Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Guest guy_mancuso

Official News: Converting a 135mm apo framelines

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Bob & Ed:

If you have a 135/2.8, it can be coded as it stands. It has been in Leica's list of codable lenses from the beginning. Carsten has a photo of its zebra stripes on the Leica M8 Lens Codes site.

 

Both versions of the 135/2.8 M included the magnifying goggles (and brought up the 90 framelines in the camera).

 

 

What Guy is doing is not in the books and has nothing at all to do with a 135/2.8. He is asking that his 135 apo have its lens mount removed and replaced with a mount which keys the 90mm frame, but he is asking that that mount be coded with the same zebra stripes as found on the 135/2.8.

 

Thus the M8's electronics see the lens as a 135/2.8, while Guy sees the 90mm frame, which is the smallest frame the M8 offers and is therefore the closest it can come to a 135 frameset. Guy thus has less interpolation to do to 'see' the 135's fov in the finder.

 

Great move by Guy--I would never have thought to ask!--and useful information for anyone else who would like her/his 135/3.4 to key 90mm frames but tell the system that the lens is a 135.

 

Guy got his 135/3.4 coded by slipping in the back door, as it were.

 

Remember, the 135/3.4 is not officially codable according to Leica. What Guy has done is to make use of the functionality already built in to the M8 to make it codable. So if you ever see a coded 135 apo, it's Guy's.

(Or someone else's who has gone this same route.)

 

--HC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bob & Ed:

If you have a 135/2.8, it can be coded as it stands. It has been in Leica's list of codable lenses from the beginning. Carsten has a photo of its zebra stripes on the Leica M8 Lens Codes site.

 

Both versions of the 135/2.8 M have included the magnifying goggles (and brought up the 90 framelines in the camera)....................................

...............................Remember, the 135/3.4 is not officially codable according to Leica. What Guy has done is to make use of the functionality already built in to the M8 to make it codable. So if you ever see a coded 135 apo, it's Guy's.

(Or someone else's who has gone this same route.)

 

--HC

Thanks for the explanation Howard. It seems as if I need to call Leica again, I also thought it was on the list of doables. At the moment the lens is with a third party having it's threads relubed. Leica UK told me it would have to go to Solms for this since they didn't have suitable tools. It's a very nice lens on the M8 if you don't mind the bulk.

 

Bob.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guy_mancuso
Bob & Ed:

If you have a 135/2.8, it can be coded as it stands. It has been in Leica's list of codable lenses from the beginning. Carsten has a photo of its zebra stripes on the Leica M8 Lens Codes site.

 

Both versions of the 135/2.8 M included the magnifying goggles (and brought up the 90 framelines in the camera).

 

 

What Guy is doing is not in the books and has nothing at all to do with a 135/2.8. He is asking that his 135 apo have its lens mount removed and replaced with a mount which keys the 90mm frame, but he is asking that that mount be coded with the same zebra stripes as found on the 135/2.8.

 

Thus the M8's electronics see the lens as a 135/2.8, while Guy sees the 90mm frame, which is the smallest frame the M8 offers and is therefore the closest it can come to a 135 frameset. Guy thus has less interpolation to do to 'see' the 135's fov in the finder.

 

Great move by Guy--I would never have thought to ask!--and useful information for anyone else who would like her/his 135/3.4 to key 90mm frames but tell the system that the lens is a 135.

 

Guy got his 135/3.4 coded by slipping in the back door, as it were.

 

Remember, the 135/3.4 is not officially codable according to Leica. What Guy has done is to make use of the functionality already built in to the M8 to make it codable. So if you ever see a coded 135 apo, it's Guy's.

(Or someone else's who has gone this same route.)

 

--HC

 

Howard excellent explaination of this, your my new writer. LOL

 

I just sent it in overnight to leica NJ, so hopefully i will get this back soon so i can post some thoughts on it. Really great way to make something work as not intended. I think Leica is pretty excited by this idea

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guy thanks - I loved the 135 on film and regretted the difficulty of using it with the M8 - focusing wasn't the issue, simply the framing. I'm in touch with Leica UK tomorrow to get this sorted out.

 

Best

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guy:

 

As always, you are on top of the technical. Thanks for the info.

 

At this point, I will not convert the lens because I still shoot so much film. I have found that it is quite easy to hold the Framline selector on the M8 in the 90 position and shoot.

 

If I ever switch completely to digital, I will consider the conversion at that point.

 

I have yet to code any of my lenses execpt the 50 Summilux Asph, which is in Solms now. I sent it in because the Infinity focus was off for all of my cameras so I asked them to go ahead and code the lens.

 

Richard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Excellent idea, Guy. Thanks for checking into this. I was just about to send out a few lenses for coding ... now I can add this to the collection.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Kurt--

I may be offbase for intruding here, but remember to call ahead of time and arrange the peculiarity with Robert Fisk.

 

In other words, if the service writer who enters the lenses into the system gets a 135 with the instruction to put a 90mm bayonet on it, and to code that bayonet as a 135/2.8, s/he may throw up his/her hands in confusion if not aware of the arrangement.

 

From what Guy said, this is a special arrangement agreed to by New Jersey. For anyone sending a lens to Solms, check with them first.

 

--HC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes it certainly does say 135mm f/2.8 and after close inspection of one of my 135 bug eye lenses I see that the eye mounting is NOT part of the lens mounting ring.

Just to make sure I took the mounting ring off the one that does not work correctly and the monuting ring is a separate part.

So I will be sending one of the 135's off tomorrow for coding and a focus check.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guy_mancuso

Yes i would call Robert or any service center and confirm and also maybe show them is thread. For US folks call Robert and tell him this info came from Christian, i am sure the two have talked about this at length but just be sure

 

Just tell them that PIA mancuso guy said to do this. LOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'll take mine with Pearl inlays, a la George Patton.... :D

 

To be like Patton you'd want ivory inlays. "Only a cheap pimp would have pearl handles."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'll take mine with Pearl inlays, a la George Patton.... :D

 

General Patton was a psychopath but he never carried pearl-handled revolvers. Neither were they matched. They were one WWI vintage Colt Mod. P, and one S&W .357. Both had ivory handles. One journalist who asked him about the mythical pearl handles was regaled with the moderately famous and very Pattonesque retort:

 

"Only a New Orleans pimp would carry a pearl-handled revolver."

 

To the thread. I am plugging for a 135 Apo with goggles. This would give you a 90 mm size frame, and 1 : 1.5 (some say 1 : 1.4) subject magnification, better than the finder magnifyer. There should also be a tailored pouch for the thing. Solms, are you reading me?

 

The old man from the Age of the Colt Peacemaker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mailed Tom Abrahamsson if he could do a goggled 135 APO, as he has produced goggled 3.4/21 lenses in the past. Unfortunately I never received an answer, so I suppose that it is not an easy thing to do. For one thing the focussing track nust be changed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If goggles, then like the DR50/2, i.e. removable.

 

If you meant the 135 with goggles then no they couldn't be removeable. The goggles change the focusing points.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you meant the 135 with goggles then no they couldn't be removeable. The goggles change the focusing points.

 

Well, removable for transport, like the old Summaron would be nice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guy, the more I think about this the more surprising it becomes. It seems to me, and someone will undoubtedly correct me if I'm wrong, that this is the first time ever that Leica has been prepared to "corrupt" a piece of equipment. It is to my mind almost inconceivable that anyone at Leica would have agreed to get involved with something like this even a few weeks ago – so – is this the first battle won by the M8 in the war to establish 18 X 27 digital as the sole future of the M. A modified 135 lens is after all incompatible with all previous M cameras and agreeing to this idea signals that there are no plans for full frame.

 

Leica must be much more upbeat about the M8 than they were even a few months ago which is great news.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guy_mancuso

Well not so sure about full frame but personally i am not counting on it given how close the lenses are to the sensor and what issues it has caused it maybe something that can't be done. Not sure and what value it would really bring. As long as leica can come up with some super wides to cover that area for a good price than as a shooter your pretty much covered. Now more Mpx. and such I can understand but that FF thing is something i sort of given up on. many would argue but it's been almost 3 years with a 1.33 or 1.37 for me and heck i don't miss FF hardly ever anymore. Now this little idea with the 135mm is probably a good thing for Leica which probably has a lot of 135mm in inventory or at least brings some life back to this lens maybe more important for them. There not many used and i bet many have kept this lens from the film days so this is another plus for leica that folks can use this lens or buy it. Frankly i think leica in doing this is a very good idea for them, I did ask too if it was something that was okay to talk about and they are very open to doing this. So overall a very good option for the users of the M8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A modified 135 lens is after all incompatible with all previous M cameras and agreeing to this idea signals that there are no plans for full frame.

 

Leica must be much more upbeat about the M8 than they were even a few months ago which is great news.

 

The only thing they are modifying is the bayonet mount to bring up the 90mm frame lines. This will in no way affect the focusing of the lens on any other M camera and you can always move the frame selector switch/lever to bring up the lines for framing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue., Read more about our Privacy Policy