ECohen Posted March 18, 2017 Share #41 Posted March 18, 2017 Advertisement (gone after registration) I got the impression Mr.Q was talking about Leica Macro Adapter #14652 $695. US Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted March 18, 2017 Posted March 18, 2017 Hi ECohen, Take a look here Which macro lens ?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
ramarren Posted March 18, 2017 Share #42 Posted March 18, 2017 My macro equipment now is all Leica R: it all works well on either on M+EVF or SL. Macro-Elmarit-R 60mm f/2.8 + Macro Adapter-R extension tube nets infinity to 1:1. Focusing Bellows-R + Macro-Elmar-R 100 f/4 short mount nets an excellent infinity to 1:1 macro setup. The Focusing Bellows-R manual includes scales for use with 50, 90, and 135 mm lenses too. With a 50mm lens, it can achieve just shy of 3:1 magnification. G Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted March 18, 2017 Share #43 Posted March 18, 2017 I got the impression Mr.Q was talking about Leica Macro Adapter #14652 $695. US Ah yes my mistake sorry. The 14652 is indeed expensive but remains difficult to compare to a mere ring like the OUFRO. 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! Quote 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/270233-which-macro-lens/?do=findComment&comment=3236559'>More sharing options...
ECohen Posted March 19, 2017 Share #44 Posted March 19, 2017 (edited) Yep the 14652 is quite pricey ...That said its on my wish list, to expand my lenses to Macro capability.....I don't want to mess with the individual rings. And I did not choose the Macro Elmar f/4 for its price and limitations. I'm sure the Macro Adapter will be a welcome addition to the 28mm /2.8, 35mm /2, 50mm/2 and the 90 /2.8 that makes up my M kit ....As for sharp and beautiful "bokeh" I don't nit pick or shoot brick walls so I'm very happy........Currently I use a Nikon 105 f/2.8 for close up work and the occasional B&W close up lens. I do also value the Leica M EVF, with all it's flaw's. One can always want ....I try not to over buy and I try not to collect But as many have said and I agree ....I don't think I'll ever sell a Leica lens ...I am sure I'll regret it Man..... Ict you must have everything and know everything Leica (seriously and respectfully ) ..... I'm glad to call you my friend .......I wish we were neighbors....so I could borrow a cup of sugar or that Macro adapter for the day :D Edited March 19, 2017 by ECohen 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted March 19, 2017 Share #45 Posted March 19, 2017 (edited) Haha no problem for a cup of sugar or a glass of Champagne my friend but i'll give you my adapter when you pry it from my cold, dead hands Edited March 19, 2017 by lct 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmahto Posted March 19, 2017 Share #46 Posted March 19, 2017 If your requirement is not a variable extension (as in macro-adaptor-M 14652) then you can use the following cheaper combo. Leica R adapter M (most already has this for using R lens) + Leica 14127 M to R adapter (this is $69 on Adorama). This gives you 40cm of entension compared to max 30cm of expensive macro-adaptor-M 14652. I hope Leica is not reading this. I don't want to cause any impact on bottom line. 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! Quote 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/270233-which-macro-lens/?do=findComment&comment=3237021'>More sharing options...
Magic Posted March 19, 2017 Author Share #47 Posted March 19, 2017 Advertisement (gone after registration) Playing with the Summilux 50 and the Macro Adapter: 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECohen Posted March 19, 2017 Share #48 Posted March 19, 2017 curious ...Do you recall your f/stop? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magic Posted March 19, 2017 Author Share #49 Posted March 19, 2017 If I remember it correctly, I set it to f=2.8 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
roverover Posted April 4, 2017 Share #50 Posted April 4, 2017 (edited) Oufro Ring #16469 taken with 50mm Summilux ASPH lens, Macro-Adapter M ring, M240, cropped 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! Edited April 4, 2017 by roverover 1 Quote 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/270233-which-macro-lens/?do=findComment&comment=3247973'>More sharing options...
wattsy Posted April 4, 2017 Share #51 Posted April 4, 2017 Another example with the goggled adaptor and film. Portra 400, this was probably F8 @1/1000. Remarkable how reliably accurate the focus can be if your lens and adaptor (and camera) are all calibrated properly). There is very little DOF to work with at this distance, even with F8. 5 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rpopescu Posted November 30, 2018 Share #52 Posted November 30, 2018 (edited) Does anyone find that the goggles adapter for the Macro Emarit 90/4 isn't working correctly on the M10? I focus with the rangefinder, and the photo shows the focus point behind where I aimed. Naturally using the evf works correctly. Could it be that the M10's slimmer body results in the adapter's lenses being in the wrong position? Thanks! Edited November 30, 2018 by rpopescu Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UliWer Posted November 30, 2018 Share #53 Posted November 30, 2018 The adapter with goggles was built and can be used with the M-bodies for film, which are even slimmer than the M10. So this should not make any difference. The viewfinder of the M10 was changed with a slightly different magnification - though this should not make any difference for focussing either. You might try to check whether there is a difference between optimal focus using the viewfinder and using liveview. If you see a difference your lens or/and your viewfinder might be out of calibration. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted November 30, 2018 Share #54 Posted November 30, 2018 (edited) 2 hours ago, rpopescu said: Does anyone find that the goggles adapter for the Macro Emarit 90/4 isn't working correctly on the M10? I focus with the rangefinder, and the photo shows the focus point behind where I aimed. Naturally using the evf works correctly. Could it be that the M10's slimmer body results in the adapter's lenses being in the wrong position? It isn't the thickness of the M10 body. With the goggles in place there are three things that contribute to the overall focussing accuracy – the RF, the lens and the goggles – and any one of these could be slightly out. Have you checked focus accuracy of the lens by itself? Working in the close focussing range that the goggles necessitate is quite demanding upon the calibration of all components in the system. I would also ensure that you do your testing on a tripod because any slight movement will lead to suboptimal focus. Edited November 30, 2018 by wattsy Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rpopescu Posted November 30, 2018 Share #55 Posted November 30, 2018 5 minutes ago, wattsy said: It isn't the thickness of the M10 body. Witht he goggles in place there are three things that contribute to the overall focussing accuracy – the RF, the lens and the goggles – and any one of these could be slightly out. Have you checked focus accuracy of the lens by itself? Why not, though? The adapter's lenses are a different distance away from the camera's rangefinder on the M10 vs M240, for example, because the mount flange isn't flat with the body on the M10. The lens focuses very well otherwise. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rpopescu Posted November 30, 2018 Share #56 Posted November 30, 2018 57 minutes ago, UliWer said: The adapter with goggles was built and can be used with the M-bodies for film, which are even slimmer than the M10. So this should not make any difference. That's not true. Body size doesn't matter, but the distance between the outer part of the M mount and the rangefinder windows does, and it is different in the M3 and the M10, as far as I can see, by at least 2mm. I can upload photos as soon as I get to a computer as the phone camera ones, unresized, are far too large. Also the range/viewfinder is great across a number of lenses with the exception of a Summicron 28 at certain distances. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted November 30, 2018 Share #57 Posted November 30, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, rpopescu said: Why not, though? The adapter's lenses are a different distance away from the camera's rangefinder on the M10 vs M240, for example, because the mount flange isn't flat with the body on the M10. I don't think the lens in the adapter plays a role in focussing the Macro Elmar – it serves to magnify the image and provide additional corrections for parallax and frameline size in the viewfinder. The RF in the camera still does the focussing. The adapter is essentially an extension tube with a linkage between the RF roller in the camera and the close range part of the lens focussing cam. The latter of course only comes into play when the lens is mounted upside down. Provided the RF in the camera and the close range part of the lens focussing cam are calibrated correctly, the fact that the M10 has a mount that sits more proud of the body than does the mount on a film body or the M240 (something also true of the M8), shouldn't matter. If your M10 RF is accurate with your other lenses (especially in the close range) you may need to consider that the close range (upside down) part of the focussing cam on your Macro Elmar-M may need looking at. Edited November 30, 2018 by wattsy 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rpopescu Posted November 30, 2018 Share #58 Posted November 30, 2018 Do you have a way to test your adapter and lens on the M10? I think focusing actually is influenced: there are two goggle lenses, not just one, and I find it impossible for me to say whether the distance makes a difference or not because of this reason. I don't think that moving the magnifier/adjustment goggle lenses further or closer away makes virtually no difference, as the rangefinder patches come from both windows/goggle lenses. Has anyone used the adapter with the M10? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted November 30, 2018 Share #59 Posted November 30, 2018 (edited) 16 minutes ago, rpopescu said: Do you have a way to test your adapter and lens on the M10? I think focusing actually is influenced: there are two goggle lenses, not just one, and I find it impossible for me to say whether the distance makes a difference or not because of this reason. I don't think that moving the magnifier/adjustment goggle lenses further or closer away makes virtually no difference, as the rangefinder patches come from both windows/goggle lenses. I don't have an M10 but it is worth pointing out that the mount on the M240 also puts the goggles further away from the RF window than does a film body. The additional lens in the adapter magnifies the secondary RF image equivalent to the magnification that is made in the primary adapter lens. It doesn't matter that both adapter lenses sit a little further away from the body provided they magnify equally. (This gap difference may mean that there are differences between the M10 and a film body in the extent to which parallax and frame size are corrected in the close range but I do not believe that it has an impact on focussing accuracy.) Leica are good at ensuring system accessories remain compatible and if they had determined that the goggled adapter does not work reliably with the M10 (or indeed M8 or M240) they would note this in the relevant manual. To my knowledge, no such note has been made with respect to an incompatibility between the M10 and 90 Macro Elmar-M using the goggled adapter. Edited November 30, 2018 by wattsy Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rpopescu Posted November 30, 2018 Share #60 Posted November 30, 2018 4 minutes ago, wattsy said: Leica are good at ensuring system accessories remain compatible and if they had determined that the goggled adapter does not work reliably with the M10 (or indeed M8 or M240) they would note this in the relevant manual. To my knowledge, no such note has been made with respect to an incompatibility between the M10 and 90 Macro Elmar-M using the goggled adapter. Thanks Wattsy. My lens and adapter predate both the m240 and the 10, so the only thing mentioned is that the thing isn't compatible with the old CL. Regarding compatibility though my dual-range 50/2 won't even mount, while others report it sort of works. I would very much appreciate if anyone who has the goggle adapter and the M10 would chime in as well! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.