rodluvan Posted September 21, 2013 Share #1 Posted September 21, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hello, I'm what you might call a novice in the leica world. I've owned a M2 and an M3 for a few years, but I've never gotten the photography on the way, much to do with difficulties in dev'ing, finding film etc. Anyway, now I've finally begun and I've taken a few roles with the rigid type II summicron 50mm mounted on the M3. Yesterday, I bought a ƒ/2.8 35mm summaron with googles as I figured I could use it both on the M3 (with the googles) and the M2 (without). Now, it works like a charm on the M3, but removing the googles and mounting the lens to the M2 doesn't trigger the 35mm viewfinder frames (it shows the 50mm). I read a very short insinuation somewhere that this might have something to do with the lens not being adapted to M2. Can someone confirm this and perhaps suggest some solution. I could o/c assume the edge of the frame on the M2 (or even trigger the lever to check), with not much error, but will the rangefinder be correct? The new darling on the M3 Thanks in advance! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 21, 2013 Posted September 21, 2013 Hi rodluvan, Take a look here 35mm frame not showing up when mounting summaron 35 to M2. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
joeswe Posted September 21, 2013 Share #2 Posted September 21, 2013 The goggled 35mm lenses are not supposed to be used without goggles on any M. They will not focus correctly and they will show the wrong framelines (50mm). The goggles work in a way that they reduce the magnification of the finder, so the 35mm field of view fits into the 50mm framelines.This is why the lenses actuate the 50mm framelines. This works the same way on the M2 and the M3. You will have to use this lens with goggles on the M2 (it will show you the correct FOV, but at a smaller magnification than with the M3) or get a Summaron without goggles. The only alternative with the goggles removed would be to use scale focusing on the M2 and fix the frameline preview lever to 35mm position with adhesive tape. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
a.noctilux Posted September 21, 2013 Share #3 Posted September 21, 2013 Hello, Nice find. You can use your Summaron/M3 as is with every Leica M (...except MD/MDa/MD2 of course for viewing). You don't need to remove the "eyes/goggles" to use it on your M2. The field (50 selected) and focus will be correctted by the goggles. Enjoy this excellent lens on your 2 M bodies. Arnaud Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rodluvan Posted September 21, 2013 Author Share #4 Posted September 21, 2013 Thank you both, Even if it wasn't the answer I'd hope for, it saves me some preoccupation. I believe this was answered, but to really be sure I understood correctly could I bother you with a explicit statement; Will the rangefinder and the focus not be correct if I use the 35mm without the googles on the M2 (assuming I use it even thought the 35mm frame isn't visible)? I must use the googles both for the focus and not only for the frame, right? This strikes me as rather odd, besides the googles, aren't the 35 summaron with and without the googles identical? Is it a mechanical coupling that's lacking? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Geschlecht Posted September 21, 2013 Share #5 Posted September 21, 2013 Hello rodluvan, Welcome to the Forum. Their are a number of versions of the 35mm F2.8 Summaron. They are probably all the same optically but there are a number of versions of lens mounts, etc mechanically. Some are designed to key the 50mm frame. Some are designed to key the 35mm frame. All focus correctly on the various cameras they were intended for. Whether screw mount or M3 or other M. The 0.45X sized image which results when a wide angle "goggled" lens is combined with the 0.72X sized image from an M2 is still sufficiently large enough magnification for accurate focussing with a lens that is 35mm in length. The "googles" on the wide angle lenses widen the field covered & reduce the image to 2/3d's of the finder's image size. Just as the "goggles on the 135mm F2.8 Elmarit narrow the field & enlarge the image to 3/2's of the finder's image size. Best Regards, Michael Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Geschlecht Posted September 21, 2013 Share #6 Posted September 21, 2013 Hello Again rodluvan, It would appear to me, from looking at your photo, that the lens you have was attached to the "goggles" with 2 screws from the front which were NOT meant to be routinely removed Not 1 screw from the top which was meant to be Routinely removable. As far as I know the "goggled" F2.8, 35mm Summaron only came with the NOT routinely removable "goggles". The F3.5, 35mm Summaron is the model that came both ways. And more. Because you removed the 2 screws in the front & removed the add-on finder: The lens without the finder will still key the 50mm frame as it did with the finder attached. This is because the device that keys the frames is a cam on the lens mount. Not the added optics. The lens, as you have it, should still focus correctly. You have a number of options: 1. You can leave the added finder off & disregard the 50mm frame when focussing & framing with your M2. There will be no 35mm frame. 2. After you have focussed with the 50mm frame in place you can pull the frameing lever outward. The frame finder lever will then key the 35mm frame. 3. You can replace the "goggles" & focus & frame using the 50mm frame with the diminished image size. 4. (NOT RECOMMENDED) You can have the frame finder cam reground or regrind it yourself. After this the frame keyed will always be the 35mm which will still be the frame keyed by the lens with the "goggles" put back on. If you are considering doing this you might talk to me first. There are a lot of reasons NOT to do this. 5. (NOT RECOMMENDED) You can wedge or tape the framing lever to keep it at 35mm. This can damage the frame finder mechanism. Best Regards, Michael Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rodluvan Posted September 22, 2013 Author Share #7 Posted September 22, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hello Again rodluvan, It would appear to me, from looking at your photo, that the lens you have was attached to the "goggles" with 2 screws from the front which were NOT meant to be routinely removed Yes, this was one of the thing that surprised me, that they made me unscrew a pair of googles that were supposed to be optional. Turns out my surprise was well founded. Because you removed the 2 screws in the front & removed the add-on finder: The lens without the finder will still key the 50mm frame as it did with the finder attached. This is because the device that keys the frames is a cam on the lens mount. Not the added optics. Thinking about it, this makes perfect sense. 1. You can leave the added finder off & disregard the 50mm frame when focussing & framing with your M2. There will be no 35mm frame. 2. After you have focussed with the 50mm frame in place you can pull the frameing lever outward. The frame finder lever will then key the 35mm frame. Ok, here is where I feel I get mixed answers or I'm being unusually dense; With the googles removed and lens mounted to M2 I understand that the 35mm viewfinder frames will not be triggered (I will see the narrower 50mm frame), but will focus be correct or will it be off? 3. You can replace the "goggles" & focus & frame using the 50mm frame with the diminished image size. Again, sorry if Im being daft, replace with what? 4. (NOT RECOMMENDED) You can have the frame finder cam reground or regrind it yourself. After this the frame keyed will always be the 35mm which will still be the frame keyed by the lens with the "goggles" put back on. If you are considering doing this you might talk to me first. There are a lot of reasons NOT to do this. 5. (NOT RECOMMENDED) You can wedge or tape the framing lever to keep it at 35mm. This can damage the frame finder mechanism. Thank you but no thank you, I will follow your recommendation and avoid this. Knowing myself it wont end too well (and the operation is not reversible as I understand it). Best Regards, Michael Cheers, Michael, it's been great getting this many knowledgable replies this quick. Great forum and forum contributors. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rodluvan Posted September 22, 2013 Author Share #8 Posted September 22, 2013 UPDATE: I tried it and no, it won't focus correctly with the googles off. Well, that's that then. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted September 22, 2013 Share #9 Posted September 22, 2013 The goggles alter the viewfinder field to cover 35mm but they also alter the view of the rangefinder so that is why a goggled lens WILL NOT focus correctly without the goggles. I understand that the focus scale on the lens is also altered to display the correct distance aligned with the rangefinder, so you can't use it to guess distance unless you use a smaller aperture to increase dof to make up for any error. Simple answer - it works fine on any M with it's goggles! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
a.noctilux Posted September 22, 2013 Share #10 Posted September 22, 2013 UPDATE: I tried it and no, it won't focus correctly with the googles off. Well, that's that then. Because the focusing pitches are differently machined. Left large pitch on Summaron/M3 (goggled, focus to 65cm), next one is small pitch on M2 model. 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/213234-35mm-frame-not-showing-up-when-mounting-summaron-35-to-m2/?do=findComment&comment=2426484'>More sharing options...
Michael Geschlecht Posted September 22, 2013 Share #11 Posted September 22, 2013 Hello Everybody, I'm a bit confused here. I understand why the 50mm DR Summicron requires the "goggles" for close up focussing between approximately 1 meter & approximately 50cm. The movable rangefinder patch needs to be displaced relative to the immovable rangefinder patch seen in the viewfinder. But the 35mm Summaron "goggles", as far as I know, only widen the angle of vision of everything seen together thru the range/viewfinder. I see that the M3 lens threads are coarser than the M2 lens threads. But: I don't see a difference in the pitches of the 2 lens's focussing threads. Also: The angles of rotation of the 2 lenses to get from 1 distance to the other are the same & the depth of travel for the lens elements within the cutout is the same. So: Why is it that the measured distances shown by the rangefinder patches don't correlate with the engraved distances? Keeping in mind: The focussing cam on the lens moves the position of the rangefinder patches & the position of the viewfinder frames together at the same time. Hello rodluvan, What do you mean by the lens won't focus "correctly"? Focussing "correctly" means the number on the lens barrel (ie: 5 meters) is the same distance from what is being focussed on as the actual measured distance from the film plane. The approximate position of the film plane in "M" film cameras is located at the back of the accessory shoe. With the camera/lens on a tripod: Measure from the back of the accessory shoe to the point of focus. That distance should match the engraved distance. Framing is something else. The frame projected should be the 50mm frame which shows a smaller angle of coverage than the 35mm lens covers. Also: By "replace goggles" I meant: To put them back on". NOT :To change them for something else. Best Regards, Michael Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rodluvan Posted September 22, 2013 Author Share #12 Posted September 22, 2013 Hello Everybody, Hello rodluvan, What do you mean by the lens won't focus "correctly"? Michael Hi Michael! What I did was mount the 50mm summicron onto the M3 and the 35 summaron without googles on the M2 and I put them equidistance from an object. Then I focused the M3 and found it to be just over 1m according to the lens distance scale. Then I focused the M2 and the lens distance scale read much less than 1m, closer to 0.75m. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Geschlecht Posted September 22, 2013 Share #13 Posted September 22, 2013 Hello Again rodluvan, Were the cameras & lenses on a tripod placed at the same spot each time? Please try this again on a fixed tripod using only the M3 & just change the lenses without moving the camera. Do the same again separately with the M2. In your test already done: Did the engraved distances on the lenses correlate with actual distances measured with a tape or ruler? It is important to measure with a tape or ruler as well as looking at what is in the range/viewfinder & what is engraved. Best Regards, Michael Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rodluvan Posted September 24, 2013 Author Share #14 Posted September 24, 2013 Hi Michael, I will see if I get the time to set things up this weekend, but frankly, imo the on-lens-difference far outweighed the possible errors created by the setup. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted September 24, 2013 Share #15 Posted September 24, 2013 Hi Michael, I will see if I get the time to set things up this weekend, but frankly, imo the on-lens-difference far outweighed the possible errors created by the setup. ... And I suppose you will try also the 35 WITH goggles on...I would be surprised if you get a different scale-read distance with and without... , it would mean (I think) that the goggle's lens in front of the RF small window (at left, seeing from front) in some way "deflects" the entering lightrays... which I don't think... (*), it ought to be a pure "enlarger" ("reducer", indeed) to match the dimension of the image on the primary VF/RF window... (*) even if... thinking better... doesn't something similar happens with the goggles of the Summicron DR ? with them, you make the RF images coinciding at a distance of 50cm....a distance on which the Leica RF "as is" can NOT coincide.. .. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Geschlecht Posted September 25, 2013 Share #16 Posted September 25, 2013 Hello Luigi, I think that with the 50mm DR the circumstances are somewhat different: With the 35mm lens I think that the "goggles" simply widen the field of view. While the "goggles" on the 50mm DR lens have to precisely move the image of the moving rangefinder rectangle laterally to a new place before accurate close-up focussing can begin. Best Regards, Michael Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rodluvan Posted September 25, 2013 Author Share #17 Posted September 25, 2013 On the other hand I haven't yet had my first roll of film developed for the 35 (with the googles) so it might be entirely off (not that I judge it as likely). I will get the film back today. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted September 25, 2013 Share #18 Posted September 25, 2013 On the other hand I haven't yet had my first roll of film developed for the 35 (with the googles) so it might be entirely off (not that I judge it as likely). I will get the film back today. That shows the plus of digital... tests ready to check.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted September 25, 2013 Share #19 Posted September 25, 2013 Hello Luigi, I think that with the 50mm DR the circumstances are somewhat different: With the 35mm lens I think that the "goggles" simply widen the field of view. While the "goggles" on the 50mm DR lens have to precisely move the image of the moving rangefinder rectangle laterally to a new place before accurate close-up focussing can begin. Best Regards, Michael Me too thought so of the goggled 35s... but never pondered on the fact that a goggle unit (the DR, and its "twin" SOMKY unit) which makes "something more" indeed does exist.... hum... can there be some relation with the fact that some goggled 35s do focus to .65m instead of .70m of the ungoggled ones ? .70 m ought to be the "natural" limit of the M RF... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Geschlecht Posted September 25, 2013 Share #20 Posted September 25, 2013 Hello Luigi, The "natural limit" stopping point of the M3 rangefinder is 1 meter - With a 50mm lens. Since 35/50 = approximately 2/3: The "natural close focus limit" of a 35mm lens should be approximately 2/3d's of 1 which is .66+ Since we know many Leitz/Leica lenses focus closer than their marked limit: 65cm is certainly well within acceptable parameters. Best Regards, Michael Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.