Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi all

I'd like to purchase a Minolta M-Rokkor 40mm f2 to use on my M9 (which was adjusted to my Summilux 35 this March by Leica) to get an even lighter (and slimmer) travel kit. Apart from fungus, scratches and dust in the lens - do I need to worry about the focus being off?

Thanks!

Link to post
Share on other sites

You mean M-Rokkor for Minolta CLE (not CL) i guess. Normally not but the fact that your camera has been adjusted for another lens may pose problem especially if the latter suffers from focus shift contrary to the Rokkor. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

vor 4 Minuten schrieb lct:

You mean M-Rokkor for Minolta CLE (not CL) i guess. Normally not but the fact that your camera has been adjusted for another lens may pose problem especially if the latter suffers from focus shift contrary to the Rokkor. 

Correct, I'm looking for the later CLE version, since I read that the sloped focus cam of the first version is detrimental to a precise focus. Also the coatings are said to be improved with the later version.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Gerade eben schrieb mdemeyer:

The latter version has a straight cut rather than tapered focus cam.  I have the early one and no problems on my M10.  Can’t speak to the M9, however. 

Latter version might be safer...

Interesting to know. I'll search for the later version because of the better coatings. With my Tele Elmarit 90 I already have one flare-queen in my kit... 😂

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've had 40 CLE version on M-E. Not a problem, if not better than 35 lens for 35mm framing. Sharp on f2. 

 

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!

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

vor 4 Stunden schrieb AceVentura1986:

Do the two versions have distinct markings so as to distinguish them? If not, then how can you tell?

The earlier version (CL; with sloped cam, single coating) had marked its serial number on the front ring, like Leitz / Leica lenses are marked.

The later version had its serial number on the lens barrel (CLE; with even cam, multicoated), so no serial number on the front ring.

Edited by One LCF
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 5/22/2019 at 6:42 PM, One LCF said:

(which was adjusted to my Summilux 35 this March by Leica)

Are you sure about this? It isn't Leica normal policy to adjust a body to a lens although I'm sure it could be overridden. What happens when focus is off is Leica ask for both the lens and body to be sent to them so they can check which is out of spec and adjust it back to its original tolerances. This is so another variable isn't introduced as would happen if the body was adjusted to the specific lens. So if Leica have done their normal job using another lens shouldn't be a problem and focus will be accurate if the other lens is also within tolerance.  

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

vor 4 Minuten schrieb 250swb:

Are you sure about this? It isn't Leica normal policy to adjust a body to a lens although I'm sure it could be overridden. What happens when focus is off is Leica ask for both the lens and body to be sent to them so they can check which is out of spec and adjust it back to its original tolerances. This is so another variable isn't introduced as would happen if the body was adjusted to the specific lens. So if Leica have done their normal job using another lens shouldn't be a problem and focus will be accurate if the other lens is also within tolerance.  

Actually I'm not sure whether Leica adjusted the camera body or the lens. As you mention, adjusting a camera body to an out-of-spec lens would be counter-productive, as other (in-spec) lenses would show focus errors.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, One LCF said:

The earlier version (CL; with sloped cam, single coating) had marked its serial number on the front ring, like Leitz / Leica lenses are marked.

The later version had its serial number on the lens barrel (CLE; with even cam, multicoated), so no serial number on the front ring.

Also the focus tabs are different.

M-Rokkor 40/2 for CL:

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!

M-Rokkor 40/2 for CLE:

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

vor 59 Minuten schrieb lct:

Also the focus tabs are different.

M-Rokkor 40/2 for CL:

M-Rokkor 40/2 for CLE:

Excellent. Additionally the newer CLE version is labeled with "M-ROKKOR", while the old CL version with "M-ROKKOR-QF".

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have the later version of the CLE for my M10 and it is a tiny and superb lens. Mine was "shaved" to activate the 35mm framelines which I prefer. The CLE version is easier for filters because it's a common 40.5mm.

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.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...