M9 with Visoflex

[jlancasterd]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Has anyone tried an M9 with a Visoflex yet? Can I assume that the Visoflex 3 will fit with the appropriate 4x prism (the flat-bottom type)?

 

Any ideas as to what coding to use for the 65mm Elmar f3.5?

[UliWer]

I have no M9, but you can be sure that the Viso III fits with the prism you describe. The body has the same size as the M8 on which it fitted well. This was my biggest concern about the M9, when the rumours came out that it would be bigger but Leica was reasonable and didn't listen to the rumours.

 

Unfortunately there is no coding for the 65mm Elmar. You can only try to use the code for another lens given on the list for the manual coding function of the M9. I would start with the code for the 2.8/50 Elmar. The lens construction is similar.

[jlancasterd]

I have no M9, but you can be sure that the Viso III fits with the prism you describe. The body has the same size as the M8 on which it fitted well. This was my biggest concern about the M9, when the rumours came out that it would be bigger but Leica was reasonable and didn't listen to the rumours.

 

Unfortunately there is no coding for the 65mm Elmar. You can only try to use the code for another lens given on the list for the manual coding function of the M9. I would start with the code for the 2.8/50 Elmar. The lens construction is similar.

 

Thanks Uli - I should have guessed that the 65/3.5 was similar to the 50/2.8.

[swamiji]

Today our Leica Rep brought out a M9 at my local dealer. I brought my Visoflex III with an 16462 adapter and my Elmarit 135 F2.8 (11829). This Elmarit is the one with Goggles, it also comes apart and with the adapter works with the Viso.

 

First, the Visoflex III fits better on the M9 than on a M8, the arm is more centered. Second, the Emarit with goggles, is in the on camera database but do not use manual when using the Viso, turn it off.

 

The images were surprisingly good, both with the Visoflex and goggles. It seemed to me that the goggles were slightly better, however I had the lens stopped down when using the Visoflex, and that always impairs my focusing ability, slightly. However the full frame really makes a difference in framing...

 

I have a M9 on order, the dealer says next week. Be sure I will test it with the bellows with a 65mm, and the Telyt 200mm, 400mm, and 560mm, and a few other assorted lenses (both on bellows and with adapter), and by then I can post some images.

[UliWer]

Thanks Uli - I should have guessed that the 65/3.5 was similar to the 50/2.8.

 

Perhaps you also try the settings from a 75mm lens. I learned from Sean Reid's first part of his M9-Review that settings for shorter lenses increase the cyan-drift corrections stronger than settings from longer lenses. Perhaps a 50mm setting will cause too much correction and turning the edges into a red drift. Settings for longer lenses avoid this.

 

Anyway, as internal corrections caused by these settings are only relevant below 35-40mm it should not make much difference.

 

Maybe using the settings for the "good old Elmar" the M9-youngster will get a better feeeling for it's tradtion.