Modifying M lens for closer close-focus -- who/how?

[Gabriel M.A.]

My question is specifically for the 35mm Summilux pre-asph, but I'm sure that the kind of information I'm looking for may apply to many other lenses.

Please forget about the "performance issues" etc etc of the 35mm Summilux pre-asph, and think about the close-focusing limit on this lens (or others): it focuses down to 3ft (~0.9m).

Is there a way to allow the focusing mechanism go beyond 0.9m to, say, 0.7m? Let's assume that the shim is already "prepped" to allow correct movement of the rangefinder mechanism on a Leica M body.

Do you know who can, as opposed to who might be able to do this? I've discounted Don at DAG, for after many months requesting this, he sat on a lens of mine (for as many months) and had to eventually ask for it to be returned, because it sounded like he really couldn't do this.

Thoughts/ideas?

 

[ferider]

How about exchanging/complementing it with a goggled Summilux v1 ? Should bring you down to .6m or so.

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

How about exchanging/complementing it with a goggled Summilux v1 ?

Oy. Interesting suggestion, but the main reason why I got rid of my excellent 35mm Summicron 8-element version was the goggles. It's such a drag to mount and unmount that lens if you have a body case, and it also diminishes the viewfinder visibility. Not to mention that it requires extra space in my bag to store it.

But a good suggestion, nonetheless, I hadn't thought of that; I had forgotten about those lenses. *But*, the Summilux I have :cough: is the latest version, so it focuses just fine on my M8, and I *really* like the images it renders. I bought it from ErikFive.

The close focusing is a biggie for me, but with this lens not quite enough (yet) to dismiss it.

I'm not into the "clinical" look, so this lens fits in just nicely.

Anyway, what prevents a lens from moving beyond the "preset" focusing boundaries? Can this be modified? I have *zero* knowledge of the mechanics of LTM/M-mount lenses. Zero.

 

[Benjamin Marks]

Gabriel:

I think the best way to do this is with a Leica RF lens is with a Viso system. No lens modification necessary. There are bellows that can be used with the system, or an extension tube - focus would be using the reflex housing.

There are some things that an RF is just not ideal for -- macro/closeup is one of them. For the price of modifying your lens (if this can even be done) you could buy i) a perfectly nice 55mm Nikkor macro lens, ii) extension tubes for any SLR.

Ben Marks

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

Hi Benjamin: thank you for the info. Well, the main reason why I'm asking this is not to do "macro" work, but I tend to be close to my subjects, and it's around the 0.7--1m range that I tend to be in. I generally don't mind moving forward or back, generally, to get the proper framing, but there are many times that I do want that closer focus.

This is the #1 reason why I don't use my Canon 50mm f/1.2 LTM as much as I'd like to. I don't want this to be the case for the 35mm Summilux. I can adapt, though. But I'd rather adapt my lens(es) 🙂

 

[ferider]

Anyway, what prevents a lens from moving beyond the "preset" focusing boundaries? Can this be modified? I have *zero* knowledge of the mechanics of LTM/M-mount lenses. Zero.

Usually one of the helixes has a lock or stops alltogether. Even if this can be
modified, I doubt that it would work optically without recollimating the lens
with additional compromises. Not sure but might be even more complicated
if the lens has a floating element (does it ?).

The other option of course is one of the two wide Noktons.

Roland.

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

Usually one of the helixes has a lock or stops alltogether. Even if this can be
modified, I doubt that it would work optically without recollimating the lens
with additional compromises. Not sure but might be even more complicated
if the lens has a floating element (does it ?).

The other option of course is one of the two wide Noktons.

I have considered the 28 Ultron (is this the one you meant?), and did like it, but --but-- it is a bit too bulky for my taste. You may already have figured out how I feel about the 35mm Nokton. The 50 f/1.2 Canon is borderline for me, and I'm satisfied with it because it does not intrude into the 50mm frameline.

The 35mm Summilux pre-asph does not have a floating element (or elements). I understand that manufacturers set limits to their close-focusing range due to "performance" concerns, but I am not really concerned about the so-called "loss of sharpness" involved here.

I've inspected my 'lux carefully, and it looks like it's already properly machined to go all the way down to at least 0.8m The same thing applies to my 90mm Summicron (vIII)

 

[ferider]

Sounds like it might be feasible then, Gabriel.

One of the not so usual suspects is Ken Ruth from Bald Mountain

http://www.baldmtn.com

that you might want to call and ask.

Good luck,

Roland.

PS: I meant mostly the 40 Nokton ... I guess it's not a secret that I myself like it very much, also due to its close focus distance.

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

Sounds like it might be feasible then, Gabriel.

One of the not so usual suspects is Ken Ruth from Bald Mountain

http://www.baldmtn.com

that you might want to call and ask.

Good luck,

Roland.

PS: I meant mostly the 40 Nokton ... I guess it's not a secret that I myself like it very much, also due to its close focus distance.

Oh. The 40 Nokton. I've toyed with the idea, but I think the bokeh from the 40 M-Rokkor is worth the "stop loss" 😀

Did not know about Ken Ruth. Will send him ("him", right?) an e-mail this evening. Must run soon.

<insert Yoda "mmm!">Thanks again for the info! Quick discussion this has been.</ Yoda "mmm!">

 

[ferider]

Any news for us, Gabriel ?

Roland.

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

Any news for us, Gabriel ?

Roland.

I sent him two e-mails. He never wrote back. I'm thinking about contacting Sherry Krauter. What do you think?

 

[ferider]

I sent him two e-mails. He never wrote back. I'm thinking about contacting Sherry Krauter. What do you think?

Sherry is of course good, responsive and fast .... You might want
to try to call Ken, though. If you get it to work, it will increase my
interest in that exact lens dramatically 🙂

Thanks,

Roland.

 

[cmogi10]

 

[laptoprob]

Not exactly on-topic, but I encouraged both my Steinheil Quinon 50mm and IIf to go as close as the Quinon can, but then together. The lens goes down to 60cm (standard), but the focus follower in the camera only reached somewhere near 90 or 100cm. So I filed off enough space in the camera to get the follower to go out as far as needed and into the screwmount of the lens as far as needed.
Now the combination can close-focus down to 60cm. Only problem is the exaggerated parralax.
This should be possible to do with every lens that has the same capabilities.

BUT - you want this done to a 35mm lens that doesn't get closer than 90cm. Simply adding a macro ring makes the RF system useless because unlike at 50mm the extension of RF and optics are very different.
So maybe a close-up system? In front of RF and lens?
Otherwise you would have to alter the lens dramatically in order to get RF and optics matched at closer focus. And you probably would lose infinity anyway...

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

I do not want to add a close-up filter, or add bellows, or anything like that.

I want the lens to be able to focus closer than it actually is, without optical/bellows attachments. I know this is possible, because the earlier lens version (with goggles) could focus down to 0.65m, so the limitation should not be optical.

I found this little tidbit:

In the US Leitz used to offer a "close focus" modification which removed some focus travel beyond infinity and added it to the close end. That allowed close focus to about 5m. It sounds like you have a pair that was modified.

http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=31966

So it is possible to do what I'm looking for, the question is who (or how).

 

[sirius]

It must be hard with the parallax to properly frame close subjects with a rangefinder.

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

It must be hard with the parallax to properly frame close subjects with a rangefinder.

I don't have a problem at all with my 0.7m-focusing 50mm Summicron, 0.7m-focusing 50mm Summilux (wide-open, I should add), and my 0.8m-focusing 40mm M-Rokkor and Summicron-C

I don't understand the mental block/resistance to this idea. I'm sure this doesn't work for everybody, but it does for me. It is possible, I do it all the time.

 

[sirius]

There's no mental block (at least no more than usual). I mention it as a consideration. I know I have trouble framing properly with my Leica when I'm shooting close-up. It's frustrating having things drop a couple of inches down when I see them developed, I haven't done it enough to guestimate.

Obviously Leica designed their cameras with close-up in mind because there is the DR summicron and the bellows.

cheers

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

Where I had to guesstimate is with the 50mm f/1.4 Nikkor under 0.5m -- boy, did that get old quick.

Anyway, yes, the DR and bellows were conceived during the M3 era, where the closest focusing used to still be 1m, so in order to do "backwards-compatibility", they opted to don it goggles, so it would work with every M3.

It's actually harder for me to focus in the close-range with goggles on the camera. Topsy-turvy.