Imrulqays
Member
I considered to get a Super Angulon f3.4 for my R-D1, but I noticed there is contradictory information:
- the R-D1 mentions it cannot be used,
- but the Epson R-D1 webpage mentions it can be used, see www.epsonrd1.co.uk/lenses/search.ht...ql=0&lbwequ=0&llsl=0.0&llsu=0.0&lm=Leitz&lo=2
Is there anyone who has used this lens on his/her R-D1?
All info is welcome.
- the R-D1 mentions it cannot be used,
- but the Epson R-D1 webpage mentions it can be used, see www.epsonrd1.co.uk/lenses/search.ht...ql=0&lbwequ=0&llsl=0.0&llsu=0.0&lm=Leitz&lo=2
Is there anyone who has used this lens on his/her R-D1?
All info is welcome.
iUser
Established
If it's on the site, it'll fit.
LCT
ex-newbie
I don't use that lens sorry but according to the User's Guide, page 17:
"Some M/L mount lenses cannot be used because of the structure of the camera. For example, lenses with external dimensions exceeding 20.5 mm cannot be used with this camera.
Lenses that cannot be used include:
- Hologon 15mm f/8
- Super Angulon 21mm f/3.4
- Super Angulon 21mm f/4..."
Best,
LCT
"Some M/L mount lenses cannot be used because of the structure of the camera. For example, lenses with external dimensions exceeding 20.5 mm cannot be used with this camera.
Lenses that cannot be used include:
- Hologon 15mm f/8
- Super Angulon 21mm f/3.4
- Super Angulon 21mm f/4..."
Best,
LCT
Imrulqays
Member
Indeed, LCT, this was the excerpt of the manual I was thinking of.
It is very strange that Epson's website contradicts the manual.
I guess I will have to find the lens and try it out.
Dirk
It is very strange that Epson's website contradicts the manual.
I guess I will have to find the lens and try it out.
Dirk
Hektor
Leicapile
Ask Robert White, he probably knows, or knows a man who does.
pfogle
Well-known
I went and bought a plastic caliper gauge which you can use to measure the distance from the flange to the back of the lens when collapsed (off the camera, of course!).
As long as the distance is less than 20.5mm (after you put on the M adapter, which is 1mm thick) then you're ok.
The contradiction between the site and the manual could well be because of the difference made by the adapter - some lenses which would not work on a LTM body, will work with the M adapter fitted because of that extra 1mm.
As long as the distance is less than 20.5mm (after you put on the M adapter, which is 1mm thick) then you're ok.
The contradiction between the site and the manual could well be because of the difference made by the adapter - some lenses which would not work on a LTM body, will work with the M adapter fitted because of that extra 1mm.
Hektor
Leicapile
I might be able to throw some light on this puzzle.
It's possible that Epson are confused by the Leitz usage recommendations.
This lens was made up to 1980, which included the M5 period. The M5 has a swinging metering arm behind the lens.
Early versions of the 21f3.4 could not be used with an M5 because the rear elements protude too far back into the camera. Later lenses were modified and were approved for use with the M5
HOWEVER, and this is CRITICALLY IMPORTANT, the modification was to the bayonet mount and NOT TO THE OPTICS. The effect of the mod was to prevent the metering arm from swinging out behind the lens at all, so no metering, the lens was unchanged.
So some Epson engineer who looks at the Leica datasheets will see that later 21f3.4's are ok for use on M5's and might think the lens was changed to give more clearance at the rear. Thats not the case . they are all optically and physically the same.
The only safe way is to measure the rear protusion into the body, with or without the adapter as appropriate.
QED.
It's possible that Epson are confused by the Leitz usage recommendations.
This lens was made up to 1980, which included the M5 period. The M5 has a swinging metering arm behind the lens.
Early versions of the 21f3.4 could not be used with an M5 because the rear elements protude too far back into the camera. Later lenses were modified and were approved for use with the M5
HOWEVER, and this is CRITICALLY IMPORTANT, the modification was to the bayonet mount and NOT TO THE OPTICS. The effect of the mod was to prevent the metering arm from swinging out behind the lens at all, so no metering, the lens was unchanged.
So some Epson engineer who looks at the Leica datasheets will see that later 21f3.4's are ok for use on M5's and might think the lens was changed to give more clearance at the rear. Thats not the case . they are all optically and physically the same.
The only safe way is to measure the rear protusion into the body, with or without the adapter as appropriate.
QED.
Imrulqays
Member
Thank you very much for the feedback.
If I can lay my hands on a SA I will verify if it fits an R-D1, and then I'll post here whatever I find out.
If I can lay my hands on a SA I will verify if it fits an R-D1, and then I'll post here whatever I find out.
Ed Schwartzreic
Well-known
I saw this thread while I was away, and wanted to respond.
The problem with the 21/3.4 SA is not its fit, but that it vignettes to an extreme degree due to how close the rear element is to the focal plane. It is not usable on the R-D1. Neither are the following lenses, for the same reason: 21/4 SA SM, 15 Hologon, 16 Hologon converted to M-mount, 19/3.5 Canon SM, and possibly the earlier 21 Biogons, which were converted from Contax mount to M mount.
Ed
The problem with the 21/3.4 SA is not its fit, but that it vignettes to an extreme degree due to how close the rear element is to the focal plane. It is not usable on the R-D1. Neither are the following lenses, for the same reason: 21/4 SA SM, 15 Hologon, 16 Hologon converted to M-mount, 19/3.5 Canon SM, and possibly the earlier 21 Biogons, which were converted from Contax mount to M mount.
Ed