What's new
GR User Forum

The spot for all Ricoh GR camera users

Register for free, meet other Ricoh GR users, share your images, help others, have fun!

Tell your friends about us!

M mount module lens compatibility

@ZDP-189: May faint memories tell me that is was a different lens, but you may be right... Neverthless, I have bought it already -- perhaps I can sell it to you??? ;)
Gerd
 
Hi guys,
just a foolish question from one who should PROBABLY know better! :D
Anyone have thoughts on whether I could saddle the 'M mount' with my 17mm f4.0 Rokor MD lens?
Should an adaptor be available, would it increase the 1.5 factor to an even greater number?
Never having walked on the clouds with a Leica or close relative on my arm, I find myself now rather ignorant in these 'M-mount' matters! :?
Thanks!
Andy
 
Hi Wiener,

The Novoflex adapter finder offers the following answer (adapter for Minolta MD to M-mount):
Bestellcode: LEM/MIN
Preis: € 149,00

It may be cheaper elsewhere, but that's its name... The crop factor should not be changed by the adapter.

Best regards, Gerd

URL: http://www.novoflex.com/index.php (and some browsing)
 
Gerd,
thanks for this! I guess at this price it must be quite a precision adaptor. The quality of the images is, of course, the $64.000 question! ;)
And one would need to buy the adaptor to find this out...but by multiplying 17mm by 1.5 I find I would have a 26mm lens which could still be a small advantage over the 28mm unit...but to be honest, perhaps not so much to make a significant difference...on the other hand I seem incapable of 'throwing' these wonders of engineering out, so giving it a new life would be very humane? :)
Do you have any Minolta glass still in your cupboard? I recall that you used to be a Minolta man like me...if my memory serves me well!
Andy
 
Whats with the idea to use a Leica R lens? Much cheaper, the same money you spend for a used M Summicron you can get a used R Summilux?
Only a adaptor is needed.

Rainer
 
There was a time not too long ago when people were practically using R lenses as paperweights, because not many people were shooting R-mount, they didn't autofocus and you wouldn't shoot them on a rangefinder as they weren't RF coupled so the only option was the less than slick Visioflex adapter. But in recent years (months?) it's become trendy to use them with adapters on digital bodies, especially Canon EF, so the price has risen quite dramatically. Personally, like the compactness of M lenses over R lenses. I'd be lynched for saying so on some forums, but there's an argument that a good lens by another maker such as GR, M-Hexanon, M-Rokkor, or the various CV-made brands would be as good or better than a Leica R with an adapter.
 
I have a few Russian lenses to try which may end up leaving me with a real lynch mob (grin)

The small group of rag-tail Russian lens fanciers say that they can be good but cite poor quality control. My experince so far is that much of the poor quality control is on fact either serial neglect by unconcerned owners or being subject to unheated storage through quite a few Russian winters. We must remember that whilst the ordinary snapshooter in the west was using folding Kodaks, Box Brownies and Instamatics our friends over there were using Ziess clone lenses on Leica or Contax clone bodies as their point and shoot cameras. No doubt many were treated as point and shoot cameras storage wise. Also the lens grease can go sticky like treacle, which may have been from "cold storage" - I find that even literally 30 year old brand new in original packaging lenses (yes a few still exist) can sometimes have degraded lubrication.

However for those that are brave enough to consider stripping a lens and re-lubricating it the Russian lenses are often enough well kept and in good working order when shipped. However the worst ones are where some less than competent flea market vendor has stripped and fixed the lens himself with a chisel and some multigrips on the kitchen table then covered up the scratches and dings with a thick purplish "ink"(?) Yes and they can reset the helix threads incorrectly in the process and of course the focus is quite problematic. No wonder many are shy of them.

So if you get a well kept Russian lens (there must have been millions of conscientious users of them) it is ready to use and I think must be quite capable. Others are in good shape but the aperture or focus ring is sticky and it needs cleanimg and relubrication. Others are simply dinged scratched but in the optimistic mind of the vendor the dust inside and the dings and scratches will not affect your photographs one little bit.

So I have been using them on a test mule Samsung NX10 and they work well enough, not also having trod the boards with the exalted I do not have Leica experience either, but I did buy a 50mm f2.0 Summitar which had been well loved and looked after. Nice lens, a tonne of solid metal. To my weak eyes I find difficulty in picking images it generates to those from a Jupiter-8 50mm f2.0 Ziess Sonnar clone. However maybe I am not rigorous enough and the Summitar was the cheapest Leica LTM lens type I could find at the time.

My Antoni Lolli COMA adapters are in flight and, well maybe someday soon enough an M mount module will drop by my way so that I can test this rough menagerie out and see if it can take roughly good images (smile). All I know is that I have a lot of amusement in front of me for the price of (say) one "to die for" decent Leica lens. On the other hand maybe one really great lens is more worth having that a rattling tote bag of cheap Russian rubbish - we shall find out.

For amusement I will have to strip and make over a rough Russian lens body to make it perfect internally despite being over-rough externally. Would give my impish sense of humour to show it off at the Leica exclusives club. Who brought the rag and bone man?
 
In my experience and roughly 60% are fine, 30% need some (graduation of) tender loving care, but are quite usable, 10% are spare parts material. Most Russian, Ukranian, Belorussian, Latvian, Uzbekistan, etc vendors are straight up decent blokes but as I have mentioned there are some happy rogues conducting an eBay version of the flea market.

Therefore buy carefully and don't touch any dealer where any of his lenses seem to have that thick cover-up purple ink noticeable. So I sent one lens back and another was repaired by myself as the drive collar had come loose and the vendor surprisingly also had not noticed a repaired dented filter ring. The rest work after a fashion from perfect (mostly) to a bit sticky. A few need re-lubrication, I am sure one at least has a helix drive matching problem, the aperture scales need adjusting on at least one - it works fine though as it is.

Not all my purchases have been happy ones but mostly I have some great lenses I am just itching to test out on the M mount module.

Honestly a well kept Jupiter-8 50mm f2.0 in ltm for about the equivalent of US$50 just has to be a bargain. Ziess Sonnar design and just a neat little highly usable lens.

I also have to note that Russian lens prices are a factor of supply and demand and not an indication of relative quality. The Industar 61L/D is a great lens and very cheap because millions were made. The Russar MP2 is a cult lens but not necessarily as extra-exciting as it's rarity pricing might indicate. Not many Russars came out of the workshops and despite it's country of origin it will pretty well match good old German glass prices on the second hand market. As the Yanks will say "go figure".

So if you need to spend a lot of money to make sure you get good glass and feel comfortable then buy German or Japanese (or a Russian made Russar). Your pocket book will tell you that you have made the right decision.

But you have been warned by my previous post (grin) it's not an adventure for the faint-hearted.

The Industar-22 and it's derivatives in "silver" body: 26M and 50 seem to be made with very soft aluminium and are easily scratched. Hardly heavy enough to be a paperweight the difference between them and German made is pretty obvious. However the others might be worth an adventure for those seeking M mount compatible lenses on a budget. Backpacker's specials perhaps?
 
Ok, Tom, here I go. On the merit of your post I ordered a Jupiter-8 50. Since it's coming from the Ukraine, the M mount ought to get here first.

John
 
Hope it works out (nervous grin)

Slow post from the Ukraine, can take 4/5 weeks by pigeon post to Australia. Moscow a bit faster, Tashkent quite quick, Latvia and Belorussia not too bad. From anywhere else in Europe or USA max 10 days. I did get one lens ex-Japan in 3 days door to door. Depends on how the transport is scheduled.

I could give some advice on good/bad vendors but am reluctant to do so other than urge to be careful. Some guys can supply good gear and then a clunker which seems to indicate more selling just what they have in hand than any used-lens salesman intent.

However a few of my vendors have consistently sent me good product.

I don't know what Pavel's policy is on blaming and recommending.
 
Thanks, Tom. We'll see. I just bought from what looked like a good eBay vendor, based on feedback, the photos of the lens itself, and his description, which was detailed and mentioned the history of the Jupiter lenses. It wasn't the cheapest one to choose from, but it looked like a reasonable vendor to pick.

Hopefully in several weeks, I'll be posting photos from the GRX + Jupiter!
 
I might mention that the two adapters to Leica m mount arrive today from Antonio Lolli in Italy (COMA brand).

Of course I have no M mount camera to hand to try them on. However the PK mount mounted a lens no problem.

I had a bit of difficulty at first getting an FD lens to mount until I realised that the sweet mounting point was not exactly flush and to try and get a flush mount left the lens tilted against the mount and it just would not go anywhere from there. So I am over that problem.

I have Polish FD->NX adapter which has machined lugs inside to catch the aperture lever so that once mounted the lens aperture lever is moved into the position where the diaphragm works correctly. Good bit of gear. However the COMA FD-Leica M comes with a little cheat-sheet to modify the lens by inserting a small piece of rubber to hold the actuating lever in it's "advanced" position. This is because the COMA adapter does not have the internal lugs to actuate the aperture lever.

This is a bit of a messy way to deal with the issue for several reasons:

Firstly I have a number of FD lenses and they all need to be modified.
Secondly when I put one of the lenses back into the Polish FD-NX adapter that is machined correctly the actuation of the mounting causes the little piece of rubber to fall out - now missing one small piece of rubber and I cannot find it inside camera, adapter or lens. (Mmmm ...) This is not going to work!
Thirdly - although I can seemingly easily move the lever to allow the diaphragm to move freely in a Breech Lock FD lens no amount of fiddling seems to get that lever in a position where the diaphragm will work correctly. One of the other little buttons must need pressing but I suggest that the locking mechanism needs to be rotated as well. Must try the little bit of rubber trick again now that I have overcome the problem getting the lens to mount on the adapter ... Next installment of the adventure soon.

Not overly pleased to have bits of rubber floating around inside the bodies - must be a better way.

If anyone needs to make a M42 "automatic" lens work as fully manual there is a fairly simple reliable permanent but undo-able professional fix - just let me know and I will explain it.

Meanwhile I will have to return to my FDn adventures.

Have not been able to find a Rayqual FD->Leica M adapter - there is a Novoflex one of course and surely it has those machined in lugs?

Must try my Polish supplier to see if he might be making a FD->Leica M adapter - he is a pretty good guy to deal with and his product is good.

Tom
 
Final COMA disaster report

Got the bit of rubber inserted to hold the aperture lever in place, mounted lens on adapter. Doesn't work.

Short bit of kludge rubber is really fiddly and must jump out from time to time inside your camera-lens cavity. Anything more solid substituted could do some real damage. Needs to be done for every FD used (if it worked). Change adapters to a different mount - properly kitted out adapters dislodge the rubber kludge straight away. I am asking Antonio Lolli for their suggestions. The adapter is well built otherwise.

I have Polish and Chinese made FD->NX adapters - both worth fine. The Polish one has two lugs inside that set the aperture lever correctly so as the aperture click stops work properly. The Chinese one just has a protruding little pillar. But it has a twist grip on the outside that can either over-ride the aperture on the lens if set to minimum, or otherwise you can use the regular click sops - or even set the minimum stop you wish to use on the lens, open up, focus and smoothly slide back to your pre-set minimum stop. Neat - very much like some Russian M42 lenses work.

The Chinese FD->Leica M appears to work the same way.

Tom
 
Hi Tom,

I'm sorry to hear the COMA adapter you bought is useless. I put high hopes into the COMA adapters, because of their very competitive price.

Do you think you can start new (review) post here:
viewforum.php?f=65
and put all your experiences with this adapter to this post?

I'm going to add my experiences (unfortunately also not very positive) with Roxsen "LM to Nikon" adapter. And as I hope, soon also some preliminary lens reports (so far without the M mount).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top