M10 closest focus distance?

[Masukami]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Dear members

I always believed the rangefinder coupling on Leica Ms had a minimum focus distance of 0.7m (about 28 in) - the same as most of their lenses. 

Today I was surprised when reading the following article, where the author mentions his M10 operates down to 0.6m (about 24 in)

https://jacktaka.com/voigtlander-35mm-f2

He states "In fact, my M10’s rangefinder couples all the way down to 0.6m... ".

 

I only have Leica glass, so I am unable to test this for myself.  

 

There are two considerations:

1) does the M10 rangefinder coupling actually go down to 0.6m?

2) even if it does, is it still accurate at that distance?

 

I've tried researching but cannot find anything definitive that answers both the above questions. Is anyone on the forum with first-hand experience of the above able to shed some light, please?

 

PS - I'm aware I've been asking a lot of questions recently, so thank you all for your help, which I appreciate greatly.  One day I hope to be sufficiently knowledgable to be able to 'pay it back'.

 

[a.noctilux]

I use coupled RF on M since decades, 48cm on Summicron DR close range.

My 35mm Summicron SAMWO, RF to 65cm (a bit less) on every M.

So nothing special with RF coupling less than well know 70cm.

 

Have fun with these bonus!

M10's LV/Viso can do wonder if need be 😉

 

if not already read, DR on M10

Edited January 27, 2022 by a.noctilux

[Hans-Dieter Gülicher]

My a bit expensive propose: Take the new APO-Summicron 35 mm plus Visoflex 2 and you can take pictures up to 30 cm.

Regards Hans

[mike3996]

12 minutes ago, Hans-Dieter Gülicher said:

My a bit expensive propose: Take the new APO-Summicron 35 mm plus Visoflex 2 and you can take pictures up to 30 cm.

Regards Hans

You can adapt almost any old SLR lens on a live view -capable M, even throw in an extension tube or three. Doesn't change the fact that the rangefinder portion is limited to 70 cm by physical realities.

[Masukami]

Thanks all for your comments.

So we have identified from @a.noctilux that the M10 rangefinder coupling focuses at least as close at 0.65m.

 

Does anyone have any experience of it focussing closer than 0.65m and, if it does, is it still accurate at those closer distances?

[BJohn]

47 minutes ago, Masukami said:

Thanks all for your comments.

So we have identified from @a.noctilux that the M10 rangefinder coupling focuses at least as close at 0.65m.

 

Does anyone have any experience of it focussing closer than 0.65m and, if it does, is it still accurate at those closer distances?

It should be about right! My Summilux 50 can also focus a bit closer than the APO Summicron 50, not by far but it's a little below 0.7m. I can confirm that the Summicron 35 focuses closer than the Summilux 35 to about 0.65m (I guess it's even a tiny little bit more).

Small remark (I edited the post): funny, cause I did a concrete comparison between Lux 35 and Cron 35 about two years ago as I had the feeling that the bokeh is about the same or even a tiny little bit better on the Cron 35 at the minimal focus distance which then led to a small experiment at home...with the outcome that the more blurry background is due to the closer focus.

Edited January 27, 2022 by BJohn

[Hans-Dieter Gülicher]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

vor 2 Stunden schrieb mike3996:

You can adapt almost any old SLR lens on a live view -capable M, even throw in an extension tube or three. Doesn't change the fact that the rangefinder portion is limited to 70 cm by physical realities.

Partly correct. I use my old Vario-Elmarit R with my M 10-R plus R-to-M-adaptor. But to take the new APO-Summicron 35 mm plus Visoflex 2 is the best (however expensive) way to get closer.

Regards Hans

[fotografr]

3 hours ago, Masukami said:

Thanks all for your comments.

So we have identified from @a.noctilux that the M10 rangefinder coupling focuses at least as close at 0.65m.

 

Does anyone have any experience of it focussing closer than 0.65m and, if it does, is it still accurate at those closer distances?

Nothing beats a real world test, so I set my 35 Ultron II at the minimum distance marking then moved myself back and forth until the hands on this clock were in correct focus using my rangefinder (not live view). Here's the result and the lens setting. In theory, this should not be possible.

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 January 27, 2022 by fotografr

[Masukami]

1 hour ago, fotografr said:

Nothing beats a real world test, so I set my 35 Ultron II at the minimum distance marking then moved myself back and forth until the hands on this clock were in correct focus using my rangefinder (not live view). Here's the result and the lens setting. In theory, this should not be possible.

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!

Great experiment.

Thank you @fotografr, exactly what I was hoping for!

Looking at the hands on the image, would you say they are slightly out of focus ?  If yes, then it suggests that although the rangefinder coupling operates at distances closer than 0.7m it is not necessarily accurate at those closer distances.

By the way, researching that lens is what made me ask this question in the first place.  I'm seriously considering buying it. How do you find the bokeh at portrait distances?  

 

 

[fotografr]

55 minutes ago, Masukami said:

Great experiment.

Thank you @fotografr, exactly what I was hoping for!

Looking at the hands on the image, would you say they are slightly out of focus ?  If yes, then it suggests that although the rangefinder coupling operates at distances closer than 0.7m it is not necessarily accurate at those closer distances.

By the way, researching that lens is what made me ask this question in the first place.  I'm seriously considering buying it. How do you find the bokeh at portrait distances?  

 

 

When I looked at the full size image on my desktop, the hands were tack sharp. If they appear slightly unsharp, it's most likely due to the fact that it was fairly dark where the clock is located and my ISO was high.

As to bokeh at portrait distances, that would depend mostly on your aperture selection. When shot wide open at a distance of a few feet, the bokeh is kind of creamy and very pleasing. That's totally subjective, however. What one person considers pleasing bokeh, another may not like at all.

For the price, you really can't go wrong with this lens.

[Masukami]

33 minutes ago, fotografr said:

When I looked at the full size image on my desktop, the hands were tack sharp. If they appear slightly unsharp, it's most likely due to the fact that it was fairly dark where the clock is located and my ISO was high.

As to bokeh at portrait distances, that would depend mostly on your aperture selection. When shot wide open at a distance of a few feet, the bokeh is kind of creamy and very pleasing. That's totally subjective, however. What one person considers pleasing bokeh, another may not like at all.

For the price, you really can't go wrong with this lens.

That's good to know, thank you @fotografr so, basically we're saying the M10 rangefinder coupling works well down to just under 0.6m.  

As for the ultron, the more I hear about that lens, the more it interests me.  I. Must. Resist. The. GAS!

 

[fotografr]

7 minutes ago, Masukami said:

As for the ultron, the more I hear about that lens, the more it interests me.  I. Must. Resist. The. GAS!

 

Black paint on brass, smooth to use, sharp, tiny, cheap by Leica standards, RESISTANCE IS FUTILE. 😉 

(No, I don't get any commission.)

Edited January 27, 2022 by fotografr

[Masukami]

@fotografr you're really not helping.

And my M10-R is black paint, which would look great with that finish, not that it should matter....

Thank you, I guess.  My bank manager would probably say something different.

Edited January 27, 2022 by Masukami

[chasdfg]

On 1/27/2022 at 10:25 PM, fotografr said:

Nothing beats a real world test, so I set my 35 Ultron II at the minimum distance marking then moved myself back and forth until the hands on this clock were in correct focus using my rangefinder (not live view). Here's the result and the lens setting. In theory, this should not be possible.

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!

I have the same lens myself and I can confirm the lens appears to focus accurately enough via the rangefinder (0.58m) of my M10M. I was surprised myself (another reason to keep the lens apart from the size and cost relative to performance..I bought the lens just to try it but haven't been able to part with it. For a small 35mm, it is a no brainer to me). I note some of my M lenses (or all, just that the hard stop is not marked with a precise distance so I never measured) focus below 0.7m.

I've always been curious of the mechanics of focusing under 0.7m. I hear a slight sound akin to decoupling (wouldn't know since I don't have xray vision) when the 35 f2 VM goes under 0.7m. Maybe it's my ears.