M8/M9 and macro

[vahe_sahakian]

<p>Ok, if you intend to do lot of macro, go for a DSLR,<br>

But, for occasional macro has anyone done close-ups with M8/M9 and Visoflex?</p>

<p>Vahe</p>

[Alex_Es]

<p>Yes. Detest Visoflex on M8. Old Canon 50/1.8 and magnifier not bad on M8 but better on RD-1s for quick n' dirty macro. Even for occasional macro use a DSLR. Try close-up filters if you don"t have a macro lens. </p>

[aplumpton]

<p>Vahe, I have used the Visoflex II and III on the M8 with very good success. They are slower to use than macro on an SLR or a DSLR, more limited in lens choice, but perfectly useable. Handheld is difficult and the Visoflex is happier on a tripod. I did sell my 65mm Elmar Viso lens but now use the lens head from the 135mm Tele-Elmar. If I had the older 90mm lens, also with detachable lens head, that would be a good choice a well. Ifyou hook up an excellent Bellows-2 to the Viso you can expand the lens range further and do even closer macro (micro?).</p>

<p>"Occasional macro" can mean either once in a while patient shooting with the Viso, or simply occasional close-up shooting without much set-up. The Viso will do both extremely well, although an SLR or DSLR are more easy to use. But you did say occasional, so I assume a bit of extra effort is not too important a consideration.</p>

[vahe_sahakian]

<p>My “occasional” was meant to be very infrequently and always with tripod photographing small objects, no insects, no flowers, just to have the capability, just in case.<br>

I used to have a Viso-II that I used with Telyt 200 but I sold that setup a long time ago, how stupid.<br>

Big and ugly, that is Visoflex, but I love them and about to get another one, any actual difference between II or III’s? The II’s are plentiful and III’s are expensive.</p>

<p>Vahe</p>

[kens]

<p>Depends on which finder you use. The II on the M8/M9 is usable only with the chimney finder. The eye-level finder won't clear the top of the camera. The eye-level finder on the III clears the top of the camera ok, and of course mounting is easier because you don't have to remove the finder at all. If you're going to buy one at all I suggest spending a little more on the III.<br>

More...<br>

http://www.photo.net/leica-rangefinders-forum/00UZET </p>

 

[kens]

<p>One other thing to keep in mind. The Visoflex shows a 35mm full-frame view. Due to the smaller sensor of the M8 the 65mm lens records the view of an 87mm, the 90mm lens records the view of a 120mm, etc. There are no lines on the ground glass to help you with the smaller frame, but it's not a big deal. You get used to the small difference, or lines can be etched on the glass. The M9, having a full-frame sensor, doesn't have this problem with the Visoflex view.</p>

[mark cortella]

<p>Why not just use the 90 f4 macro,and its finder. Much more compact solution,for up to 1/3 life size on sensor images. And the M8/9 would show you right away if you got it. It would also provide much better image quality.</p>

[User_502260]

<p>If there is no issue of an auto diaphragm you could just get an adapter and put a 55/3.5 or 55/2.8 Micro Nikkor on either camera. If the rear display adjusts to the lower light level caused by closing down the lens then you might even be able to focus and use one of the Micro Nikkors at f/8 or f/11 while shooting hand held. A tripod would be preferable and could always be used if needed. Extension tubes can give greater magnification. With a BR-4 adapter you might even be able to get semi-automatic diaphragm opertation if you can get a double cable/switch to work. </p>

[mukul_dube]

<p>For occasional work of the kind you describe, a Visoflex should be adequate.<br>

In 1975 I had enough money for either a Leica M2 with 35mm and 90mm lenses or an SLR system with three lenses, extension tubes, etc. It was a Leica salesman who convinced me not to buy a Leica as I foresaw doing much close-up work. From early in its history the Leica has been a true system camera, one with which a user can do practically anything: but the accessories needed for some of those things are cumbersome and slow. This was one reason for the success of the Kine Exakta, a story repeated some decades later by Asahi Pentax, Nikon and others.</p>

[vahe_sahakian]

<p>I do have a Nikon F-2 with a number of MF lenses including the 55/3.5 Micro, who makes adapters for mounting the Nikon on Leica mount?</p>

<p>Vahe</p>

[kens]

<p>Even if you can adapt a Nikkor to the M8/M9 the rangefinder linkage will not be there.<br>

Neither the M8 nor M9 have live view display. You can't focus by watching the screen.<br>

So the only way you would be able to focus close up objects is through trial and error.</p>

[vahe_sahakian]

<p>If I understand what you are saying, the rangefinder linkage becomes inactive when a Visoflex is installed on the M Leica, with the rangefinder bypassed you now have a reflex system to work with and have only one option for focusing and that is through the Visoflex screen.</p>

<p>Vahe</p>

[paddler_b]

<p>Yes...</p>

[aplumpton]

<p>Vahe, I cannot speak for the utility of this one, but it does claim ability to mount Nikon SLR lenses on the M mount.</p>

<p>http://www.rugift.com/photocameras/nikon-leica-m-adapter.htm</p>

<p>The automatic functions are not retained and one would have to do stopped down metering. Not sure if the lens can focus to infinity. Also, while it may work directly on the M8 or M9 the focussing range might be a problem, as well as its confirmation, and you might have to instead use the Bellows-2 on the Visoflex, to get a reasonable focus range with the Nikon lens. I expect you would need a 16598 mount for the Bellows-2. A bit complicated, to say the least. Adding the Nikon to Leica M mount adapter to the Visoflex and to the M9 would possibly work, with confirmation of focus on the Viso screen, but the focussing range might be really <strong>limited</strong> (as it is when you use a 50mm Leica M mount lens on the Viso without using the bellows in between).</p>