Over the past few weeks, a few members of this forum have mentioned that they use (and like!) the Konica RF body with their tri-elmars. My question is this: I'm thinking about getting one of these bodies nfor the AE feature, but have heard that Konica used a slightly shorter flange-to-film distance than Leica, creating a situation where the M lenses won't focus perfectly on the Konica body. Have any of you used faster ('luxes) or longer lenses with your Konica, and if so what were the focus-results? Has anybody else heard about this compatibility issue?

Thanks in advance for your answers and input!

Jack

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), March 21, 2001

Answers

I bought my Hexar RF used, body only. I have never used a Konica lens on it. When I got the body the rangefinder was a tiny bit "off" at infinity (checking a radio tower about 2 miles away from the open window of my 3rd floor office. I carefully pried off the plastic plug on the top plate, noted the toothed wheel underneath, and used a small jeweler's screwdriver to move it just slightly until the images coincided. It now focuses all my Leica lenses perfectly at all distances. I don't know if there is any discrepancy between Konica and Leica lenses/bodies (which would only be a problem if you intend owning a mix of Konica and Leica lenses), or if it's a QC issue or what, but it's an easy fix and the RF is a great camera. Whether the RF's rangefinder is up to the task of close-focusing a Noctilux or 75 Summilux is questionable, due to the low (0.6x) finder magnification (same with M6TTL 0.58).

-- Jay (infinitydt@aol.com), March 22, 2001.

The one I checked with my Leica lens in a nearby store was off at infinity, but it was also off when using the Konica 50mm lens. I have to agree with Jay that some of the cameras were just not dialed in prior to shipping them out.(maybe too many-The store I looked at the camera was mad at Konica for sending them several cameras out of whack). I have a feeling once dialed in, they will focus any M lens as good as a .6 mag finder can. How hard was it to adjust the double image Jay?

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), March 22, 2001.

I just bought a LNIB Hexar RF off of ebay from a dealer in Hong Kong (I know, it was risky. I guess I'm just a thrill seaker). Because of the problems with focus on some Hexars, the first thing I did was check the focus at infinity and using the tape on the mirror test. Not sure if the mirror test means anything, but I saw it in the Leica FAQ on another web site. Based on these two tests, my Hexar appears to be focusing right on the money. This was using my 50 Summicron. I don't get giddy very often, but I really like this camera! Thanks to the feedback from Jay and Paul, I also bought the Tri Elmar. It should arrive tomorrow (new model, purchased from Delta Int.) Guess what I'll be doing this weekend! Oh, the serial number on my Hexar is 14480XX.

-- Bob (robljones@home.com), March 22, 2001.

The impression I'm getting is that the "back-focus discrepancy" disclaimer that Konica is using is nothing more than a bit of legalese designed to protect them from the possibility of a Leica lawauit. In practise I believe the difference (if it exists) is so small as to not be an issue. I've heard the distance is some very small fraction of a millimeter - a distance only of interest to lawyers :-) The only real focussing problem with Hexars seems to be a QC issue with the RF adjustment.

Mine shows no problems at all, and I have successfully used it with a 75/1.4 wide open at around 2 meters.

-- Paul Chefurka (paul_chefurka@pmc-sierra.com), March 22, 2001.

Leica law suite for what? The patent ran out several years ago on the M mount. That's why Voigtlander can make a leica m mount camera no problem as well. I know several Leica users that have bought the new Konica lenses for the Leica M. The lenses focus perfectly on the Leica cameras. What does that tell me? The new Konica has exactly the same mount as a Leica M, otherwise the Konica lenses would not sync up perfectly to the Leica bodies. I have not heard a single complaint that someone tried a Konica M lens on a Leica body and it didn't couple correctly. Their disclaimer is to help convince owners of their cameras to buy their lenses instead of the thousands of used Leica M lenses on the market.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), March 22, 2001.

The question was asked if it was easy to adjust the RF's RF. The answer is, for me it was. But I am used to doing little technical jobs like that. The biggest pitfall is prying the plastic plug off the top plate to expose the adjustment wheel without scoring the top plate or letting the plug fly off into oblivion. One past that, there's a toothed wheel that sits upright, visible through the hole in the top. The wheel sits next to a bracket with a notch at the top. Placing a screwdriver blade across the notch and toothed wheel, you use the notch as leverage so by turning the driver one way or the other, the toothed wheel gets moved to or fro. DO NOT PRESS DOWN HARD while doing this, you can bend the RF out of vertical alignment!! To check adjustment it's better to use a lens with a not-too-steep focusing helix, like a 135 or 90. Make sure you have a really sharp vertical target (like a radio or TV tower) and that it's at least a mile or more away. Set the lens to infinity, adjust the RF, rack the lens to close and back to infinity a couple times and re-check. Do this until the RF images line up exactly at infinity. There is no separate adjustment for close focus (other than minimum focus limit, which is buried inside the top plate and shouldn't need adjustment ever). The same adjustment procedure works for Leica M's, except the adjustment is made with a blade in the slot located in the middle of the RF follower wheel just inside the lensmount at 12 o'clock. Under NO circumstances put pressure up against the wheel!!

-- Jay (infinitydt@aol.com), March 22, 2001.

Andrew, ultimately nobody knows why Konica is saying that. You're right that the patent expired on the M mount and that Leica is unlikely to sue them for anything else. On the other hand, if they would rather you bought Hexanons instead of Summicrons, why did they put an M mount on the durn camera in the first place?

Actually, I think the Hexar has benefitted both companies. I bought a Hexar bercause I wanted a motorized AE body for my existing lenses, and then I bought a Tri-Elmar because I suspected it would be especially tasty on the Hexar (and boy was I right :-)

Maybe the back-focus disclaimer is just a dodge to try and keep the warrantee repair rates down...

-- Paul Chefurka (paul_chefurka@pmc-sierra.com), March 22, 2001.

I too agree that Konica and Voigtlander have been good for Leica and for all of us. Just look at the interest stirred up by two incidental comments made about the Hexar RF and the 3E in a post on a completely unrelated topic.

-- Bob (robljones@home.com), March 22, 2001.

Just wanted to clarify one point. I believe that Konica’s disclaimer regarding the use of Leica lenses on the Hexar RF and the focusing problem are two separate and distinct issues. The disclaimer means that Konica has no control over what Leica does and vise versa. The focus issue, in my opinion, was just an early production QC problem and has probably been rectified. We may be able to figure out where the serial number cut off is for the focus problem. A week or two ago I emailed Steve Gandy regarding this issue as I thought his web site was a good place for this type of information. As of yet, he has not responded.

-- Bob (robljones@home.com), March 22, 2001.

Leica has stated in the past that they assisted in the design of the Konica RF's finder.

Cheers,

-- John Collier (jbcollier@home.com), March 23, 2001.

Can anyone from Konica comment on this issue ?

-- Loo W. H. (loowh@starhub.net.sg), December 06, 2001.