Leica lens management LTM vs. M

[Hassasin]

Full compatibility from LTM to M is claimed, and I have no doubts that is how it's supposed to work.

While not all lenses are available in LTM, many are, including some new makes. If you own both body types, the Barnacks and the M, do you go for the LTM mount when available, and use them on M bodies with adapter, or tend to trust M mount for direct fit more? Since M to LTM is not possible, seems to be prudent to stick with adapter route ?

Are there any LTM / M adapter combos with problem history? Not asking about 3-rd party adapters, but perhaps some focal lengths acting up when used on M body with an adapter.

At this point I have 2 Barnacks, M5 and MDa (with M4 in my rifle scope) and certainly not doubling up on whatever lens just to direct mount.

 

[Laurent]

I have both, partly for historical reasons (I had a M4 before the IIIa) , partly because I tried the Soviet lenses on the M4 first.

Nowadays, I'd tend to buy an LTM version so that it fits both cameras, at least for wide and "normal" (21 to 50mm) which is my most used range.*

I remark that there are combinations I love more, like the 21mm (color skopar f/4) on the IIIa, or the 35mm for the M4 (suits the finder very well and avoids needing the accessory finder)

* I do not use longer than 50 a lot, my only "long" lens is an Elmarit 90mm

 

[Don_ih]

The only issue I had with an adapted lens was an Elmar 35mm that (1) needed the infinity lock pin removed so it cleared the M4-2 while focusing and (2) stopped adjusting the rangefinder patch 2/3 of the way through it's focus range (can't remember which direction). So it was not ideal. When it was focusing, it was focusing correctly.

 

[guangong]

For a new lens, if available I trend towards LTM and use adapters for M cameras. My Ms were all made by Leitz and most bought new at the time. As for later Leica made cameras, the adapters should work equally as well, but I have no experience with them.