Any market left for Auto-Ups?

[awilder]

Considering the Auto Up series allow close focus up to 22" or 15" on many popular focal length lenses from Canon, Leica or CV, I'm surprised I've had little interest in these items up recently put up for sale. Is this accessory now considered passé for rf users?

 

[Larry H-L]

There was a discussion here recently about using them on the RD-1, so there is some interest.

However, most probably default to an SLR for macro work.

I haven't seen many #2 Auto-Ups, so you'll probably find an interested party sooner or later.

 

[awilder]

I agree that an SLR is preferable especially for exact framing and uninterrupted focusing range. But if you mainly use an RF, these seem like a good way to go, and more preferable to Leica DR or the 90/4 M as both are far more expensive and only limited to M series bodies and more limited in close focus as well.

 

[sevo]

They may have been a valid solution when SLRs (or accessory mirror boxes for RF cameras) were even more expensive than RF cameras. These days, you can get a SLR and macro lens for roughly the same money as a Auto Up...

 

[Dante_Stella]

Auto-ups can be very particular to the RF/VF window layout - so it's not as if you can slap a Canon RF auto-up on a Canon lens mounted to a Leica.

Dante

 

[pyeh]

I succumbed and bought Awilder's Auto-ups (Thank you Awilder). I have a bunch of rangefinders and lenses and while I have had SLRs in the past and really enjoyed them, I like how camera manufacturers developed all these devices to 'overcome' the non-WYSIWYG factor of the rangefinder, in an effort to make them as functional as SLRs.
It's almost a perversity to try and make something do what it was never designed to do.
I also like any clever, sophisticated optical-mechanical contraption where some engineer has resolved all the conflicting design constraints to find an elegant solution, especially when it's for such a specific task, like close-up photography on a rangefinder.

 

[awilder]

Dante is correct if pairing to the Leica M series due it's long base length. Besides pre-7 series Canons, cameras like the CV Bessa series, Epson R-D1 or the Leica CL have base lengths short enough to easily fall within the Auto-Up optical frame which is of matching diopter power to the taking close-up lens. Here's an example of the set-up.

 

[farlymac]

In answer to the OP's original question, I was crazy enough to get both Auto-Ups for my 1.8/50 Canon. I don't shoot the camera much yet because I need to do some work on it, but was satisfied with the results I got first time.

Auto-Up II on 1.8/50 Canon LTM

Weathered Fence by P F McFarland, on Flickr

Canon Auto-Up Sets by P F McFarland, on Flickr

PF

 

[f16sunshine]

Great on the RD1 with Serener 50mm f1.9

Great on the RD1 with Serener 50mm f1.9

This one I've pulled (auto)up before as a sample.
It's with the Seranar 50mm f1.9 collapsible and auto-up on the RD1 at 800 iso.
I gave the whole set up away when I traded my RD1 for an x100 in 2012. Yeah... regret that a bit even though I still use an original x100. 😱

I think it's a very useful little attachment. It sure worked great on the RD1.

 

[bennyng]

This one I've pulled (auto)up before as a sample.
It's with the Seranar 50mm f1.9 collapsible and auto-up on the RD1 at 800 iso.
I gave the whole set up away when I traded my RD1 for an x100 in 2012. Yeah... regret that a bit even though I still use an original x100. 😱

I think it's a very useful little attachment. It sure worked great on the RD1.

Andy,

That's really excellent output from the Autoup and the R-D1!

Cheers,