Which macro lens ?

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

13 hours ago, wattsy said:

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.

You are correct that the mechanical geometry cannot change, as the register distance must always be the same, but changing part of the optical system (in this case the distance between the lenses of the goggles and the RF windows/first optically active component in the camera body) may certainly make a difference. The whole focusing optics are basically telescope systems, and pulling a telescope out or in changes not only the magnification, but also various other parameters like the position of pupils and focal length.

Calculating the effects of the extra 2 mm distance on these goggles is quite beyond my capabilities, however  .

[a.noctilux]

Concerning Macro-Elmar-M 4/90 which I use on M10 and other Ms without trouble, I don't see any focus flaws with the Macro-Adapter.

So, to see what I "missed", I took time to clear things out.

Compared the "focus" M10 + x1.25 mag. with 90 MEM + adapter focus with Visoflex 020 focus with x10 ...

Net results, no discrepency in my setup ☺️.

[Advertisement]

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

[a.noctilux]

14 hours ago, rpopescu said:

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!

Set focus to 1.5m-2m before mounting DR to digital M.

One thing to know is when mounting Summicron DR is to set the distance ring to about 1.5m to 2m to clearance of the focus cam ring not to knock something

inside digital M.

I learned this since M8 🧐 as I wanted to use the DR with it.

For M10, have a look here

[wattsy]

1 hour ago, jaapv said:

but changing part of the optical system (in this case the distance between the lenses of the goggles and the RF windows/first optically active component in the camera body) may certainly make a difference. The whole focusing optics are basically telescope systems, and pulling a telescope out or in changes not only the magnification, but also various other parameters like the position of pupils and focal length.

I take your point (and had already considered this) but I don't think the lenses in the adapter are optically very significant. Both magnify the image slightly and the primary one also presumably provides additional parallax correction. I don't believe the different placement of these lenses in relation to the RF glass of the various flavours of M camera impacts on the basic focussing accuracy of the camera RF when using the adapter and lens.

[rpopescu]

So I received a reply from the store where I bought the lens saying that the adapter should work fine with the M10 and offered to calibrate the lens.

I've tested it again today, focus seems just fine in the close to 7m range anyway. I'm not keen on sending it away so soon after I've just got it, to be honest.