Hening wrote:
Thank you for your reply, MeanWearPants. I had understood it the way that it was the rubber that was removed, not the focussing ring itself, sorry for my misleading phrasing. - I don't have the 50 mm at hand, but an 85 Sonnar, and on that, I can not see how to remove the rubber - and get it back on. I'll see to it again when I have got the 50 which I have just ordered.
@ sebboh:
The MM has nothing to do with coating. It's the abbreviation for "Multi Mode", meaning that the lens can operate both in manual and automatic mode. - These lenses are still serviced by Zeiss Germany, whereas the non-MMs are not.
I have both the Planar 50/1.7 and 85. Both ribbed rubber are movable. I assumed this is the same for all Contax lenses.
Are you sure the MM is serviceable by Zeiss Germany? I wrote to them without reply. Then I tried Kyocera Japan whom refuse to service my MMG. They will still service MMJ though.
i love the sharpness of this lens wide open. havent shot any landscape with it yet so im not sure how it is stopped down but its certainly sharper wide open than the 50/1.4ze i had. i recently sold that one so im unable to compare the two. both are fine lens though but i needed the money to pay off other stuff so the more expensive lens had to go.
Are you sure the MM is serviceable by Zeiss Germany? I wrote to them without reply. Then I tried Kyocera Japan whom refuse to service my MMG. They will still service MMJ though.
My information is from Zeiss Germany, dated january 2009, but refers to RTS lenses only. With an N lens, I was referred to Tritec, who has taken over from Kyocera, but they have to send the lens to Japan. So if you have a direct connection to Japan, you're in luck.
BR-Hening
The reason I removed the rubber focus grip on the 50/1.7, was to get to the 3 radial screws that are used to adjust infinity. I'm remembering the 85 Sonnar's focus screws are under the front ID ring, so the rubber grip shouldn't need removing.
JimBuchanan wrote:
The reason I removed the rubber focus grip on the 50/1.7, was to get to the 3 radial screws that are used to adjust infinity. I'm remembering the 85 Sonnar's focus screws are under the front ID ring, so the rubber grip shouldn't need removing.
Jim,
Nice work as usual. By the way, any reasons for the conversion instead of using adapter? I converted one to use with my Sony but was using it fine with an adapter on my 5DII...
Apr 09, 2010 at 08:32 AM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
I hope he doesn't mind, but I can answer for Jim. He converted my Leica 90mm f/2 (non-AA) to a Canon mount and it is so much nicer using it than when it was on an adapter. The conversion is so much more solid and he tuned it wonderfully for infinity as well. A mount conversion is no more and probably a bit less than a good adpater and for me it is the better solution. Of course if you wanted to use the lens on different camera platforms or with the original mount, then an adapter would be better.
JimBuchanan wrote:
The reason I removed the rubber focus grip on the 50/1.7, was to get to the 3 radial screws that are used to adjust infinity. I'm remembering the 85 Sonnar's focus screws are under the front ID ring, so the rubber grip shouldn't need removing.
Hi Jim
thank you for your fast reply. I mentioned the 85 only to indicate that I did not have the 50 at hand. The 85 does not need infinity adjustment.
My problem is that I can not see HOW to remove this rubber. Do you use a little flat screwdriver to come in under the rubber, or how do you do it? On my 85, the rubber is sitting so tight that I can not imagine how it would be possible.
Steve Spencer wrote:
I hope he doesn't mind, but I can answer for Jim. He converted my Leica 90mm f/2 (non-AA) to a Canon mount and it is so much nicer using it than when it was on an adapter. The conversion is so much more solid and he tuned it wonderfully for infinity as well. A mount conversion is no more and probably a bit less than a good adpater and for me it is the better solution. Of course if you wanted to use the lens on different camera platforms or with the original mount, then an adapter would be better....Show more →
Thanks, Steve. I was thinking maybe there is something else beside usability.
One thing I see in Jim conversion's photo is that there's a big gap between the rear element and the new mount. Light reflection/leak from inside the lens could potentially get to the sensor thru that gap.
debuggerus wrote:
Jim,
Nice work as usual. By the way, any reasons for the conversion instead of using adapter? I converted one to use with my Sony but was using it fine with an adapter on my 5DII...
It's in my blood, I guess. And let me say right here that theres nothing wrong with a good adapter. The 2 issues with the adapters, though, build quality and proper thickness to give good infinity focus. Problem is these dead end lenses with no modern sensor cameras for them (Minolta, Contax, etc) may not be properly infinity adjusted in the first place. Even if the adapter is the proper thickness, one may still have an issue with infinity. I've had a lot of practice doing this so, I just do it.
thank you for your fast reply. I mentioned the 85 only to indicate that I did not have the 50 at hand. The 85 does not need infinity adjustment.
My problem is that I can not see HOW to remove this rubber. Do you use a little flat screwdriver to come in under the rubber, or how do you do it? On my 85, the rubber is sitting so tight that I can not imagine how it would be possible.
BR - Hening
I use a dentist probe, sliding the thin bar under the rubber grip, working it away from any adhesive on the focus ring and it can be worked off.
debuggerus wrote:
Thanks, Steve. I was thinking maybe there is something else beside usability.
One thing I see in Jim conversion's photo is that there's a big gap between the rear element and the new mount. Light reflection/leak from inside the lens could potentially get to the sensor thru that gap.
There could be a gap between the M42-EOS bayonets I use, depending on the size of the rear element. Light won't come out of the gap, as there is no opening to the outside world from the lens body. There could be light reflecting back onto the back of the bayonets I use and then reflect back toward the sensor. I have painted this part flat black on some lenses, but have to pass that issue on to the user. Industrial Sharpies work very well for this.
JimBuchanan wrote:
I use a dentist probe, sliding the thin bar under the rubber grip, working it away from any adhesive on the focus ring and it can be worked off.
Thank you, Jim. - I have also discovered that you do this kind of things as a job. So I know where to go if I can't do it myself. That makes me look more confident towards my just purchased lens...
Next problem, how do you adjust the focus? I have read shirozina's advice https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/402782 : "Under this are 3 screws which when removed give access to the clamping ring. CAUTION! this also holds the front element in place so keep the lens upright!"
He uses an angle finder, which I don't have and hardly will buy just for this purpose. And even if I did, if the lens is to be kept upright, it would point to the ceiling of my room, which is not quite infinity.
Alternative seems to be trial and error: loosen the screws, move the clamp ring a bit, tighten screws, put the lens back on camera, try on distant object; repeat.
Is this the way to do it?
Don't know what shirozina is taking about. I have never seen the infinity focus screws also hold the front element in place. Then, I have never worked on all lenses in the world, either.
The typical mechanism is for the screws to clamp the focus ring so that there is a minimum focus stop and an infinity focus stop. Thru pixel peeping on your computer and the infinity shots taken wide open, you will be able to tell the correct adjustment.
Jim B, I have a question with regards to the focus grip removal - How to do you go about putting it back in place and preventing it from slipping/being loose?
Do you use a small amount of adhesive to hold it or just be very careful not to stretch the rubber when removing in the first place?
I used to use WD-40 to put bicycle hand grips on and it had the side effect of drying up to be a bit sticky (at least with the type of rubber in handlebar grips), have you ever tried something similar with a focus grip?
I am careful to not stretch the rubber grip. Sometimes I will wash it with comet and toothbrush to remove finger grease and dirt, and sometimes use rubber cement, sparingly, as an adhesive. Its just a grip and shouldn't slip.
Empire wrote:
Jim B, I have a question with regards to the focus grip removal - How to do you go about putting it back in place and preventing it from slipping/being loose?
Do you use a small amount of adhesive to hold it or just be very careful not to stretch the rubber when removing in the first place?
I used to use WD-40 to put bicycle hand grips on and it had the side effect of drying up to be a bit sticky (at least with the type of rubber in handlebar grips), have you ever tried something similar with a focus grip?...Show more →
One simple thing that works for me is heating the rubber grip with a hairdryer so it will expand naturally and comes of more easily. When reattaching the grip heat it again and put it on quickly (and still carefully!).
I was not talking about 'infinity screws'. This lens needs extra care as if you loosen the 3 screws under the rubber ( the focus adjustment screws) too much they become detatched from the inner part which then requires dimantling of the lens using a special friction ring tool on the front ring and removal of 3 screws which hold the front lens group in place.
The only Zeiss I have now are 35mm F 2.8 Distagon, and 135mm F 2.8 Sonnar.