Sax45 wrote:
I mean, I can’t be impossible to make a good LTM to M adapter. The M mount is standardized with lenses and cameras that almost always play nice, and the LTM mount is standardized with lenses and cameras that almost always place nice.
The issue is production tolerances amongst all the items you are using.
When you use a native m mount lens on your M mount camera - you are dealing with the tolerances on the camera and that on the lens. When you use an LTM mount lens, an LTM adapter and then an M mount camera - you are now dealing with three sets of production tolerances instead of two with just the camera and m mount lens.
You may, or may not run into the same issues with a more expensive adapter. I have. I would just swap the Fotodiox one with another. If that doesn't work, move on to a different brand.
The mount on the M3 sure seems to be steel, because it seems to attract a magnet. Now it’s possible that other steel pieces are actually attracting the magnet, but it does seem like the magnet is sticking directly to the lens mount itself. Meanwhile, no magnetic attraction to the lugs on my Summicron or Elmarit. On my IIIc, the mount is definitely chrome plated brass, because there is some brass showing where the chrome has worn away.
Does anyone have any experiences with Popflash’s returns and customer service, if it does turn out that the LLL adapters have an issue?
Desmolicious wrote:
Love the colour here. What camera was used?
Thanks! (sheepishly looks around to make sure no one is judging) These were taken on a Sony A7RII. The lens is sooo difficult to use on a rangefinder with the traditional focus and recompose methodology. I really, really like its character, but it is frustrating using it on film bodies and having 7 out of 10 shots be weirdly/un-usably soft because of the curved field, etc.
I sort of wish I had a digital Leica (mostly for style points), but I just can't bring myself to spend that much on a piece of future digital detritus. Maybe someday...when my ship comes in...
I definitely get what you are saying, it just seems like the LTM-M adapters are cursed. Based on what you're saying, what I see on forums, and what I see on Amazon/B&H reviews. I have a bunch of adapters with no issues. Heck, I have even had FOUR-manufacturer situations (Canon FD mount, 3rd party lens, cheap adapter, mirrorless camera) with no issues.
_jim_ wrote:
Is everyone sure that what we think is steel is actually steel rather than chromed brass. Most lens mounts on cameras and on lenses are chromed brass (because it is much easier to machine and relatively rugged once chromed)?
All my LTM to M adapters (from a variety of manufacturers) are brass. I've had no issue.
I've never used the LLL mount adapters, but I'd assume they are nicely made. Everything else I have from them is nicely machined.
You most prob are right - chrome plated. I ASSumed because it was silver...
Funny enough I decided to see what Fotodiox had to say about what material they use. I had to look at a few different listings for the same adapter, but I found one that claimed it was "brass with a stainless steel finish." I had assumed it was chrome-plated aluminum, since all of my other adapters use aluminum (really the cheapest material available for the purpose).
Go figure! I assume they are referring to color only when they say "stainless" finish, as stainless steel isn't really used to plate other metals.I
As Mr. Zhou has indicated, the prototype I received is not the final product, so unfortunately we will have to wait longer for this lens to be available commercially. LLL has other products in their pipeline, and I could not be given any assurances as to a release date.
It's hard to draw too many conclusions from this. Ed seems like a lovely guy and it's unfortunate that his review copy was out of calibration (and also not a final version of the lens). But...the photos don't give me a lot to go on (it does look like he took a lovely European trip, though...which is nice). There are a couple closer-up/environmental portraits...which are kind of useful. Stopped-down landscape photos on a highspeed lens are kind of irrelevant for me (all lenses look good enough at small apertures...and this lens looks good, as well).
I'd love to see wide-open (or nearly wide-open) shots at close and mid distances. I'd love to see some out-of-focus highlights to see what the onion ring sitch is like (Zhou claims that there is improvement over the 50/1.2, but I'd like some evidence).
I'd even like to see how it looks mounted on a camera.
I guess I'll just keep waiting until other images come along.
_jim_ wrote:
It's hard to draw too many conclusions from this. Ed seems like a lovely guy and it's unfortunate that his review copy was out of calibration (and also not a final version of the lens). But...the photos don't give me a lot to go on (it does look like he took a lovely European trip, though...which is nice). There are a couple closer-up/environmental portraits...which are kind of useful. Stopped-down landscape photos on a highspeed lens are kind of irrelevant for me (all lenses look good enough at small apertures...and this lens looks good, as well).
I'd love to see wide-open (or nearly wide-open) shots at close and mid distances. I'd love to see some out-of-focus highlights to see what the onion ring sitch is like (Zhou claims that there is improvement over the 50/1.2, but I'd like some evidence).
I'd even like to see how it looks mounted on a camera.
I guess I'll just keep waiting until other images come along.
Hey! I have acquired the lens from Ed since the review, and I have shot over 6000 photos with it. I will be updating the website as soon as I can. I want to give you guys a small sneak peek, but I still don't understand how to share photos ...Show more →. If anyone would like to explain I can publish some here.
Sax45 wrote:
Can I assume that their adapters are made to a similarly high standard? Is there any reason to buy used Leica adapters for way more money? I can get the LLL 3 pack for about the same cost as a vintage 90 or 135 adapter, and half the cost of a vintage 50 adapter.
I have the 3-pack of LLL LTM to M adapters and they work perfectly for me on my Leica M2-R film camera; perfect fit, correct framelines are called up, no issues. That said, I have a Fotodiox 35/135 LTM to M adapter as well and haven't had any problems with it either.
lehautedog wrote:
I'm hopefully getting an M Mono and can share my LLL 8e images when it's here. Otherwise the images I've made on my M2 have been phenomenal.
bjhurley wrote:
I have the 3-pack of LLL LTM to M adapters and they work perfectly for me on my Leica M2-R film camera; perfect fit, correct framelines are called up, no issues. That said, I have a Fotodiox 35/135 LTM to M adapter as well and haven't had any problems with it either.
Thanks BJ, glad to hear you had a good experience. I actually ended up calling Popflash the same day I made the post. I spoke with Tony, and he gave me the confidence to order the 3 pack. I will report back once I have a chance to play with them.
I'm not sure if my blog links will show up but here's the 8e while my daughter was doing horseback riding lessons. I just got my 246 with the 8e as well. I haven't done much but family photos.
I picked up the three pack of LLL adapters from Popflash. They are great! Unlike the Fotodiox adapter, all go on smoothly, lock nicely, and bring up the correct framelines. As far as I can tell, focusing on my M3 with the Summicron and the adapted Summitar are exactly the same.
Sax45 wrote:
I picked up the three pack of LLL adapters from Popflash. They are great! Unlike the Fotodiox adapter, all go on smoothly, lock nicely, and bring up the correct framelines. As far as I can tell, focusing on my M3 with the Summicron and the adapted Summitar are exactly the same.
Great! My experience as well. I shot two entire rolls with LTM lenses on my M2-R and all were perfectly in focus.
