They all use shims and are calibrated one by one as far as I know going back the 90mm/3.4 APO in LTM (disassembled 4 of them).
And I'm not sure what you mean buy "in the mount area" but I had access to shims from the mount with the recent 35mm/1.5, 28mm/2 Ultron and others.
Some, you need access from the front which maybe more complicated or at least requiring more than a screwdriver.
Flange distance and infinity focus adjustment shims are usually placed behind the lens mount and can be easily accessed by removing the four screws. Sometimes, adjusting these shims can correct both the optical infinity focus and the flange distance, and in certain cases also bring the RF alignment into proper calibration across the full focus range.
If RF alignment is still off, there are internal shims, usually located behind the RF coupling cylinder, that can adjust rangefinder focus, but accessing them requires deeper disassembly that many people prefer to avoid.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Shims usually are placed behind the lens mount and can be accessed by removing the four screws
I'm not sure we are talking about the same thing but I plan on explaining how to adjust shims in the 28/2.8 Color Skopar type II because Yuri from Yugosteel told me it would be useful.
And in this case, the shims are accessed via the front.
Once I find the time to shoot the pictures and post this, we may resume this discussion.
ShadowDoc wrote:
Anyone have more portraits from this lens they could share? I know the consensus is that it's sharper/more modern than most would probably seek from a portrait lens, but I'm still curious
jourdan.merritt wrote:
I'm new to the rangefinder world and am still learning with the patch, so my focus might not be perfect, but I don't find this lens too sharp, I think it's incredibly pleasing in its rendering.
/quote]
These photos make my eyes hurt. I hope the lens is better than this. Judging lens sharpness when misfocused is pointless.
Voigtländer clearly has a problem with this lens. I have read about misaligned lenses in various forums. I also ordered one, but had to send it back after testing it on my M11. It was slightly misaligned. This was only noticeable when I used it at aperture 2. It couldn't have been my M11 or my eyes. During a photo walk in Hamburg organised by a Voigtländer ambassador, I was able to try out a perfect specimen for a few hours. This lens really does produce fantastic images.
Feb 25, 2026 at 06:22 AM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
paulleica wrote:
Voigtländer clearly has a problem with this lens. I have read about misaligned lenses in various forums. I also ordered one, but had to send it back after testing it on my M11. It was slightly misaligned. This was only noticeable when I used it at aperture 2. It couldn't have been my M11 or my eyes. During a photo walk in Hamburg organised by a Voigtländer ambassador, I was able to try out a perfect specimen for a few hours. This lens really does produce fantastic images.
It is always hard to know when a lens is more prone to copy variation and misalignment. To know whether it happens 2 percent of the time vs 10 percent of the time would take evaluating dozens if not hundreds of lenses. Reports on forums are good cautions, but they can be misleading too. Lens rentals used to examine a number of copies of a lens and report how much variance there was in the different copies, but even those reports were probably not based on enough lenses and we don't even have that information for many recent lenses. It might be simply that more discerning people buy the Voigtlander 90 f/2 APO Ultron so problems are more likely to be noticed but don't occur at any more frequency than any other lens.
[Zitat]Steve Spencer schrieb: [Zitat]Paulleica schrieb: Es könnte einfach sein, dass anspruchsvollere Menschen das Voigtlander 90 f/2 APO Ultron kaufen, so dass Probleme eher bemerkt werden, aber nicht häufiger auftreten als bei jedem anderen Objektiv.
You may be right. For me, it is the first of many Voigtländer lenses that was not properly adjusted.
Hi, @pmeheut My post count is too low and I don't have an "upload and sell" membership here, so I'm not allowed to send PMs. I can't reply privately to your PM about your new lens. Apologies for inflicting it on everybody, but here's my response:
The locking ring I removed was no.2 in your picture - the inner one, next to the coupling cam. This locks the cam in place. When it is removed you should just be able to lift out the cam. Underneath there should be some shims. I found 3 shims of different thicknesses. I took out the thinnest shim, but that was too much adjustment and moved the rangefinder from front focus to back focus. As I said my earlier post, I found the right intermediate adjustment by using a thin layer of clear nail varnish without replacing the shim I removed.
The cam only goes back in one position, because there's a cutout at the base of the cam that aligns with a screw in the body of the optical cell, so you shouldn't have a problem aligning the cam. Just make sure it's properly seated, otherwise the cam will be too close to the sensor for the focus distance of the lens.
The adjustment only affects the rangefinder calibration, not the focus of the lens itself at the infinity stop, so providing that the infinity stop is properly calibrated on your lens, it's a question of finding the right shim combination to align the rangefinder correctly on distant objects when the lens is at its furthest stop.
As long as the cam surface and helicoid angle are machined correctly (they should be!), then the focus distance should coincide with the rangefinder alignment at all distances.
Hey all, long time lurker and (probably) first time poster. I just got an M11-D (I am elated =D) and happened to have this lens with me (previously for adapting on a long gone Fuji X-T5 and then Nikon Zf).
I noticed that when I attached this lens to M11-D, the bright frame lines switch to 28/90mm and image field selector moves closer to the lens. Other lens that I have is Classic Nokton 35mm f/1.4 II. When I attach that, I think frame lines of 35/135mm are shown.
Does anyone know does the camera knows that I attached a 90mm lens? I thought only Leica lenses have 6-bit encoding.
It the camera indeed recognize 90mm lens, would it also recognize 28mm APO Lanthar and 50mm f1.2 Nokton? That would be awesome if it does as I am considering them.
Thanks for any insights as to how this focal length recognition works for VM lenses!
The Leica M lens mount is slightly different for each major focal length represented by a set of frame lines in order to bring up the appropriate frame lines in the viewfinder. But I don't believe that the camera actually knows that a 90mm lens, for example, is attached, rather than a 28mm lens. That is what 6-bit coding is for. Normally, with a non-Leica lens, if you want EXIF to show the correct focal length, you have to manually select a lens code in-camera. Otherwise, with 6-bit coded lenses, you would leave lens selection on auto and the camera will base lens info on the 6-bit code.
rscheffler wrote:
The Leica M lens mount is slightly different for each major focal length represented by a set of frame lines in order to bring up the appropriate frame lines in the viewfinder. But I don't believe that the camera actually knows that a 90mm lens, for example, is attached, rather than a 28mm lens. That is what 6-bit coding is for. Normally, with a non-Leica lens, if you want EXIF to show the correct focal length, you have to manually select a lens code in-camera. Otherwise, with 6-bit coded lenses, you would leave lens selection on auto and the camera will base lens info on the 6-bit code....Show more →
Ahh, I see! So, bringing up correct frame lines is mechanical and correct EXIF data is more digital. Well, I am super glad to learn that.
It is indeed very easy to change the calibration, First, remove the 4 screws and the flange.
Then using a lens spanner, unscrew the locking ring just around the rangefinder coupling cam.
Then you can disassemble said cam and inside the lens, you will see the shim.
If you are in front-focus, you can remove the thinnest shim, reassemble and test.
If you are in back-focus, you need to add a shim. I made my own with a 0.01mm copper sheet cut using a circle cutter: it was not easy but after a few trial, I managed to have a very good calibration.
Waiting for 0.02mm sheets because I'm hoping to reach perfection.
pmeheut wrote:
... it was not easy but after a few trial, I managed to have a very good calibration.
Waiting for 0.02mm sheets because I'm hoping to reach perfection.
pmeheut wrote:
It is indeed very easy to change the calibration, First, remove the 4 screws and the flange.
Then using a lens spanner, unscrew the locking ring just around the rangefinder coupling cam.
Then you can disassemble said cam and inside the lens, you will see the shim.
If you are in front-focus, you can remove the thinnest shim, reassemble and test.
If you are in back-focus, you need to add a shim. I made my own with a 0.01mm copper sheet cut using a circle cutter: it was not easy but after a few trial, I managed to have a very good calibration.
Waiting for 0.02mm sheets because I'm hoping to reach perfection....Show more →
Great explanation, and thanks for posting the pictures. Hopefully this will help many people who are experiencing miscalibration with their lenses. Yuri (yukosteel) may end up putting together an article showing the different ways to adjust this, since the process is often lens dependent and can vary based on factors like the body design, lens size, and other physical details.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Yuri (yukosteel) may end up putting together an article showing the different ways to adjust this, since the process is often lens dependent and can vary based on factors like the body design, lens size, and other physical details.
I'm in the process of writing my own blog about it with detailed instructions because Yuri pushed me to do so.
But it may take me a few weeks or even months.
BTW, I'm double-checking everything I said because with a high-resolution sensor, even the smallest rangefinder miscalibration can produce misleading results.
pmeheut wrote: Focusing a 90mm/2 would be interesting with the original MD.
Nah, it's actually pretty easy. Just stop it down a good amount and use the distance scale on the lens. Plus it's film, so you don't have to be ultra precise. Wide open would be another story though. 🙂🍺
Focusing a 90mm/2 would be interesting with the original MD.