I'm wondering if anyone has had problems with using Leica lenses on the Hexar rf. I'm experiencing focus problems. Especially close at large apertures(which would make sense if there is a problem at all.) Konica said that lenses might have to be calibrated somehow for the particular camera. But I thought that the lenses would be fine on the Hexar.

-- roy gumpel (rgumpel@earthlink.net), April 23, 2002

Answers

What lenses and what apertures in particular are you shooting Roy? The Hexar has a shorter rangefinder base than the M Leicas, and even in Komica'a literature they state that F2 is about the maximum aperture that can be reliably focussed, especially at close ranges. What they've told you about the individual tuning may be correct. I've heard rumour that the reason Konica only sells the special edition high speed 50mm is that it is in fact tuned to the body it is sold with. This is not the first time things like this have happened. Early in its production run, the MD11 motordrive for the Nikon FE/FM often had to be sent in with the camera it was being used on to be internally adjusted for wind tension, otherwise it may or may not have worked. This was of course cured with the MD12.

-- Bob Todrick (bobtodrick@yahoo.com), April 23, 2002.

The above should read "the reason Konica sell their high speed 50mm IN KIT FORM ONLY.

-- Bob Todrick (bobtodrick@yahoo.com), April 23, 2002.

Roy, I own a HexarRF and use the hex90 and hex50 together with a CV 35/1.7 Ultron. The voigtlander lens which is the same as the leica lenses (at least I've never heard of an incompatability issue with Leica-CV) works fine on the Hexar, also at full aperture, close focus. Also I've tested a 50 'lux in a shop, shot a couple of pics, at full aperture, they all came out fine. Bob; > The Hexar has a shorter rangefinder base than the M Leicas The physical baselength of the hexar is exactly the same as the M's. Only the viewfinder magnification is 0.6, so the effective baselength is shorter than the 0.72 and 0.85 leica's but a little bit longer than the 0.58! In fact you should read on Erwin Puts website: (http://www.imx.nl/photosite/leica/technics/rfaccuracy.html) He also writes: "..It is clear that up to 50mm the accuracy is well above any critical demand...." I have to admit focussing a 75/1.4 will be hard. (the same as with a 0.58 M leica). So, which lens were you speakling of?

-- Joop (mes@nat.vu.nl), April 23, 2002.

I use a 35mm Summicron with my RF and it works fine, even at close focus wide open.

-- Pete Su (psu@kvdpsu.org), April 23, 2002.

roy -- my first rf had a misadjusted rf. i got a replacement camera and never had any trouble thereafter. it sounds to me like your camera simply needs an adjustment. this i snot at all uncommon for mechanical RF cameras. more m cameras than leica would care to admit come thru with misadjusted RFs (perhaps shipping an RF camera is the real issue). anyway, take your camera to any competent "old school" repairer who will be able to quickly ascertain whether you need an rf adjustment. at that point, you may have to return it to konica. the rf adfjustment in the hexar is no where near as straightforward as in the m cameras.

-- roger michel (michel@tcn.org), April 23, 2002.

Joop, I get my information from Stephen Gandy..." Curiously, the Hexar's image magnification is lower at .6 (same as the Leica CL) instead of Leica's .72 or .85, resulting in an effective rangefinder baselength of 69.2 x .6 = 41.5 which is 83% as accurate (all other factors being equal) as the .72 M6. In practical terms this means the Hexar will be easier to use with the 28 and 35 for eye glasses wearers, but won't give the focusing accuracy needed for the 50/1.4 or faster, 75/1.4, 90/2, or 135/4 wide-open at the closest focusing distance".....Also, Konica themselves have said the reason they are not concentrating on F1.4 lenses is that they feel there may be focussing problems at close range.

-- Bob Todrick (bobtodrick@yahoo.com), April 23, 2002.

Hi all,

Simply for the record, a 135 mm f/4 Tele Elmar focuses accuratly at short distance with mine full open at short distances.

I must admit framing is more difficult than with a higher magnification finder and perhaps 0.72 is a more potent compromise than the 0.6 magnification of the Hexar RF.

I think it is hard to guarantee the perfect focusing full open and at short distances of a Noctilux, a 75mm Summilux and Erwin Putts adds to these ones the 135 mm f/3.4 Apo (for which i'm not so sure considering my results with the older f/4).

Anyway, saying f/2 is a limit for all lenses to focus properly on an Hexar RF is irrelevant. Full open and at the same distance from the subject the DOF tolerance of a wide angle and even a 50 mm lens is sufficient to compensate for the shorter effective base of the Hexar RF. I never heard the 50mm f/1.4 Summilux has any problem focusing accurately on Hexar RF, but 75mm f/1.4 Summilux why having the same maximum aperture will probaly be not focused accurately. Conversly the new 28mm f/1.2 will surely focus accurately enough on an Hexar RF.

Conclusion, if you're sure you'll use Noctilux or 75mm Summilux, go for a Leica (0.72 if you wear glasses, 0.85 otherwise)... But if any other lens in the Leica range is to be used, you won't have any problem focusing them accurately with an Hexar RF.

Friendly.

François P. WEILL

-- François P. WEILL (frpawe@wanadoo.fr), April 23, 2002.

there are so many factors that determine RF accuracy beyond just effectice baselength, which actually is a very misleading number. effective baselength so-called is a product of actual baselength (crudely put, the distance between the two rf windows) and VF mag. thus a 100mm baselength at .5 mag yields the same effective baselgth number as a 50mm baselength at 1.0 mag (50 in both cases). however, the first rf system likely will be more accurate since the higher mag camera will necessarily magnify the ineveitable margin of error in the rf system AND that margin of error will be higher in that second camera because the actual baselength is shorter. other factors also influence accuracy to a significant degree, including (1) rf type -- coincident image and/or split. leica incorporates both types for more accuracy. many rfs are coincident only and are harder to focus in certain circs; (2) rf contrast is a huge factor, perhaps the most important; (3) rf briteness (4) focusing helix travel distance. a long throw (this varies lens to lens) makes it much easier to achieve precise focus. erwin puts wrote at length on this subject in his review of the noct in photo techniques. this is all a long-winded way of saying that the mere fact that the hexar rf has a .6 mag is by no means evidence, standing on its own, that the camera is not up to focusing lenses that work with the .72 m cameras. i have a good friend who has tremendous success with a noctilux and the hexar rf. don't make any assumptions -- test test test. in the end, the most important factor may be the eyesight of the photog. p.s. while the hexar has the same mag as the cl, the hexar's actual baselength is about three times as great.

-- roger michel (michel@tcn.org), April 23, 2002.

Bob, read your own quote again. The RF's effective baselength is shorter than the *0.72 and 0.85*. It is longer than the 0.58. effective baselength is the product of the physical baselength (the same for Leica and Konica) times the viewfinder magnification (0.6 for Konica, 0.58/0.72/0.85 for Leica).

To the original posting: There are 2 distinct issues at play with the Hexar RF. The first is the adjustment of the rangefinder, many of which came from the factory "off". Put your lenses on your RF and sight at a sharply-defined vertical-line target (like a radio tower) at least 1 mile away! Set the lens to infinity and observe if the images coincide exactly horizontally (there could be a slight vertical misalignment too but that doesn't affect focusing accuracy). If not, your problem is easily corrected by an adjustment of the rangefinder. If the images are coincident at true infinity (over 1 mile) then the second Hexar issue comes into play: the adjusted distance between the lens mount flange and the film plane. This maladjustment has been implicated many times but so far I haven't heard of anyone who has actually had this adjustment made to correct a focusing problem.

-- Jay (infinitydt@aol.com), April 23, 2002.

François

What "new 28mm f/1.2"? If you're thinking of the references to an f/1.2 in the 'Leica. The Program' catalogue, I'm afraid that this is a misprint. The newer 28mm is an f/2.

Nigel

-- Nigel Bowley (nigel.bowley@btinternet.com), April 23, 2002.

Thanks for the tip Nigel

As their PDF file on Leica site indicated a new f/1.2 28mm upcoming I supposed it was a relacement for the f/2.

François P. WEILL

-- François P. WEILL (frpawe@wanadoo.fr), April 23, 2002.