Stephen
Lifetime Member
Still collecting.......
Posts: 2,718
|
Post by Stephen on Apr 19, 2013 6:35:54 GMT -5
If the micro 4/3 is trusted with the adaptor, then it will work, most adaptors are on the thin side deliberately to assure all lenses reach infinity. Also against great precision in Digital sensors is the heat of operation, it alters focus a bit, which normally the auto focus compensates for.
Basics.....You can trust a lens and it's focusing scale more than any camera body......but it's always worth checking.
Camera bodies get more damage due to handling, old Russian and Leica especially bottom loaders, they squash......
The reason a checker is used is that it is a "standard", a Gauge which can be trusted.
Stephen.
|
|
Berndt
Lifetime Member
Posts: 751
|
Post by Berndt on Apr 19, 2013 8:38:16 GMT -5
You are right. I remember having a M42 adapter, where the infinity point seems to be slightly "behind". However, what is still confusing me most is the fact, that I own at least three FEDs, which are definitely not adjusted to the Leica standard, you mentioned BUT lens and body are adjusted to each other in a way, that they are still working very good ... just with the mounted lens though. As I would assume it as being most unlikely, that lens and body can both de-adjust over the years exactly in a way, that they are still adjusted to each other, I would say, that some repairmen are doing something, when those cameras become refurbished for sale. But then, if such an effort is invested, why don't they directly adjust everything to standard ? And, if it is easier to adjust just one part to the other, which one is easier to adjust, the lens or the body ? Just curious.
|
|
Stephen
Lifetime Member
Still collecting.......
Posts: 2,718
|
Post by Stephen on Apr 19, 2013 10:41:54 GMT -5
The rangefinder in the body is easier to adjust, a few moments, to get the rangefinder to read with the lens, and the lens being OK generally otherwise, should mean the body will work with other lenses as well!!, but hidden within this is the body may be out in some way, and such an adjustment is only covering up the problem, not solving it.
A classic repair situation I dealt with, was with a Leica fake, a Russian body with Fed and Zorki parts, and the owner thought is was a Leica, the clue was his Leica lenses had been adjusted to work, it turned out two had, and the body was also adjusted, getting a compromise that worked. He was shocked to find the camera was a fake, he had taken award winning shots on it of African wild life.
In checking it over, the body was set to 28.79, and his non-adjusted Leica standard lens worked with the rangefinder to the focus scale, but measured short of infinity in practice, the depth of field covered the mismatch. He simply never noticed any problem, as in the African shots all were at smaller apertures due to the bright conditions.
The other two telephotos, a Leica 135 mm and a Leica 200 mm, had been adjusted on the lens rear rim to work with the 28.79mm thick body, and moved the rangefinder in time with the lens scale quite correctly.
He said he had given the lot to "Leica" to be adjusted, and they never commented on it not being a Leica, but it turned out on closer questioning that the Leica servicing was in Tanganyika at a Leica agency. The local repair man had obviously left the body as it came in, and finding the standard lens was acceptable, took the way out of setting the telephotos to work with the existing rangefinder and body. What should have been done was re-set the body to correct thickness, then the three lenses will all fit and they will all work, then set the rangefinder to work to the scales.
The lot was taken apart after we purchased it, the camera body set exactly to 28.8mm, the lenses were checked on the focus checker, which showed the infinity marked to be perfect, and the scales all matched, as you would expect from Leica.
The standard lens now worked with the body perfectly, but the other two needed to have the the rear rim loosened and adjusted to work with the rangefinder, as set.
Once all set up, I tested the whole outfit and it worked as well as any other Leica set-up, top quality results, but we only paid for the lenses at Leica prices, the body at FED prices. This was in the 1970's, long before the avalanche of Leica fakes, the fake being made in Cairo.
Stephen.
|
|
mickeyobe
Lifetime Member
Resident President
Posts: 7,280
|
Post by mickeyobe on Apr 19, 2013 10:55:07 GMT -5
Mmmmh ... a rangefinder has no aperture ? Same focal length ? Same depth of field ? Mickey, what do you mean ? I apologize for my stupidity For me, a rangefinder is a device for measuring a distance/setting the focus or a camera, equipped with such. Yes !!! Always a lot of new things to learn too. So many words, my dictionary is giving me just nonsense or unsatisfying results. But google is a blessing nowadays. I often provides an understandable image of a specific word, where an ordinary dictionary fails. Berndt, I misunderstood what you were saying. I thought you were referring to a range finder, not a rangerfinder type camera which is what I believe you were referring to.. I have been on painkillers and am not the sharpest blade in the Swiss Army knife. Never was. I think I may have your words right now. If my explanation is still fuzzy (zzzz) let me know and I shall have another go at it. I am now on a reduced dosage so some sense might be forthcoming. Mickey
|
|
|
Post by olroy2044 on Apr 19, 2013 13:27:37 GMT -5
Mickey said: Boy, do I know what you mean, Mickey! I'm in exactly that same situation Roy
|
|
Berndt
Lifetime Member
Posts: 751
|
Post by Berndt on Apr 19, 2013 20:06:12 GMT -5
Mickey, Roy ... I am sorry for your health situation. Hope, you will get better soon !!! Too heavy painkillers for a too long time are killing your stomach and you will get an additional problem. I know, what I am talking about
|
|