Cheap Chinese LTM to M adopters, ''My experience''

seanE · Mar 8, 2016

Ok, I asked, I was warned, And I went ahead and did it anyway

Let me make it simply ''DONT BUY THEM'' ''THER A SCAM'' ''unless your happy with no focus accuracy under 6ft''

It works like this, When a strapped for cash buyer sees two pieces of metal one for 12 euros and an other for 60 or 100, He will automatically assume that one would be unable to ''f#$@k up'' such a simple mechanism, No electronics, No AF motors, WRONG,

The threads don't evan nearly match up,
''your left with your aperture ring all on one side''
The focus is alright at infinity, but loses it at close range, I would rant about how anyone could when designing such a simple device that is going to be replicated thousands of times and fail to measure and test it, But I have came to two posable conclusions.

1... I will now have to buy the voigtlander adopter at a cost of 70? including post, add on top of that the two Chinese ones I bought and there shipping ''40 euro'' And I now have a total of 110 euros spent. ''win win for someone right?

2.. There was some poor slave designing my adopter getting a handful of rice a week. So I feel kind of bad now complaining.

I have used the adopter to take photos and they work to an extent. But they are designed wrong.

Here is a image of the one I bought, Notice the style and layout of the wighting,
It comes in different focal lengths I have both nether work.
It appears to me that there are two different manufactures of chines adopters, But the one below is a dud.

seanE · Mar 8, 2016

Feel free to give your own experience, ''it might save someone a few bob''

mdarnton · Mar 8, 2016

OK, I'll give my experience, then. Over the last 40 years I've bought Leica rings, Voigtlander rings, and $7 Ebay rings. Except for the non-Leica ones having some sharp edges, having had maybe 6 or 8 Leica, 4 Voigtlander, and a half dozen cheapies, I've never had a bit of a problem with any of them.

If your lens focuses good at infinity, but not close up, it's not the adapter's fault! Don't blame the adapter for that.

I don't see a single thing wrong with the one in the photo. Perhaps you can enlighten us.

I hope no one takes your "review" too seriously!

Ko.Fe. · Mar 8, 2016

I din't have problems with MiC ones for 50mm framelines. Not for Jupiter-8, nor for Summarit 50 1.5 wide open. I have tried several FSU and Leica 50mm lenses with MiC adapters. Works fine.
But with 35-135 it din't worked well. LTM lens would align on LTM body, but on M with 35-135 MiC, it will shift lens position. Hector 135, for example, will not focus on M body.

blockend · Mar 9, 2016

I have two Chinese LTM to M adapters. The first engages and locks nicely on M39 and M mount, and focus appears to be correct from minimum distance to infinity with various FSU lenses. However it gives some slack in the frame line lever when on the camera, so the bayonet dimensions are a fraction out, but not enough to deter use. The second is a different brand and I didn't get further than a few degrees of turn before abandoning the experiment. I'm sure it would have locked given sufficient force, but the effort was beyond my mechanical sympathies and would have had Wetzlar's engineers spinning in their graves.

It's the old story with cheap Chinese products and Soviet optical goods before them, get a good one and it'll be brilliant, but quality control isn't to the best western standards.

kobaltus · Mar 9, 2016

My cheap chinese pentacon six to nikon adapter works perfect. God bless China.

Now I know that my pentacon six lenses are sharp as best nikkors. God bless ex comunist countries.

k.hendrik · Mar 9, 2016

Fotodiox.

Richard S. (rich815) · Mar 9, 2016

mdarnton said:
OK, I'll give my experience, then.....I've bought Leica rings, Voigtlander rings, and $7 Ebay rings.....I've never had a bit of a problem with any of them.

My experience too, never a problem.

bdial · Mar 9, 2016

The one I have seems to be fine, though I've not used it with anything longer than a 50. My only problem with it was that the edges were almost sharp enough to shave with, but a few minutes with some Scotch-brite and a little emory paper in places took care of that.

The saying "you get what you pay for" is almost always true and high quality control costs money.

seanE · Mar 13, 2016

Ok, when I was buying everyone was saying don't touch them, but now everything seems to have changed As I said in my post, the two I got were made wrong. The lenses don't line up right when attached Which tells me whoever makes the adopters dose not pay much ''if any'' attention to detail, which is why I blame the adopter for close focus being off, ''The longest lens I have is a 35mm 2.5''

Xmas · Mar 15, 2016

seanE said:
Ok, when I was buying everyone was saying don't touch them, but now everything seems to have changed As I said in my post, the two I got were made wrong. The lenses don't line up right when attached Which tells me whoever makes the adopters dose not pay much ''if any'' attention to detail, which is why I blame the adopter for close focus being off, ''The longest lens I have is a 35mm 2.5''

It may seem like a simple device but it needs to have tight tolerances.

A Ch one would not mount easily, ten minutes with a nail file fixed that. It was not my ring. It was ok otherwise.

If the rangefinder is ok at infinity but out close in it is more likely.

a) you are not using a collimeter or
b) your lens has a problem
c) your M4 has a problem

The moon is at infinity.

It takes me a weekend to get an M rangefinder near to factory accuracy, they are good for f/0.95 5cm.

Cowboys will tell you different.

There were two LTM setting standards the Leica lenses on Leica bodies have infinity at half one.
The Canon lenses on Canon bodies have infinity at 12:00. ( I think.)

Be careful when you buy lenses some are not compatible even if your M4 will accept any lens a late Canon LTM rather more picky.

Some Ms can be picky I've had new in box Leica asph lens fail to mount. I handed back to shopkeeper...

Only buy rangefinder kit when you can inspect and return. Most UK dealers (or EU) will allow immediate return, you get to pay return post.

Slagging of suppliers in general won't help... Some of the Ch rings are ok.

seanE · Mar 16, 2016

Im after getting some more adopters, So il give my thoughts on them too.

Olympus OM, to Sony NEX,

Im quite happy with this adopter, Its made of metal, And has a sufficiently tight tolerance, Altho if you fully tighten the lens on the focus becomes locked
''in practice this is not a problem but how it is there at all I have no idea'' ''and yes I'm referring to a bayonet mount lens''
Some things puzzle me, like why they chose a rouge sand blast finish on the mount, But all in all its fairly good.

Leica M to Sony E.

The lens release button is metal, but is a bit fragile looking, And requires a bit of pressure to operate,
But it gets the job done,
mounting lenses is also quite stiff, But over all a good product at a good price.

seanE · Mar 16, 2016

Also back stepping on the LTM to M mount adopters, I have finally gotten to the bottom of my mysterious blacked out bottom left and top right corners, affecting my CV 15mm, I put it down to my clumsy fingers, But after putting it on my a7 I can see it is caused by the fact my LTM to M mount adopters screw up the centre alignment of the lens, thus causing the hood on my CV 15mm 4.5 to blocking the two corners of the frame, since it is designed to be on the top and bottom where there is less sensor coverage.

''Cheap LTM to M adopters don't work for CV 15mm 4.5''

StephenT · Mar 16, 2016

I've had good experiences with the adaptors from Fotodiox as well.

Xmas · Mar 24, 2016

seanE said:
Also back stepping on the LTM to M mount adopters, I have finally gotten to the bottom of my mysterious blacked out bottom left and top right corners, affecting my CV 15mm, I put it down to my clumsy fingers, But after putting it on my a7 I can see it is caused by the fact my LTM to M mount adopters screw up the centre alignment of the lens, thus causing the hood on my CV 15mm 4.5 to blocking the two corners of the frame, since it is designed to be on the top and bottom where there is less sensor coverage.

''Cheap LTM to M adopters don't work for CV 15mm 4.5''

Trying the search function before posting or even reading the thread again... Might be better?

https://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=14413

The LTM 'standard' does not warrent interchangeability.

The M 'standard' is not wonderful either!

seanE · Mar 24, 2016

This thread was for me and others to give our experiences with cheap adopters as a guide for people in the market for one,
Thanks for the link tho, When I was reading about adopters online, people ware saying only cheaper Chinese adopters have mis alignment issues.
I was just about to sand off some of the adopter I use on my digital to fix the alignment issue, which I didn't want to do because of the implications.

Ricardo Miranda · Mar 26, 2016

seanE said:
Im after getting some more adopters, So il give my thoughts on them too.

Olympus OM, to Sony NEX,

Im quite happy with this adopter, Its made of metal, And has a sufficiently tight tolerance, Altho if you fully tighten the lens on the focus becomes locked
''in practice this is not a problem but how it is there at all I have no idea'' ''and yes I'm referring to a bayonet mount lens''
Some things puzzle me, like why they chose a rouge sand blast finish on the mount, But all in all its fairly good.

View attachment 152701

Leica M to Sony E.

The lens release button is metal, but is a bit fragile looking, And requires a bit of pressure to operate,
But it gets the job done,
mounting lenses is also quite stiff, But over all a good product at a good price.

View attachment 152708

So, what these thingies have to do with FILM or 35mm cameras?
Does that Sony NEX and E use film by any chance?

Xmas · Mar 28, 2016

seanE said:
This thread was for me and others to give our experiences with cheap adopters as a guide for people in the market for one,
Thanks for the link tho, When I was reading about adopters online, people ware saying only cheaper Chinese adopters have mis alignment issues.
I was just about to sand off some of the adopter I use on my digital to fix the alignment issue, which I didn't want to do because of the implications.

I've checked my LTM Canon Cameras and I was wrong they are like Leica LTM cameras and have infinity at 13:30 looking from front of camera. Same as Leica LTM camera and lenses, you can swap them...
Some FSU cameras are more wayward but they might have been ok at the factory door.
If you want to use your 15mm you may have to adjust it. I think my CV LTM lenses were all perfect from the factory I know I never adjusted any of the 40 or so I've had.
But your 15mm may have been adjusted already.
The only Ch adapter I've had a problem with would not mount on a M body easily and that needed a file. But it's lens alignment was ok. The M bodies are variable even with Leica M lenses.
If you buy the adapter from a return if not satisfied source it simplifies problems.
My iPhones were made in Ch.
Lots of K1000s were made in Ch.
Not had any problems with my Cosina lenses either.
If you sand the datum surface it will compromise use of the rangefinder.
It has never been easy to use a Leica.

guangong · Mar 29, 2016

I bought a Leica tm lens with adapter attached from a friend and discovered lens would not focus correctly. The adapter was German but not Leitz. Put on cheap Chinese adapter and worked properly. Crap can also be made in Germany too. Depends on the individuals making it. The very best film slitter for Minox comes from China. Also, even producers of high quality items are made in China, Vietnam , and Tailand but charge made in Japan, etc prices. Look carefully and you will often see "box (in very small letters) made in Japan (in big letters). Think Nikon, etc. This is especially the case with digital.

Cheap Chinese LTM to M adopters, ''My experience''

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency