The Heavenly Leica M5…

[chuckroast]

My guess, Chuckroast, is that is what Don will do when I send my M5. I suspect I will use the alkaline and see how it goes. Othewise, I will follow in your footsteps with the dummy adapter and a silver oxide battery. My concern is that I've tried that before. I had to file down the adapter in order to get it in the battery well with the battery . The cover never did screw in flush by a long shot.

OK, i just checked my M5. With the adapter in place, the battery cover does not thread all the way in and does stand slightly proud of the body. However, it's really a small amount - perhaps 1-1.5 millimeters or so. This is considerably less than the base height of the strap lugs and does not interfere with any of the camera functions, nor does it get in the way of slipping the camera into my Mr. Zhou half case.

I consider this to be a very minor thing by comparison to the benefit of using silver oxide batteries.

Just for fun, I put in one of my remaining silver PX625s to compare and - while it does thread in completely - the difference is quite small.

I will continue to look for a thinner adapter, however. Supposedly, you can also use #9 O-Rings to hold the smaller batteries in place, but I've not tried this myself.

 

[splitimageview]

 

[sebastel]

I just tried my MR-9 adapter with an LR43 battery in the M5. The cover threads in fully.
Note: the LR43 is about 1 mm thinner than the much more common LR44. The adapter itself doesn't need any modification like filing.

Note 2: the meter reads the same values as my Seconic L-208 with the MR-9 adapted LR43. With a PX625A, the meter is about 1 stop off towards underexposure.

 

[splitimageview]

The chrome M5 with 50 Summicron I linked earlier from Precision Camera will be 10% off starting tomorrow, Memorial Day sale. No affiliation, just a heads up. $1800 is a good deal.

 

[AntonioC]

The last one... 😅

M5 + VM 35mm 1.7 Ultron

Regardless of the camera, what a shot!!!

 

[AntonioC]

Great pic, BTW ... but it would have been better with a Hasselblad....bwhahaha

Or a YashicaMat, for the matter 😜

 

[chuckroast]

Or a YashicaMat, for the matter 😜

That's not nice 😛

I have Leica, Yashica TLR, and Hassy at my disposal. The Hasselblad far and away is sharper and higher resolution in every case by a mile. All you have to do is be willing to hump a very heavy bag of camera(s) and lens(es).

The Yashica MAT-124G is a fine camera with adequate optics for many things, but I gotta say, a stopped down Summicron with fine grained film can arguably be as good, at 8x10 or 11x14 print sizes. Why? Because the Leitz optics are jaw droppingly good with great microcontrast. I say this owning Leica lenses as old as 1945 and as new as the mid-2000s. Even the old mid-century Summicrons are pretty amazing.

In the end, format size does matter a whole bunch. Pretty much no 35mm will touch medium- or large format negatives for resolving power and sharpness. But keep in mind, the Yashica MAT-124G was the height of the Yashica TLR series and cost around $100 when new. That is to say, they didn't put the best possible optics into these, so the Leica can get much closer in quality. Just don't try that comparison with a Rolleiflex or a Hasselblad.

In fairness, it depends somewhat on subject matter. I like shooting abstracts where these differences matter less.

Here is a print scan from a negative shot on a Nikon with a 35mm f/1.4 AI-S:



Here is one from a Hasselblad using a 120mm f/4 Makro-Planar CF T*:

 

[hap]

That's not nice 😛

I have Leica, Yashica TLR, and Hassy at my disposal. The Hasselblad far and away is sharper and higher resolution in every case by a mile. All you have to do is be willing to hump a very heavy bag of camera(s) and lens(es).

The Yashica MAT-124G is a fine camera with adequate optics for many things, but I gotta say, a stopped down Summicron with fine grained film can arguably be as good, at 8x10 or 11x14 print sizes. Why? Because the Leitz optics are jaw droppingly good with great microcontrast. I say this owning Leica lenses as old as 1945 and as new as the mid-2000s. Even the old mid-century Summicrons are pretty amazing.

In the end, format size does matter a whole bunch. Pretty much no 35mm will touch medium- or large format negatives for resolving power and sharpness. But keep in mind, the Yashica MAT-124G was the height of the Yashica TLR series and cost around $100 when new. That is to say, they didn't put the best possible optics into these, so the Leica can get much closer in quality. Just don't try that comparison with a Rolleiflex or a Hasselblad.

In fairness, it depends somewhat on subject matter. I like shooting abstracts where these differences matter less.

Here is a print scan from a negative shot on a Nikon with a 35mm f/1.4 AI-S:

View attachment 4838051

Here is one from a Hasselblad using a 120mm f/4 Makro-Planar CF T*:

View attachment 4838053

The Yashinon version of a zeiss tessar is pretty decent. The Yashikor...not so much.

 

[Duofold RF]

My guess, Chuckroast, is that is what Don will do when I send my M5. I suspect I will use the alkaline and see how it goes. Othewise, I will follow in your footsteps with the dummy adapter and a silver oxide battery. My concern is that I've tried that before. I had to file down the adapter in order to get it in the battery well with the battery . The cover never did screw in flush by a long shot.

DAG usually adjust M5 meter for alkaline battery when send in for CLA. Use a dummy adapter and silver battery type 386 which is smaller than the LR44 will solve the unable to screw in issue.

 

[Duofold RF]

I have used YYX, DAG and others YYX and DAG are at different levels. DAG is pro and factory trained tech able to access many tech repair manuals and experience accumulated from his family’s business. YYX is gifted, self taught tech, able to master some mechanic cameras that do not involving electronic.

 

[hap]

DAG usually adjust M5 meter for alkaline battery when send in for CLA. Use a dummy adapter and silver battery type 386 which is smaller than the LR44 will solve the unable to screw in issue.

My particular problem ...it won't take an alkaline Px625 in the battery well as the cover will not screw in. For fun I've used a real MR9 and 386 silver oxide 1.5v and it doesn't allow for the cover to screw in. Eventuallly, I tried to file the the adapter and that helped a little.

I will send to DAG but I'm going to tell him that for some reason the battery well is not deep enough to take an alkaline or any other alternative. Maybe he can fix that so the cover will screw in further.

 

[Retro-Grouch]

The Yashinon version of a zeiss tessar is pretty decent. The Yashikor...not so much.

The Yashinon is a four-element Tessar design, and a pretty sweet lens. The Yashikor is a three-element design (a Triotar copy?), sharp enough in the center but not very good at the edges at any aperture. It's not a good performer by conventional standards, but can have a unique charm when you turn its weaknesses to your advantage.

 

[Duofold RF]

My particular problem ...it won't take an alkaline Px625 in the battery well as the cover will not screw in. For fun I've used a real MR9 and 386 silver oxide 1.5v and it doesn't allow for the cover to screw in. Eventuallly, I tried to file the the adapter and that helped a little.

I will send to DAG but I'm going to tell him that for some reason the battery well is not deep enough to take an alkaline or any other alternative. Maybe he can fix that so the cover will screw in further.

The M5 is designed for PX625 size battery, since Don adjusted the meter, the MR9 plus 386 will give a false read, so I use a dummy adapter and 386 or just the alkaline PX 625 and I never had unable to screw in issue

 

[Duofold RF]

The Yashinon is a four-element Tessar design, and a pretty sweet lens. The Yashikor is a three-element design (a Triotar copy?), sharp enough in the center but not very good at the edges at any aperture. It's not a good performer by conventional standards, but can have a unique charm when you turn its weaknesses to your advantage.

The later MC 124G lens is better Tessar copy than the 50-60’s Zeiss Tessar it has better color and sharpness

 

[Retro-Grouch]

The later MC 124G lens is better Tessar copy than the 50-60’s Zeiss Tessar it has better color and sharpness

No doubt; much as I hate to admit it, the Yashinon on my Yashica D beats out the Tessars on both my Rolleis, a 3.5A and a 3.5B from 1953 and 1954. I don't know about sharpness, but definitely better contrast and color.

 

[chuckroast]

The M5 is designed for PX625 size battery, since Don adjusted the meter, the MR9 plus 386 will give a false read, so I use a dummy adapter and 386 or just the alkaline PX 625 and I never had unable to screw in issue

That's only if you use a voltage dropping MR9. There are MR9 size adapters that are purely mechanical without any voltage dropping diode in them. That's what folks are talking about here.

 

[Photosynthetech]

The perfect Leica

 

[Duofold RF]

That's only if you use a voltage dropping MR9. There are MR9 size adapters that are purely mechanical without any voltage dropping diode in them. That's what folks are talking about here.

Yes there are two versions, the MR has built in diode which is bit thicker, the one without the built in diode which is thinner I call it dummy one.

 

[chuckroast]

The perfect LeicaView attachment 4838117

All the film Ms are perfect to someone in some way. I love my M5 but no more so than my M2. And I want an M3, M4, M-A, and even an M6 is someone wanted to give me one. Oh, and if anyone here has an M11 they cannot stand, I'd be happy to take it off your hands.

 

[Uncle Bill]

I recently picked up an early production chrome M5 locally through my used camera pusher at Burlington Camera west of Toronto and shot a test roll of Kodak Tri-X. I'm really happy with the results with the drying negatives. I can see why my brother loves his.