Goggled Macro-Adapter-M is coded but not recognized by M10

[Guest Nowhereman]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have the Macro-Elmar-90 and the goggled Macro-Adapter-M, both 6-bit coded, that I bought as a set a few years ago. Looking at pictures taken with the M9 and MM shortly after I bought the set, I see that, in Lightroom, the Macro-Adapter-M is correctly identified.

 

This morning I shot with this set on the M10 and see that the Macro-Adapter-M is no longer recognized, despite being coded: I had the lens recognition set to Automatic and the Macro-Adapter-M was identified in Lightroom as a "50 Summicron 1:2/50 Leitz" (the manual setting I use for the DR Summicron). On the other hand, the Macro-Elmar-90 used without the macro adapter is recognized.

 

It's mildly annoying that a coded (goggled) Macro-Adapter-M should not be recognized, although it is in the list of lenses that can be entered manually. Looks like Leica deleted the automatic recognition after the starting to sell the new, un-goggled Macro-Adapter-M.

[Advertisement]

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

[happymac]

Why not repaint the existing code and changing it to the newer one... ;-)

[Simon]

Wouldn’t they share the same code?

 

I noticed that the M10 didn’t recognise (or gave a generic response) to the newer adapter as well. Perhaps this is because the newer adapter is marketed as a universal adapter to suit many lenses and unfortunately this has had the effect of retroactively disabling the goggled adapter code.

 

A minor annoyance, but it sounds like you’ll just have to get used to manually setting the lense when using your goggles.

[Guest Nowhereman]

Understood, but I bought the set only 3 or 4 years ago and the both the lens and the adapter was coded, and advertised as such. In that context, it's surprising and not pleasing to see it's now not recognized by the M10.

[Simon]

My suggestion is to have the goggled adapter recoded to the 90 Macro Elmar M lens if you only ever intend to use it with that lens.

[wattsy]

What was the situation with the M240? Is it possible that this is just a bug or oversight in the M10 lens recognition firmware? It seems very un-Leica-like to me (at least the Leica of old) to change the way something like this would work, especially for marketing reasons.

 

Perhaps this is because the newer adapter is marketed as a universal adapter to suit many lenses and unfortunately this has had the effect of retroactively disabling the goggled adapter code.

 

If that's the case than that is a classic example of the marketing people holding sway over the engineers. Of course, any M mount lens can be used but the newer (non-goggled) adaptor is clearly designed for the new version of the 90 Macro-Elmar – both were updated in concert to solve the (pain in the arse) problem of having to remove the adaptor to use the lens outside the "macro" focus distance range. The 90 Macro-Elmar is also the only modern M lens that has been properly designed to be used on an extension tube.

 

it's surprising and not pleasing to see it's now not recognized by the M10.

 

 

Yes, agreed.

[AllNoAll]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Thanks for this info! I have an M10 on the way, and already own the goggled macro adapter that came with the 90 macro kit. Did they update the firmware on the M10 to recognize this adapter? Does the goggled adapter work fine on the M10 using the rangefinder to focus?

[a.noctilux]

2 hours ago, AllNoAll said:

Thanks for this info! I have an M10 on the way, and already own the goggled macro adapter that came with the 90 macro kit. Did they update the firmware on the M10 to recognize this adapter? Does the goggled adapter work fine on the M10 using the rangefinder to focus?

I have one set of Macro-Elmar-M 90 + Macro-adapter-M (goggled) not coded.

The combo works fine with RF of my M including M10.

The angle finder (12531) which worked on older M needs 12-14mm finder adapter on M10.

So I use Visoflex 020 more than OVF.

Side note, when the 020 mounted, I preset with OVF, my prefered use style, then move to Visoflex 020 (can be tilted up, not fair for vertical pic) if I need more precision focus/compose.

[Gobert]

Mine is recognised om M10, M10R and M10M

[AllNoAll]

On 12/21/2021 at 3:57 AM, a.noctilux said:

I have one set of Macro-Elmar-M 90 + Macro-adapter-M (goggled) not coded.

The combo works fine with RF of my M including M10.

The angle finder (12531) which worked on older M needs 12-14mm finder adapter on M10.

So I use Visoflex 020 more than OVF.

Side note, when the 020 mounted, I preset with OVF, my prefered use style, then move to Visoflex 020 (can be tilted up, not fair for vertical pic) if I need more precision focus/compose.

Thanks! As always you are a wealth of knowledge!

[a.noctilux]

Thanks Allan.

For so long time that I don't bother with coded/not coded lenses.

I use on my Ms so many non codable/third parties lenses that I choose simple way of 'old style' not worrying of the type in use.

Another side, I know that the lens in use outputs 'RAW data' (vignetting or what else), not corrected in the camera.