum rather than chromed brass. The Leica-R lens mount on the Novoflex appears to offer a little more play then an original Leica mount, although it is fabricated from chromed brass. Some of this appears to be attributable to the locking pin which is a slightly different shape than the Leica version.

 

So let's be clear. You are comparing a new Novoflex adapter (which Leica cannot release to us after 14 months) to an old Leica adapter which was made before plastics or materials other than metal were used in adapters. Or are you saying you have both the Novoflex adapter and the new Leica adapter in hand?

 

If no Leica adapter, then you are saying nothing until you have one in hand. My Novoflex adapter has no play in it whatsoever. I do not know if my Leica adapter will have play in it since I CANNOT GET ONE from when I ordered it on 18 September 2012 after handling it at Photokina on 18 September 2012.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So let's be clear. You are comparing a new Novoflex adapter (which Leica cannot release to us after 14 months) to an old Leica adapter which was made before plastics or materials other than metal were used in adapters. Or are you saying you have both the Novoflex adapter and the new Leica adapter in hand?

 

If no Leica adapter, then you are saying nothing until you have one in hand. My Novoflex adapter has no play in it whatsoever. I do not know if my Leica adapter will have play in it since I CANNOT GET ONE from when I ordered it on 18 September 2012 after handling it at Photokina on 18 September 2012.

 

I'm comparing the Novoflex LEM/LER, particularly the M-bayonet flange and the Leica-R mount portion of it to the M-bayonets and Leica-R mounts on several leica products (16467, APO extender, Leica-R extension tubes). I do not have the new Leica M adapter. Sorry if my qualification wasn't sufficiently clear: "I base this on comparing the Novoflex with the mounts and flanges on Leica extenders, extension tubes and adapters such as the 14167."

 

I'm making an estimate of the expected quality of the future Leica adapter based on the quality of Leica's similar previous efforts. It isn't necessary to wait (seemingly interminably) for the Leica adapter to make such estimates.

 

I'm glad your Novoflex adapter has "no play whatsoever", but mine did. So I disassembled the Leica-R mount and compared it carefully to an original Leica R mount. What I found lead me to install an original Leica-R mount (salvaged from an old extender) on the Novoflex. Subjectively, I think it reduced the play of lenses mounted on my LEM/LER.

 

Incidentally, I didn't find any materials other than metal used in the Novoflex adapter in a way that could contribute to mechanical compliance of any sort. In fact, the Novoflex adapter is fabricated principally from aluminum and chrome-plated brass, as you would expect the Leica adapter to be, based on Leica's past efforts on these sorts of things. Although, again based on Leica's past products, one would expect the M-bayonet flange to be fabricated from chromed brass, rather than aluminum as is the Novoflex. Like I said, the Novoflex adapters are better quality than other third party adapters. (IMHO)

 

The larger issue is evidenced by the existence this discussion, since if the Leica adapter had shipped in a reasonable time (considering the manufacturing complexity, Leica's previous experience in this class of mechanical product, etc.) I wouldn't likely find myself dismantling and modifying Novoflex adapters. But, hey, if you're really gonna get your MF grip, then maybe there's hope for the adapter as well!

Link to post
Share on other sites

So let's be clear. You are comparing a new Novoflex adapter (which Leica cannot release to us after 14 months) to an old Leica adapter which was made before plastics or materials other than metal were used in adapters. Or are you saying you have both the Novoflex adapter and the new Leica adapter in hand?

 

If no Leica adapter, then you are saying nothing until you have one in hand. My Novoflex adapter has no play in it whatsoever. I do not know if my Leica adapter will have play in it since I CANNOT GET ONE from when I ordered it on 18 September 2012 after handling it at Photokina on 18 September 2012.

 

But we can be sure that the male side of the Leica adapter will be chromed hard metal instead of anodized aluminum like the Novoflex one. The former has my strong preference.

Link to post
Share on other sites

But we can be sure that the male side of the Leica adapter will be chromed hard metal instead of anodized aluminum like the Novoflex one. The former has my strong preference.

 

Jaap,

 

Modern heat treatable aluminium alloys like 7075, have a Brinell hardness of 180-190 after treatment, which is about the same as hard brass.

 

Wilson

Link to post
Share on other sites

Jaap,

 

Modern heat treatable aluminium alloys like 7075, have a Brinell hardness of 180-190 after treatment, which is about the same as hard brass.

 

Wilson

 

Right, but the chrome plating is harder still. I notice that all my Nikkor and Canon lenses sport chromed flanges. On the other hand, the hard anodizing on the Novoflex flange adds to the wear resistance...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Right, but the chrome plating is harder still. I notice that all my Nikkor and Canon lenses sport chromed flanges. On the other hand, the hard anodizing on the Novoflex flange adds to the wear resistance...

 

I agree for the Novoflex coatings but again modern technology comes to the rescue. There are now processes like for example, Apticote 350L hard anodising, which provides the same wear resistance of medium carbon steel, together with the added benefit of good lubricity. The only downside of using a hard aluminium alloy for an adapter, is the difficulty in machining to the same micron tolerances as brass, due to a phenomenon called spalling.

 

Wilson

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...