Leica Macro Adapter M

[dpitt]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

9 hours ago, Crem said:

@dpitt thank you for the response and info! I have both the old goggles macro adapter M and the newer one made for digital. My hope was to use both adapters with the latest version of the 90mm macro elmar (11670). Basically one lens I can use for both digital and film by using different adapters.

When I use the goggles adapter + latest macro elmar 90 + M10-R with good RF calibration I end up with image that are very blurry. I compared the goggled rangefinder focus to live view and it appears the image is somewhere around 5 - 8 centimeters out of focus at minimum distance. Basically unusable.

I can only think of three possibilities:

1. The old goggles adapter isn't compatible with the latest macro elmar.
2. The goggles are out of calibration.
3. My latest 90 macro elmar is defective in some way when used with goggles.

Unfortunately I don't have the old version of the 90 macro elmar to compare with. I'm leaning toward #1 or #2 above, but I don't really have a way to test.

 

If you watch the RED dot video, they discuss the adapter briefly and mention the differences between the old and new adapter. Around 1:11:00 they start discussing the macro adapter M and the old one.

Red Dot forum the Macro issue

To sum it up about the new adapter:

1. It  works with any M lens longer than 35mm. Any M lens will fit but wider than 35 mm will not focus at all.
2. The old one is rangefinder coupled, the new one is not. The RF coupling should work with all M lenses that can mount but some can not mount because the goggles are in the way
3. For a LV camera the newer adapter is more suited because the adapter allows infinity focus when used with the 90 Macro mounted and collapsed (adapter in shortest position)
   So in LV you have access to 1:2 macro and infinity without dismounting the lens and removing the adapter
4. They mention that the 90 old and new  work both equally well on the new adapter.

 

 

[Advertisement]

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

[dpitt]

10 hours ago, Crem said:

Glad to hear the older lens version works with both adapters. If I could go back I would have purchased the older version of the lens. Hopefully the problem is the goggles, but I suspect there is a chance it's a problem with the inner helicoid of the lens. I'll never know for sure unless I buy/borrow more copies to test.

I also suspect that your 90 macro is slightly miscalibrated, so you should probably notice issues at short distances with RF focusing.
With the adapter any faults are magnified by a big factor of course.

[Crem]

5 hours ago, dpitt said:

I also suspect that your 90 macro is slightly miscalibrated, so you should probably notice issues at short distances with RF focusing.
With the adapter any faults are magnified by a big factor of course.

It very well could be. After a lot of playing around here is what I've noticed (all testing with goggles attached to the latest version 90):

• Lens set to infinity: Focus with goggles attached is somewhat in focus. Not perfect, but I can clearly make out what's in the image.
• Lens set to minimum focus:  The lens stops being rangefinder coupled. Comparing live view to the RF the focus is completely out of sync. Live view is extremely blurry compared to the RF.
• Lens set to the spot where RF coupling stops (maybe 5% - 10% away from min focus): The RF and live view are still in disagreement on focus (live view is very blurry). I'd say it's slightly less out of sync at that point compared to minimum focus.

The fact that the rangefinder seems to be decoupled from the lens at minimum focus seems like a major red flag. Any idea if this is normal? I'm guessing not.

My conclusion:

1. The lens has two machined rangefinder coupling paths. The inner (for the goggles) and the outer (for the body). The outer path works perfectly. The inner one clearly has problems with my copy of the goggles.
2. The goggles are somehow out of calibration, but I'm not even sure if they can be calibrated.

Thanks again for all the info @dpitt. I'm going to see if my dealer can test everything out. Perhaps they have extra copies of each (or at least the lens). My guess is the lens is the problem, but I haven't proven it.

[dpitt]

37 minutes ago, Crem said:

Thanks again for all the info @dpitt. I'm going to see if my dealer can test everything out. Perhaps they have extra copies of each (or at least the lens). My guess is the lens is the problem, but I haven't proven it.

No worries.
I wonder if you notice any issue without adapter? When comparing LV with the RF, focus should be spot on without adapter, otherwise any small issues will just get bigger with the goggles mounted. AFAIK there is only one coupling path. Putting the goggles on, just translates the path to closer distances. And the optical goggle elements needs to compensate that, so your RF will think it is working with distances > 0,7m while they are in fact closer than 0,7m.

There is one distance that you can check yourself. At infinity and F4 (maximum focus distance, minimal DOF), the lens without goggles should be in focus on objects far away. Put the lens at the infinity stop and then check it on your computer screen. Use an object at the horizon, or the moon 🙂, with 90mm lenses = it needs to be as far away as possible.
At the same time your RF patch should indicate that this object is in focus in this position.
If that is the case, I think your lens is fine.

With the goggles, and fully collapsed lens, the same should be true at infinity position when you check the image on the computer screen. Again the would prove that the lens, mount and distance of the goggles extension is exact. But of course the RF is not supposed to work this way, that only works when the lens is extended.

Checking the other distances with LV is possible but not fool proof...

[lct]

Just for info, the new adapter can be used and focused with lenses as wide as 21mm and even 15mm in my experience. Also, both new and old adapters allow infinity focus in LV mode when used with the Macro-Elmar 90/4 mounted and collapsed.

Edited May 4, 2024 by lct

[nykv]

Could a forum member kindly tell from personal experience, if the old macro adapter with goggles 14409 can be used with another 90mm lens on film and focus correctly for close-ups? I understand, that there will be a gap because the Macro-Elmar 4/90 goes to 0.8m, while practically all other M 90mm lenses only go to 1m.

[charlesphoto99]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

2 hours ago, nykv said:

Could a forum member kindly tell from personal experience, if the old macro adapter with goggles 14409 can be used with another 90mm lens on film and focus correctly for close-ups? I understand, that there will be a gap because the Macro-Elmar 4/90 goes to 0.8m, while practically all other M 90mm lenses only go to 1m.

The answer is no, unless you have a unicorn film M that has live view. The 90 Macro-Elmar is specially calibrated for the adaptor, unlike other 90mm lenses. 

With live view, just about any M lens can be used with the adaptor (it's really just an extension tube). 

[nykv]

Thank you, Charles. I'm not sure you are referring to the older version with goggles and I'm using an M3.

[lct]

The old version with goggles works in RF mode on digital cameras but i have no experience with it on film. Contrary to the new version, which works with any M-mount lens, the old version is made for the Macro-Elmar 90/4 only. Putting another 90mm lens on it would only work in extreme macro mode, i suspect, and the rangefinder would be inaccurate this way, but i never tried TBH.

[charlesphoto99]

7 hours ago, nykv said:

Thank you, Charles. I'm not sure you are referring to the older version with goggles and I'm using an M3.

Yes, old version with goggles. Doubt that would work at all with an M3 - I think the goggles are for a .72, 28mm frame finder, but I could be wrong. 

[charlesphoto99]

11 hours ago, nykv said:

Thank you, Charles. I'm not sure you are referring to the older version with goggles and I'm using an M3.

Hey, just checked the goggles and 90 Macro-Elmar on my M3, and it works! Nice view as well with the M3 finder. Bit fiddly to take on and off compared to my M10's. 

[nykv]

Wow, a great photog like you takes his time to look into this detail!!! Thanks are only words  

Let's NOT look at digicams nor at the newer adaptor, which is a helicoid without info to the rangefinders' windows (no goggles).

I was thinking: all lenses, all 90mm included (hence also the 4.0/90 Macro) report to the Messucher in the body (70 years or younger, no difference - this feature being kept the same). 

OK, the 4.0/90 Macro goes to 0.8m, while all other 90mm lenses only to 1m.

But any 90mm set at infinity and with the goggled old macro adapter attached, should show a correctly focused image, using only the viewfinder.

(It might even be working with a 90mm lens set at closer distances than infinity, that I don't know and I can't test).

Be it this combo can only be used at one magnification (with my 90mm lens set at infinity) = only at one distance (just as the close-up set on the 4.0/80 on the Mamiya 7 or the close-up set on the Nikonos with the 35mm) I'm happy I got a googled Macro adapter now for my old 90mm Summicron!

I don't have a M10/M11 with live view to test it, but friends do. They're on holiday in different spots at the moment. By the time one of them will be back, I'll hopefully have my newest aquisition in the mail and then the test-bw-film processed.

 

Polite suggestion to the mods, (Jaap being retired like me from the same kind of >4 decades long close-up work):

 

Isn't this a lens topic, rather than a M10 theme?! 
Could you please kindly consider moving this thread to the Leica M lenses subdivision?

Hartelijk dank, minheer  

Tot ziens!

 

 

 

Edited April 22 by nykv

[lct]

29 minutes ago, nykv said:

OK, the 4.0/90 Macro goes to 0.8m, while all other 90mm lenses only to 1m.

0.9m on the Skopar 90/2.8.

30 minutes ago, nykv said:

But any 90mm set at infinity and with the goggled old macro adapter attached, should show a correctly focused image, using only the viewfinder.

Would only work on closeups. Here at about 0.7m when the Skopar 90/2.8 is focused at infinity. Beware that the adapter and/or the lens can be damaged this way. The adapter with goggles has its own focus cam designed for the Macro-Elmar 90/4 only.

M11, Skopar 90/2.8, f/2.8, macro-adapter v1

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!

 

[nykv]

Infinity is infinity for all lenses. So mount the Macro adapter, set my 90mm lens at infinity (always) and connect it = ca. 0,7m.

The 4.0/90 Macro focuses alone to 0.8m (1:6.8x = 170 x 245cm) source Leica website, so the estimate would be:

 

90mm lens + old goggled Macro adapter ca. DINA5 (rough estimate and not 3:2 proportions like our images). 

With the rangefinder of a film camera -or M9- (about 14,90x21cm or 5.8x8.3 inches).

At 1.0m the 90mm has an object field of 22 x 33 cm = ratio 1:9

The image quality of a 75mm Summicron with its floating elements (which can't get that close) or of the 4.0/90 Macro is in a different league.

Thank you very much, dear lct!

 

Edited April 22 by nykv

[charlesphoto99]

Note that I couldn't mount my 90mm 2.8 (latest model) on the goggles unless I focused it towards infinity, and then I couldn't focus anywhere near as close as the 90mm Macro-Elmar. @lct is correct in that there is a differing helicoid with the Macro-Elmar from other lenses that is made for the goggles. My 50 Lux Asph fit fine on it, same with my 75 Summicron, though you could tell the goggles focus cam felt a bit 'rough' with those lenses, but worked.  So it really depends on the lens and how the helicoid is designed how well the old goggles will work. 

[nykv]

3 minutes ago, charlesphoto99 said:

Note that I couldn't mount my 90mm 2.8 (latest model) on the goggles unless I focused it towards infinity, and then I couldn't focus anywhere near as close as the 90mm Macro-Elmar. @lct is correct in that there is a differing helicoid with the Macro-Elmar from other lenses that is made for the goggles. My 50 Lux Asph fit fine on it, same with my 75 Summicron, though you could tell the goggles focus cam felt a bit 'rough' with those lenses, but worked.  So it really depends on the lens and how the helicoid is designed how well the old goggles will work. 

Yes, thank you Charles! But with any other focal length than 90mm focus will always be off, I'm afraid. Not to mention tolerances regarding the actual focal length of the 90mm Summicron I have...

[charlesphoto99]

20 minutes ago, nykv said:

Yes, thank you Charles! But with any other focal length than 90mm focus will always be off, I'm afraid. Not to mention tolerances regarding the actual focal length of the 90mm Summicron I have...

YMMV even with the 90 'Cron. The focus plane is very tight with a 90 at that distance, even stopped down to f11/16. Note that a 75, 50 or 35 will get you much closer with the adapter, albeit with less working distance and wrong rf coupling. All depends on what you intend with it I suppose, but with the price of film and processing these days, not sure I would want to experiment too much versus just picking up a 90 Macro-Elmar for the goggles. Great little travel lens as well compared to the 'Cron, which I've owned before and liked (also had the 90 APO once which was overkill imo). All depends on what you hope to achieve I guess. Best of luck! 

[o2mpx]

Found out a side benefit for the macro adapter from an episode of red dot forum when used with the collapsible Elmer f4 that the lens barrel doesn’t need to be extended when used together for regular shooting. 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[lct]

No need to go elsewhere see above post #25 😉

 

Edited August 24 by lct