mounts.htm Number of hits on this page:

Camera mounts & registers



CAMERA SYSTEM		MOUNT TYPE			REGISTER

Aaton			bayonet(?)			  40.00
Alpa			bayonet				  37.80
Argus			bayonet				  44.45
Arriflex		bayonet				  52.00

Balda Baldamatic lll					  44.70
Bolex			breech				  23.22
Bolex H8RX		1" x 32tpi thread		  15.31
Braun Colorette  					  44.70
Braun Colorette Super					  44.70
Braun Reflex Automatic					  44.70
Bronica S2A		bayonet & 57x1 thread		 101.70
Bronica ETRS		
Bronica GS1


Compur 00		rear outer: 25x0.5
			front inner: 22.5x0.5
			rear inner:

Compur 0		rear outer: 32.5x0.5
			front inner: 29.5x0.5
			rear inner: 29.5x0.5

Compur 1		rear outer: 39x0.75
			front inner: 40x0.75
			rear inner: 36x0.75

Compur 3		rear outer: 62x0.75
			front inner: 58x0.75
			rear inner: 58x0.75

Compur 5		rear outer: 92x0.75
			front inner: 86x0.75
			rear inner: 86x0.75


C-mount			1" x 32tpi thread		  17.526 (0.69")
C-S mount		1" x 32tpi thread		  12.50	
[also known as "1-32 UN 2A"]

Canon EOS		bayonet				  44.00
Canon EX1/2 VL		bayonet				  20.00
Canon R/FL/FD		breech or bayonet		  42.00
Canon screw		M39x1 thread			  28.80
Contarex						  46.00
Contax RF						  34.85		
Contax/Yashica		bayonet				  45.50
Contax G1		bayonet				  29.00

D-mount			0.625" x 32tpi			  12.29

Eclair			bayonet				  48.00
Exakta/Topcon		bayonet				  44.70
Exacta 66		breech lock			  74.10
Edixa Electronica					  44.70
Edixa-Rex		bayonet 			  53.00 

Hasselblad/Kiev88	multi start thread		  82.10
Hasselblad 500/2000	bayonet				  74.90

Icarex			breech lock			  48.00
(Icarex 35/35S/SL-706                  			  45.50?)
Iloca Electric					  	  44.70


K-mount 		bayonet				  45.46
Kilarflex					 	  92.30
Kilarscope						  78.80
Kiev 60/Kiev Six	breech lock			  74.10
Kiev 88			multi start thread	 	  82.10
Kodak Reflex S 						  44.70
Kodak Reflex lll					  44.70
Kodak Reflex IV						  44.70
Kodak Reflex Instamatic Reflex				  44.70
Kowa Six/Super 66	breech lock			  79.00
Konica AR		bayonet				  40.70
Konica F		bayonet				  40.50
Konica RF Hexar		screw				  27.95

Leica M			bayonet				  27.95 (27.80?)
Leica R			bayonet				  47.00
Leica screw		M39x26tpi			  28.80
Leitz Visoflex I	M39x26tpi		 	  62.50  (91.30 total)
(both are sometimes mistaken for M39 x 1mm, a tiny difference, but enough to cause problems with some non-Leica M39 lenses)
Leitz Visoflex II, III	Leica M bayonet		 	  40.00  (68.80 total)


Mamiya ZE		bayonet				  45.50

Mamiya 645		bayonet				  63.30
Mamiya RB		bayonet				 112.00
Mamiya RZ		bayonet				 105.00

Minolta AF		bayonet				  44.50
Minolta MD		bayonet				  43.50

Miranda dual BM/SM	bayonet/M44x1 thread		  41.50
Miranda TM only SM      M42x1 thread			  41.50
Miranda Laborec -       bayonet/M44x1 thread		  41.50
	dual BM/SM

Mirax Laborec BM/SM	Laborec-bayonet/M46x1 thread	  41.50

(Soligor TM only SM	M42x1 thread			  41.50
(Pallas TM only SM	M42x1 thread			  41.50


Narcissus		M24x1 thread			  28.80
Nikon			bayonet				  46.50
Novoflex						 100.00


Olympus OM		bayonet				  46.00
Olympus Pen F		bayonet				  28.95
Olympus E1		bayonet				  38.67 (38.80?) (adapter for OM lenses seems to require focusing beyond infinity, perhaps 0.13mm error due to film-thickness??)
(aka 4/3 or four/thirds)


Panasonic G1		Micro Four Thirds		  19.20 (calculated from a T-mount -> G1 adapter with 35.80mm thickness (register T2 = 55mm; - 35.80 = 19.20) 
Paxette			M39x1 thread			  44.00
Pentacon 6		breech lock			  74.10 
Pentax 6x7		bayonet 		 	  84.95  (74.10?)
Pentax 645		bayonet				  70.87
Pentax/Practica		M42x1 thread			  45.46 (add film thickness, and get 45.50mm....;))
Practica bayonet
Practiflex		M40x1 thread			  44.00 (not 45.50 as I wrote initially, see further down this page for more comments)	
Petriflex		breech lock			  43.50
Praktina		breech lock			  50.00


RAS			
Rectaflex						  43.40
Retina lllS						  44.70
Ricoh			breach mount			  45.50
RMS			0.800" x 36tpi thread 	 
Rolleiflex SL35		bayonet				  44.60
Rolleiflex SL66		bayonet				 102.80


Rollei 6008						  75.32
Rollei 6008 	        
  shutter-adapter	M39x0.75			  31.68
Rollei 6008 bellows					 +67.00 (minimum extension; add both bellows and shutter-adapter and you get 174.00mm minimum)	


Samsung NX10		bayonet				  25.50


Schneider		M26x0.5			


Sigma SA		bayonet				  44.00

S-mount			Screw M12x0.5mm				  



T2 mount		M42x0.75			  55.00
Topcon IC1		bayonet				  55.00


Voigtlander Bessamatic					  44.70
Voigtlander Ultramatic					  44.70
Voigtlander Vitessa-T					  44.70


Wrayflex		M41.2 x 26tpi			  42.05


Zeiss Ikon Flektoskop/F'meter				  84.50  (119.35 total)
Zeiss Ikon Panflex					  64.50	  (99.35 total)
Zenith 3M		M39x1 thread			  45.46
Zenit 80		multi start thread		  74.10


Microscopic lenses 	W 0.8" x 1/36"	[36tpi]	
(RMS)


Tripod mount		1/4" x 20tpi [aka UNC 1/4"]
			3/8" x 16tpi [aka UNC 3/8"]


Please note that there are almost a dozen different 1/4" & 3/8" types on the market; 
below the descriptions used for hand/machine taps (to cut thread into a hole):

UNC 1/4" (20tpi) [UNified Coarse, thread angle 60 degree, DIN 371]
UNC 3/8" (16tpi) [UNified Coarse, thread angle 60 degree, DIN 376]

UNF 1/4" (28tpi) [UNified Fine, thread angle 60 degree, DIN 371]
UNF 3/8" (24tpi) [UNified Fine, thread angle 60 degree, DIN 376]

UNEF 1/4" (32tpi) [UNified Extra Fine, thread angle 60 degree, DIN 371]
UNEF 3/8" (32tpi) [UNified Extra Fine, thread angle 60 degree, DIN 374]

BSP 1/4" (19tpi) [British Standard Pipe, thread angle 55 degree, ISO (straight cut) or DIN 5156 (spiral cut)]
BSP 3/8" (19tpi) [British Standard Pipe, thread angle 55 degree, ISO (straight cut) or DIN 5156 (spiral cut)]

BSPT 1/4" (19tpi) [British Standard Pipe Tapered, "Rc", thread angle 55 degree, DIN 5156]
BSPT 3/8" (19tpi) [British Standard Pipe Tapered, "Rc", thread angle 55 degree, DIN 5156]

BSPP 1/4" (19tpi) [British Standard Pipe Parallel, "Rp", thread angle 55 degree, DIN 5156]
BSPP 3/8" (19tpi) [British Standard Pipe Parallel, "Rp", thread angle 55 degree, DIN 5156] 

BSW 1/4" (20tpi) [British Standard Whitworth, thread angle 55 degree, ISO or DIN 371]
BSW 3/8" (16tpi) [British Standard Whitworth, thread angle 55 degree, ISO or DIN 376]

BSF 1/4" (26tpi) [British Standard Fine, thread angle 55 degree, DIN 371]
BSF 3/8" (20tpi) [British Standard Fine, thread angle 55 degree, DIN 376]

FG/BSC 1/4" (26tpi) [??/???, (bicycle applications), thread angle 60 degrees, DIN 79012]
FG/BSC 3/8" (26tpi) [??/???, (bicycle applications), thread angle 60 degrees, DIN 79012]

NPT 3/8" (18tpi) [National Pipe Thread [USA], to create conical holes (1:16), thread angle 60 degrees, DIN 5156]
NPT 3/8" (18tpi) [National Pipe Thread [USA], to create conical holes (1:16), thread angle 60 degrees, DIN 5156]


Further note that there used to be cheap hand-taps available 
(for low speed & low frequency use, about US$10), while it seems 
that currently only the harder & more expensive machine-taps are 
available (US$20-25).

Other options/differences are in the shape of the 'drain-channels' 
of the tap, for normal holes straight channels are fine, for blind 
holes you need spiral channels, to get the metal shavings out.


Abbreviations used here and in other literature

tpi = threads per inch
M = metric thread
Register = distance flange to film plane
BM = Bayonet Mount
TM = Thread Mount
RMS = Royal Microscopic Screw

When is an adaptor between two systems possible?

An adaptor is always possible; some are widely available, like M42-lens->brandX-camera or T2-lens->brandX-camera.
However, even custom order adaptors have to obey an optical law: the register of the lens system should be LARGER than the camera system. If the register of the lens system is SMALLER, or EQUAL (less than 1mm difference) than the camera system, the adaptor requires an optical element to make infinity focussing possible. Otherwise such an adaptor would act as a macro tube, putting the lens further away from the body than designed!
Also, the above non-optics formula only works if the lensmount is a bit smaller than the camera mount.
The extra optical elements are essentially acting as a mild teleconverter; needless to say that this won't improve image quality, nor do you want a teleconverter at all when using wide angle lenses....
The above is also the reason why there are NO non-optics M42 adaptors for Nikon and Leica (at least none that allows infinity focussing).

EOS adapting specialties

Since the EOS system has a rather small register, some very cute non-optics adaptations are possible: one can mount Leica and Nikon lenses on an EOS body! The adaptors are quite thin, so the lens release mechanism requires major engineering, hence they are very expensive ($200). If one can live with a screw instead of a fast release mechanism, cheaper solutions are possible.

(email me if you want more info about these adaptors).

For detailed instructions how to use these all-manual lenses on EOS cameras, see Neil K.'s site: EOS & Manual lenses

FD->EOS compromises

Many people ask about the possibility of mounting FD lenses on EOS cameras....you can, but not without a large compromise. The following solutions exist:
- Canon high end FD->EOS adaptor: as expensive as the EOS 1.4x, and also contains image degrading optical elements, thereby also acting as a slight (1.26x) teleconverter. Useless with wide angles, and only a real alternative if you already have expensive FD tele's, or can buy one cheap.
- Canon macro FD->EOS adaptor: no lens elements, but you loose infinity focus. Only practical for macro purposes, where infinity focus is not required.
- Aftermarket FD->EOS adaptors: cheap, but contain lens elements, just like the one sold by Canon, and are even worse in optical quality....there are more of these on the market, available for various lens/camera combinations, but all contain these image degrading lens elements. If you want to spoil the good quality of your FD optics, go ahead....;-((

EOS->Nikon incompatibility

Several other people ask whether it is possible to mount EOS lenses on Nikon (or Canon FD) bodies....sadly this is near-impossible, for several reasons:
1) Just like the Nikon->EOS (and Leica->EOS) adaption is so easy, because of very different registers, the same difference makes the reverse situation impossible, mounting an EOS lens on a Nikon body, without additional (teleconverter) optics.
2) aperture on EOS lenses is controlled electronically....therefore you can't control aperture when mounted on any non-EOS body....
3) the first generation of high end EOS optics (including 28-80/2.8-4, 200/1.8, 300/2.8, 400/2.8(mark I & II) 600/4.0 and 1200/5.6) can only focus through their E-M/USM motor (Electronical Manual), not just AF, but also MF. This means *no* focus possible on non-EOS bodies....
And even if one could live with all these problems, an adapter for this purpose has never been made to the best of my knowledge, definately not in commercial quantities....


T2-reverse adaptors

For some applications, a T2-reverse adaptor would be very useful. Examples are mounting OEM lenses on T2 tilt/shift bellows, or even on cheap M42 bellows (by using a second T2->M42 adaptor behind the brandX-lens->T2-camera adaptor).
Another application is using OEM still lenses on C-mount moving picture cameras, by means of a second T2-lens->C-mount-camera adaptor. This also works with Canon LC-1 & LC-2 video cameras.

(email me if you want more info about these T2-reverse adaptors)

Adaptal->EOS adaptors

From:             "Mark Fischer" 
To:               
Subject:          EOS Adaptall
Date sent:        Sat, 16 Feb 2002 03:33:35 -0600

Is there an Adaptall adapter to allow a Tamaron Adaptall lens to be placed
on a Cannon Eos body?  I would be willing to live with manual focus and stop
down metering.  Hopefully someone makes something that will work.  Thanks for
any help, Mark Fischer.

_________________________________________ Mark Fischer ICQ#:3664138  SMS:
(Send an SMS message to my ICQ): +27831423664138 More ways to contact me:
http://wwp.icq.com/3664138 _________________________________________





From:                 Self 
To:               "Mark Fischer" 
Subject:          Re: EOS Adaptall
Send reply to:    w.j.markerink@a1.nl
Date sent:        Mon, 18 Feb 2002 04:01:21 +0100

On 16 Feb 02 at 3:33, Mark Fischer wrote:

> Is there an Adaptall adapter to allow a Tamaron Adaptall lens to be placed on
> a Cannon Eos body?  I would be willing to live with manual focus and stop down
> metering.  Hopefully someone makes something that will work.  Thanks for any
> help, Mark Fischer.

Adaptal->EOS does exist, but it is no longer made, and rather hard to 
find.
But a perfect alternative exists, much cheaper too: 
Adaptal->M42 plus M42->EOS....the first can often be found on photo 
fairs, the second is an adapter you might want to have anyway (as 
well as a T2->EOS adapter, not the same thing btw!). 




A typical adapting question:

From:                 Self 
To:               "Ginny Doehler" 
Subject:          Re: Nikon/Contax
Send reply to:    w.j.markerink@a1.nl
Date sent:        Fri, 30 Apr 1999 21:13:55

On 29 Apr 99 at 22:32, Ginny Doehler wrote:

> Just wonder if you are aware of any good company that makes adapters so one
> can use a Nikon lens on a Contax SLR or one that will adapt the lens
> individually?   Any ideas would be appreciated.
> 
> Ginny Doehler

For what application: macro or normal use?
Normal use requires infinity focus, and since Nikon and Contax are 
too close together in register and mount-diameter, only additional 
optics will cure infinity, with inherent image quality-loss & a slight 
teleconverter effect.

For macro applications you can simply use an intermediate mount like
M39/Leica-thread....these adapters exist in both directions, for
nearly every possible system, made by Novoflex (distributed by
Calumet in the USA).

Converting a lens permanently is quite expensive....not really
recommended, unless you have very exotic optics....and even if, a
second-hand body of either system might still be cheaper....






From:             "Willem-Jan Markerink" 
To:               eos@avocado.pc.Helsinki.fi
Date sent:        Wed, 12 Apr 2000 15:20:26 +0100
Subject:          Re: EOS: Re: manual focus lense in eos
Priority:         normal
Send reply to:    eos@avocado.pc.Helsinki.FI

On 10 Apr 00 at 13:00, Olle Bjernulf wrote:

> In the Canon line, the TS-E lenses (24, 45, 90) and
> the MP-E macro 1-5x'are manual focus.
> With a M42 adaptor you can use any screw mount lens.
> With expensive adapters you can use Nikon and Leica 
> lenses. With a discontinued Tamron adapter you can use
> any Tamron adaptall lens. 

Note that an Adaptal->M42 plus M42->EOS adapter is a perfect 
alternative for the (rather) rare Adaptall->EOS adapter, often at a 
fraction of the price (assuming one already has the M42->EOS 
adapter).

--                 
Bye,

Willem-Jan Markerink

      The desire to understand 
is sometimes far less intelligent than
     the inability to understand


[note: 'a-one' & 'en-el'!]






FROM: Sven Hegewisch 
SUBJECT: Re: C-Mount (diameter, ...)
DATE: Fri, 03 Nov 2000 08:51:12 +0100
ORGANIZATION: [posted via] Leibniz-Rechenzentrum, Muenchen (Germany)
NEWSGROUPS: sci.engr.mech,sci.engr,sci.optics



Thomas Blotevogel schrieb:

> Hi!
>
> Due to the fact that I have to design an adapter for incorporating a
> filter and an iris diaphragm I need the exact size of a C-Mount
> (diameter, ...), if possible in the metric system. And if there is
> something like an ISo paper about C-Mount please let me also know.
> Thanks a lot.
>
> Kind regards,
> Thomas Blotevogel

C-mount.  Cine mount.  The first standard for CCTV lens screw mounting.
It is defined with the thread of 1'' (25.4 mm) in diameter and 32 
threads/inch, and the back flange-to-CCD distance of 17.526 mm (0.69'').  
The C-mount description applies to both lenses and cameras.
C-mount lenses can be put on both, C-mount and CS-mount cameras, but 
must use a C-mount adaptor when used on a CS-mount camera.  If a C 
adaptor is used on a C-mount camera the image will only focus at very 
short range, it can then be considered as an economy macro adaptor.
C-mount adaptor.  An adaptor used to convert a CS-mount camera to
C-mount to accommodate a C-mount lens.  It is simply a ring 5 mm thick, 
with a male thread on one side and a female on the other side.  It has 
a 1'' diameter and 32 threads/inch, as the cameras and lenses.  It 
often comes packaged with the newer type (CS-mount) of cameras.

Gefunden mit GOOGLE :  " C-mount thread "

Gruesse

Sven Hegewisch





FROM: Martin Jangowski 
SUBJECT: Re: Was ist das =?ISO-8859-1?Q?f=FCr?= ein Gewinde?
 (Vergroesserungsobjektiv)
DATE: 9 Feb 2001 15:45:48 +0100
ORGANIZATION: Phoenix Pharmahandel Aktiengesellschaft und Co
NEWSGROUPS: de.rec.fotografie

Christian Romberg  wrote:

> Weiß einer von Euch, was das für Gewinde sind (sind nämlich auch bei beiden 
> noch verschiedene):

> Schneider-Kreuznach Componon 5,6/105; #9856928
> Außendurchmesser des Gewindes ca. 32,3 mm

Koennte ein Gewinde 32.5x0.5 sein, das ist das gleiche wie ein Verschluss #0.
Das Componon gabs IMHO mit M39 oder eben #0-Gewinde. 

> Boyer Paris 3,5/75; #780188
> Außendurchmesser des Gewindes ca. 29,8 mm

Da hab ich bei Steve Grimes nur "Alpax #0" bzw. "Rapax #1" gefunden, haben 
beide ca. 1.18" (ca. 29.98mm)

Martin







From:                 Self 
To:               "Daniel Derwin" 
Subject:          Re: Mamiya 645
Send reply to:    w.j.markerink@a1.nl
Date sent:        Mon, 16 Apr 2001 10:40:52 +0100

On 15 Apr 01 at 23:03, Daniel Derwin wrote:

> Are there any 35mm type camera lens that can be used on a Mamiya 645 =
> with one of your mounts? I would be particularly interested in a zoom =
> lens if possible.
>         Dan Derwin

No sorry, that's impossible for 2 reasons: a 35mm type lens on a 
Mamiya 645 would be too far from the film plane (=no more infinity 
focus, same as with a macro extension), and such a lens would 
not have enough coverage for a 6x4.5cm image....you would get only a 
circle with 43.26mm diameter (the diagonal of 24x36mm).
And the latter only increases when you use the lens for strong macro
magnifications (twice the extention is twice the diameter)....so for
both arguments that's the only application available....






Date sent:        Sun, 21 Oct 2001 09:24:23 +0200
From:             hobbacher@t-online.de (A.F. Hobbacher)
To:               w.j.markerink@a1.nl
Subject:          Mounts and threads

Congratulations for the compilation of threads. Just one remark: Pipe
treads are an entire different issue than the bolt threads. Example:
1/2"-20 UNF is a bolt with an outer diameter of 1/2" = 12.7 mm. A pipe
thread 1/2" is the thread which fits on a pipe with a nominal diameter
of 1/2". A pipe of ND 1/2" has an outer diameter of about 21 mm which is
also the about the OD of the pipe thread. Please do never confuse these
two ways of designation of threads.

Kind regards
AFH






FROM: Tom Burgess 
SUBJECT: Re: c-mount thread
DATE: Sat, 01 Dec 2001 08:30:30 GMT
ORGANIZATION: Shaw Residential Internet
NEWSGROUPS: sci.optics

"Stephen H. Westin" wrote:
> 
> Daniel Hembd  writes:
> 
> > Can somebody give me the dimensions of a C-Mount thread?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Daniel
> >
> 
> From the indispensible ,
> 
>                    Mount             Register (flange distance)
> C-mount         1" x 32tpi thread       17.526mm (0.69")
> 
> --
> -Stephen H. Westin
> Any information or opinions in this message are mine: they do not
> represent the position of Cornell University or any of its sponsors.

Here's another fine reference with practical tapping advice:
http://www.atmpage.com/thread.html

regards, tom






FROM: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Winfried_B=FCchsensch=FCtz?= 
SUBJECT: Re: Novoflexar M42
DATE: 20 Jan 2002 10:58:12 +0100
ORGANIZATION: WEB.DE
NEWSGROUPS: de.rec.fotografie

"Olaf Ulrich" <1461-465@onlinehome.de> wrote:
>Helmut F. schrieb:


(Streit über M42-Erfindung)
>> Wer hat's erfunden?
>
>Äh ... die Schweiz'r? Nein, äh ... die Sachsen? Keine Ahnung, aber
>M42 als Objektivanschluß gab es doch schon, als die Japaner
>noch gar nicht wußten, wie man Spiegelreflexkamera schreibt ...?

Es waren tatsächlich die Sachsen. Lt. Hummel 'Spiegelreflexkameras aus Dresden' 
wollten die Russen die alte Praktiflex (mit M40-Anschluss, M39 war schon von 
Leitz belegt) auf ein größeres Bajonett umkonstruiert haben und wollten den 
Konstrukteur so lange festhalten, bis er es fertig hatte. Er konnte sie dann aber 
überzeugen, daß das kurzfristig nicht machbar sei und schlug daher eine 
Vergrößerung auf M42 vor. Daher ist der zutreffendste Name wohl 'Praktica-
Gewinde'. Es wurde allerdings recht bald von den Japanern übernommen (die 
übrigens schon in den frühen 50ern Spiegelreflexkameras bauten, als man in der 
Bundesrepublik kaum wußte, wie man das schreibt) und wird in den USA meist als 
Pentax-Gewinde bezeichnet. Die (AFAIK) ersten gescheiten SLRs aus der BRD, die 
Edixas, hatten bis in die 60er Jahre hinein das M42er-Gewinde übernommen, auch 
die Contaflex hatte AFAIK dieses Gewinde. 


Winfried Büchsenschütz






FROM: Thomas Kaltschmidt 
SUBJECT: Re: Novoflexar M42
DATE: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 09:56:33 +0100
ORGANIZATION: TU Freiberg
NEWSGROUPS: de.rec.fotografie


>>(Streit über M42-Erfindung)
>>>> Wer hat's erfunden?
>>>
>>>Äh ... die Schweiz'r? Nein, äh ... die Sachsen? Keine Ahnung, aber
>>>M42 als Objektivanschluß gab es doch schon, als die Japaner
>>>noch gar nicht wußten, wie man Spiegelreflexkamera schreibt ...?
>>
>>
>>Es waren tatsächlich die Sachsen. Lt. Hummel 'Spiegelreflexkameras aus 
>>Dresden' 
>>wollten die Russen die alte Praktiflex (mit M40-Anschluss, M39 war schon 
>von 
>>Leitz belegt) 
>
>Hmm....M40 fehlt noch in meine Liste.... 
>
>http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/mounts.htm
>
>...welches 'Register' hatte dieser Anschluss? 
>Und M40x1? 


IHMO ja. Wird jedenfalls mit M 40 x 1 angegeben. Das Auflagenmaß dürfte
eigentlich das selbe wie bei M42 x 1sein. 

Thomas







FROM: Helmut Faugel 
SUBJECT: Re: [F] T2 Adapter =?iso-8859-1?Q?f=FCr?= Mittelformat
DATE: Mon, 18 Feb 2002 12:20:31 +0100
NEWSGROUPS: de.rec.fotografie

Oliver Corff wrote: 
> Dieter Lefeling  wrote:
> :> Stativgewinde Leica
> 
> : ?!? Ein M39-Stativgewinde ?-)
> 
> Ich meine doch das 3/8"-Gewinde...

Das 3/8" heisst deutsches Stativgewinde, das 1/4" heisst englisches
Stativgewinde. Hab ich zumindest in meiner gestrigen Nachtlektuere
erfahren.


-- 
Helmut Faugel






Date sent:        Sat, 05 Jan 2002 10:40:11 -0500
From:             Bernard Cousineau 
To:               w.j.markerink@a1.nl
Subject:          mounts.htm

Hello,

I have noticed that you don't have the Aaton value in your "Camera mounts &
registers" page.

The correct flange focal distance is 40 mm (+- 5 microns). My source for this
number is:

http://www.aaton.com/files/ltr_usermanual.pdf (page 2 of the document).

Many thanks for providing such a useful resource on the internet,

Bernard Cousineau






From:             "Miranda Camera.ch" 
To:               
Subject:          Miranda mounts
Date sent:        Sun, 8 Sep 2002 12:41:23 +0200

Hi

I found your homepage with the Miranda mounts:

You wrote:
Miranda	dual BM/SM	bayonet/M42x1 thread		  41.50
Miranda Laborec		bayonet/M42x1 thread		  41.50
Miranda Laborec -	M46x1 thread			  41.50

Your information's are NOT correct!

M42x1 for Miranda is not correct!
All Miranda cameras (including MIRANDA LABOREC)
without the MIRANDA TM have     M44x1 TM!

MIRANDA TM only SM                M42x1 thread

MIRAX LABOREC  BM/SM          LABOREC bayonet/M46x1 thread
                                                             
LABOREC bayonet is bigger than Miranda 
                                                                 
bayonet!

The REGISTER measure 41.50 is not correct!

I have some Miranda service manuals. There is the measure process illustrated
and the depth of the gauge still is 41.65mm. The register must be in +/- 0.02mm

I propose you place that on your web site:

Miranda dual BM/SM                           bayonet/M44x1 thread                      	41.65
MIRANDA TM only SM                        	M42x1 thread                           	41.65
MIRANDA LABOREC dual BM/SM       	bayonet/M44x1 thread               	       	41.65
MIRAX LABOREC  BM/SM                 LABOREC bayonet/M46x1 thread      			41.65
                                                                     
The MIRAX LABOREC bayonet is bigger than the Miranda standard bayonet!

SOLIGOR TM only SM                        	M42x1 thread      		        41.65

PALLAS TM only SM                           	M42x1 thread                 	        41.65

If you have any question please do not hesitate to ask me.

Regards

Rudolf

SWISS MIRANDA CAMERA COLLECTOR
Member of MHS Miranda Historical Society
MHS Homepage:  www.mirandacamera.com
Mailto: mirandacamera@gmx.ch






From:                 Self 
To:               "Miranda Camera.ch" 
Subject:          Re: Miranda mounts
Send reply to:    w.j.markerink@a1.nl
Date sent:        Sun, 15 Sep 2002 05:59:05 +0100

On  8 Sep 02 at 12:41, Miranda Camera.ch wrote:

> Hi
> 
> I found your homepage with the Miranda mounts:
> 
> You wrote:
> Miranda	dual BM/SM	bayonet/M42x1 thread		  41.50
> Miranda Laborec		bayonet/M42x1 thread		  41.50
> Miranda Laborec -	M46x1 thread			  41.50
> 
> Your information's are NOT correct!
> 
> M42x1 for Miranda is not correct!=20
> All Miranda cameras (including MIRANDA LABOREC)=20
> without the MIRANDA TM have     M44x1 TM!
> 
> MIRANDA TM only SM                M42x1 thread
> 
> MIRAX LABOREC  BM/SM          LABOREC bayonet/M46x1 thread
>
> LABOREC bayonet is bigger than Miranda
>
> bayonet!
> 
> The REGISTER measure 41.50 is not correct!
> 
> I have some Miranda service manuals. There is the measure process  illustrated
> and the depth of the gauge still is 41.65mm. The register must be in +/-  0.02mm

That 0.15mm difference is caused by measuring at the front vs back of 
the film....;))
(this confusion happens with more camera systems, not just Miranda) 
But I included your message for the rest of the info, and will add 
this note to it....;)) 

--                 
Bye,

Willem-Jan Markerink

      The desire to understand 
is sometimes far less intelligent than
     the inability to understand


[note: 'a-one' & 'en-el'!]











From: "Lars Petersen" 
To: 
Subject: About page with "Camera mounts & registers"
Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2005 14:42:56 +0100

Hello

Do you have any information about the register of the Olympus E-System 
(Four Thirds) mount ?

Best regards, Lars












From: Willem-Jan Markerink 
To: "Lars Petersen" 
Subject: Re: About page with "Camera mounts & registers"
Cc: "Schuengel, Paul Joachim (Unaxis CS)" 
Reply-to: w.j.markerink@a1.nl

On 26 Feb 2005 at 14:42, Lars Petersen wrote:

> Hello
> 
> Do you have any information about the register of the Olympus E-System
> (Four Thirds) mount ?
> 
> Best regards, Lars

Sorry, no....but it should be relatively good for lens-adaptations, 
since smaller format normally means smaller mirror, which allows the 
lens to sit closer to the 'film' plane (which is almost necessary, 
since smaller format also requires smaller focal lengths, and their 
design is optically better if it can be put closer to the film 
plane).
(the best design being a symmetrical lens, like the famous Zeiss 
Biogon's)

Here some more reading though, including commercial adapters, which I 
assume you are looking for:
(ah, finally including the actual spec, 38.67mm, never seen it 
before, date-stamp at the bottom suggests it might be only 1 month 
old....thanks for the inspiration to dig for this info....:))

http://www.wrotniak.net/photo/oly-e/any-lens.html

CC to Paul Joachim, who also asked for this spec recently, in 
vain back then....:))














From: "Willem-Jan Markerink" 
To: eos@a1.nl
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 02:05:35 +0100
Subject: Contax->EOS adapter
Cc: infrared@a1.nl
Reply-To: eos@a1.nl

Not 100% sure there never was such an adapter before (without image-
degrading (slight-teleconverting) optics, of course), since I also 
recall that some US-manufacturer made an Olympus->EOS adapter....but 
today I received a mailing from Germany's largest Contax shop, 
announcing a Contax->EOS adapter, to mount Contax-AE and -MM 
lenses....169 euro (about US$200).

Not cheap, but neither are the long-existing Nikon->EOS and 
Leica->EOS adapters from Novoflex & Z=F6rkend=F6rfer.

(might just as well be that one of those actually manufacturers this 
Contax adapter, who knows)

http://www.foto-huppert.de


Willem (now also wondering whether any Zeiss/Hasselblad -> Contax 
adapter existed already?....or perhaps even 
Contax645 -> Contax-35mm?....always liked that 350/5.6 super-
apochromat, corrected for both IR and UV....;)) Jan


--                 
Bye,

Willem-Jan Markerink

      The desire to understand 
is sometimes far less intelligent than
     the inability to understand


[note: 'a-one' & 'en-el'!]












From: Cotty 
To: "EOS list" 
Subject: Re: Contax->EOS adapter
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 09:23:43 +0000
Reply-To: eos@a1.nl

On 25/3/05, Willem-Jan Markerink, discombobulated, unleashed:

>Not 100% sure there never was such an adapter before (without image-
>degrading (slight-teleconverting) optics, of course), since I also 
>recall that some US-manufacturer made an Olympus->EOS adapter....but 
>today I received a mailing from Germany's largest Contax shop, 
>announcing a Contax->EOS adapter, to mount Contax-AE and -MM 
>lenses....169 euro (about US$200).
>
>Not cheap, but neither are the long-existing Nikon->EOS and 
>Leica->EOS adapters from Novoflex & Z=F6rkend=F6rfer.
>
>(might just as well be that one of those actually manufacturers this 
>Contax adapter, who knows)
>
>http://www.foto-huppert.de

Hi Willem,

You may find this page interesting:



best,


Cheers,
  Cotty

___/\__
||   (O)   |     People, Places, Pastiche
||=====|    http://www.cottysnaps.com
_____________________________













Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2005 00:10:38 -0400
From: J Richter 
Reply-To: Studio@MidnightTypeandGraphics.com
To: w.j.markerink@a1.nl
Subject: Sticky Novoflex adapters - LeicaR to EOS

Dear Sir

I was wondering if there is any discussion and notes on how to remove 
Leica lenses from the well-made and obviously thin/delicate Novoflex 
adapter.The lame instruction sheet that comes with it does not really 
help. The minute pin (I guess that it is a locking device) does not have 
much movement, it tilts towards the EOS end a bit, as well as pulling 
out about 1/2 mm. Instructions say to install lens onto adapter first 
and then onto the EOS camera - ok - and removal is the reverse. What are 
you supposed to hold onto when removing the lens from the apapter? I 
used the plastic back cap on the adapter, but the unit is still stuck on 
my 50mm, and so far no combination of manipulating that little 
pin/button and attempting to turn the lens or adapter at the same time 
have succeeded. And yes, sir, you are correct, those Novoflex things are 
thin! and expensive!, and I sure can't afford one for each of my Leica 
lenses in case they do not come off! and I would hate to have to hire 
someone to cut the unit off - defeats the purpose of keeping these great 
lenses.

Hoping you may be able to share some solutions to this problem. Please 
and Thank You in advance...

I think your website is great and full of wonderfull information - but I 
did not find any answers there yet.

Jurgen Richter
Ontario Canada














From: Willem-Jan Markerink 
To: Studio@MidnightTypeandGraphics.com
Subject: Re: Sticky Novoflex adapters - LeicaR to EOS
Reply-to: w.j.markerink@a1.nl
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 12:07:30 +0200

On 14 Sep 2005 at 0:10, J Richter wrote:

> Dear Sir
> 
> I was wondering if there is any discussion and notes on how to remove 
> Leica lenses from the well-made and obviously thin/delicate Novoflex 
> adapter.The lame instruction sheet that comes with it does not really 
> help. The minute pin (I guess that it is a locking device) does not have 
> much movement, it tilts towards the EOS end a bit, as well as pulling 
> out about 1/2 mm. Instructions say to install lens onto adapter first 
> and then onto the EOS camera - ok - and removal is the reverse. What are 
> you supposed to hold onto when removing the lens from the apapter? I 
> used the plastic back cap on the adapter, but the unit is still stuck on 
> my 50mm, and so far no combination of manipulating that little 
> pin/button and attempting to turn the lens or adapter at the same time 
> have succeeded. And yes, sir, you are correct, those Novoflex things are 
> thin! and expensive!, and I sure can't afford one for each of my Leica 
> lenses in case they do not come off! and I would hate to have to hire 
> someone to cut the unit off - defeats the purpose of keeping these great 
> lenses.
> 
> Hoping you may be able to share some solutions to this problem. Please 
> and Thank You in advance...
> 
> I think your website is great and full of wonderfull information - but I 
> did not find any answers there yet.
> 
> Jurgen Richter
> Ontario Canada

Do you have enough grip/leverage on that EOS-lenscap?
Otherwise the two remaining options are lubrication (silicone-based 
stuff is murderous to remove from lens coating!), or heat+cold 
(expansion/contraction, works best if the metals are different).
Put it in your freezer, and/or in a mildly heated oven (and/or 
shrink/shock the hot adapter with a bag of ice).


--                 
Bye,

Willem-Jan Markerink

      The desire to understand 
is sometimes far less intelligent than
     the inability to understand


[note: 'a-one' & 'en-el'!]













Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2005 14:55:46 -0400
From: J Richter 
Reply-To: Studio@MidnightTypeandGraphics.com
To: w.j.markerink@a1.nl
Subject: Re: Sticky Novoflex adapters - LeicaR to EOS

Thank you for your suggestion Mr Markerink

It turns out that you cannot leave the EOS lenscap on when trying to 
remove the adapter from a lens (without modifying the cap first).
The retractable locking pin on the adapter is unable to retract fully 
when the cap is in place to unlock the lens (you have to drill out a 
small recessed area for it to retract into the cap). My issue was also 
that this retracting pin was for some reason stuck, so I put on a bit of 
teflon oil with a needle, and with a tiny flat watchmakers screwdriver, 
was able to manually actuate/retract the pin, allowing the lens to 
unscrew/rotate from the adapter. There is not much gripping area 
afforded on the adapter, and with sticky mechanisms (and admittedly an 
ignorance of how the locking mechanism worked, before now) removal 
without any tools becomes almost impossible. I now keep a tiny 
screwdriver in my lens kit for emergency use...

Regards

Jurgen Richter









From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Jo=E3o_Carlos?= 
To: 
Subject: Reverse T-Mount
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2005 20:02:22 -0300

Hello, 
I live in the Brazil, and I found your Home Page.  I found the published
articles excellent.  It is a true university of the photograph.  I have a camera
Pentax Ist Ds. I also have one bellow screw mount.  All my lenses are pk-mount I
read in your home page about reverse T-mount.  But I do not find to buy.  You
knows where I finds this product?

Best Regards,

João Carlos Ribeiro
Brazil









From: Willem-Jan Markerink 
To: João Carlos 
Subject: Re: Reverse T-Mount
Reply-to: w.j.markerink@a1.nl
Date: Sat, 08 Oct 2005 02:06:43 +0200

On 7 Oct 2005 at 20:02, João Carlos wrote:

> Hello, 
> I live in the Brazil, and I found your Home Page.  I found the
> published articles excellent.  It is a true university of the
> photograph. 

Thank you for your kind words Sir!....:))

> I have a camera Pentax Ist Ds. I also have one bellow
> screw mount.  All my lenses are pk-mount I read in your home page
> about reverse T-mount.  But I do not find to buy.  You knows where I
> finds this product?
> 
> Best Regards,
> 
> João Carlos Ribeiro
> Brazil

They were once made (or just sold/rebranded) by Danubia, which is a 
Japanese/Asian brand AFAIK.
(but with strong German ties, but no German production)

If that solution doesn't work, you could still use the M39-system as 
a full reversible mount, Novoflex (and perhaps Zoerkendoerfer) offer 
M39-adapters in both directions, for many brands.

							adapter1 -> adapter2

bellows/Pentax-K -> M39-external   ->   M39-internal -> Pentax-AF










Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2006 23:57:53 -0000 (GMT)
Subject: Please update your lensmount info...
From: adlg06952@blueyonder.co.uk
To: w.j.markerink@a1.nl

Hi, I like your site but it has some incorrect information...The Miranda
screw mount is not M42, its M44.
And you have forgotten to include the Sigma SA mount, which is 44mm
register, same as Canon EOS mount.

Thanks

Alf Beharie.








From: Willem-Jan Markerink 
To: adlg06952@blueyonder.co.uk
Subject: Re: Please update your lensmount info...
Reply-to: w.j.markerink@a1.nl
Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2006 21:37:27 +0100

On 17 Mar 2006 at 23:57, adlg06952@blueyonder.co.uk wrote:

> Hi, I like your site but it has some incorrect information...The Miranda
> screw mount is not M42, its M44.
> And you have forgotten to include the Sigma SA mount, which is 44mm
> register, same as Canon EOS mount.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Alf Beharie.
> 

Thanx, already had a note about this further down that page, but 
never changed the table itself!

--                 
Bye,

Willem-Jan Markerink

      The desire to understand 
is sometimes far less intelligent than
     the inability to understand


[note: 'a-one' & 'en-el'!]








Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2006 12:02:03 -0400
From: Frank Deutschmann 
Subject: Error on your mount page
To: w.j.markerink@a1.nl

Hi,
Your mounts page (http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/mounts.htm) is hugely
useful, but it has an error: for the Rollei 6008 shutter adapter, you list
the flange register as 31.68mm; this is actually the distance from the
flange of the shutter adapter to the flange of the camera body.  The actual
flange register from the front flange of the shutter adapter to the film
plane is 107mm (with an additional 11mm available via helical in the shutter
adapter).  The shutter adapter front flange has a M39x0.75 thread pitch.

The Rollei 6008 flange-film plane register is 75.32mm., proprietary
bayonet/electrical mount, leaf shutter lenses required.  And lastly, the
Rollei bellows has a minimum additional extension of 67mm (net minimum
register front flange to film plane with bellows unit is thus 142.32mm;
adding the shutter adapter to the front of the bellows yields a minimum
front flange to film plane register of 174mm.

-frank









From: Willem-Jan Markerink 
To: Frank Deutschmann 
Subject: Re: Error on your mount page
Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2006 19:53:05 +0200

On 5 Apr 2006 at 12:02, Frank Deutschmann wrote:

> Hi,
> Your mounts page (http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/mounts.htm) is hugely
> useful, but it has an error: for the Rollei 6008 shutter adapter, you list
> the flange register as 31.68mm; this is actually the distance from the
> flange of the shutter adapter to the flange of the camera body.  The actual
> flange register from the front flange of the shutter adapter to the film
> plane is 107mm (with an additional 11mm available via helical in the shutter
> adapter).  The shutter adapter front flange has a M39x0.75 thread pitch.
> 
> The Rollei 6008 flange-film plane register is 75.32mm., proprietary
> bayonet/electrical mount, leaf shutter lenses required.  And lastly, the
> Rollei bellows has a minimum additional extension of 67mm (net minimum
> register front flange to film plane with bellows unit is thus 142.32mm;
> adding the shutter adapter to the front of the bellows yields a minimum
> front flange to film plane register of 174mm.
> 
> -frank
> 
> 

Thanx, all data added....:))

--                 
Bye,

Willem-Jan Markerink

      The desire to understand 
is sometimes far less intelligent than
     the inability to understand


[note: 'a-one' & 'en-el'!]









From: "Andy Radcliffe" 
To: 
Subject: Olympus four-thirds register
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2007 13:34:51 -0000

Hi,

I don't think that the Olympus four-thirds dimension on your database is 
correct at 38.67mm.
This seems to have been measured by subtracting the thickness of the MA-1 
adaptor (7.33mm) from the OM register of 46mm.
However, for some reason the MA-1 is actually thinner than it should be to 
achieve correct infinity focus and the actual register will therefore be 
greater than 38.67 mm, by something like 0.13mm (measured by determining the 
extra lens extension needed for infinity focus on an E-system body compared 
to an OM body).

This then would give a revised register of something in the region of 
38.80mm.(which actually sounds more likely).

Kind regards,

Andy. 










From: Willem-Jan Markerink 
To: "Andy Radcliffe" 
Subject: Re: Olympus four-thirds register
Reply-to: w.j.markerink@a1.nl
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2007 16:05:01 +0100

On 25 Jan 2007 at 13:34, Andy Radcliffe wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> I don't think that the Olympus four-thirds dimension on your database is 
> correct at 38.67mm.
> This seems to have been measured by subtracting the thickness of the MA-1 
> adaptor (7.33mm) from the OM register of 46mm.
> However, for some reason the MA-1 is actually thinner than it should be to 
> achieve correct infinity focus and the actual register will therefore be 
> greater than 38.67 mm, by something like 0.13mm (measured by determining the 
> extra lens extension needed for infinity focus on an E-system body compared 
> to an OM body).
> 
> This then would give a revised register of something in the region of 
> 38.80mm.(which actually sounds more likely).
> 
> Kind regards,
> 
> Andy. 
> 

Thank you, very interesting data!....:))

My guess: Olumpus made a serious error in the design of this adapter, 
since 0.13mm difference is suspiciously close to the thickness of 
film, a error that has been fauling up register-spec's of other 
brands/systems as well....
IOW: they measured the film-flange distance from the wrong 
surface....a weird analog/digital anomaly....

Btw, just to be sure that I understand your 'correction' right: an OM 
lens mounted to a 4/3-body requires you to shift the focus towards 
you, to regain infinity focus?
(which equals extension)

(the other way around would have been much worse of course....:))
(only larger tele lenses allow focussing beyond infinity)
(while wide-angles, mounted at a too large register, would need it 
much more)

--                 
Bye,

Willem-Jan Markerink

      The desire to understand 
is sometimes far less intelligent than
     the inability to understand


[note: 'a-one' & 'en-el'!]











From: "Andy Radcliffe" 
To: 
Subject: Re: Olympus four-thirds register
Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2007 09:29:28 -0000

From: "Willem-Jan Markerink" 
Sent: Friday, January 26, 2007 3:05 PM

> On 25 Jan 2007 at 13:34, Andy Radcliffe wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I don't think that the Olympus four-thirds dimension on your database is
>> correct at 38.67mm.
>> This seems to have been measured by subtracting the thickness of the MA-1
>> adaptor (7.33mm) from the OM register of 46mm.
>> However, for some reason the MA-1 is actually thinner than it should be 
>> to
>> achieve correct infinity focus and the actual register will therefore be
>> greater than 38.67 mm, by something like 0.13mm (measured by determining 
>> the
>> extra lens extension needed for infinity focus on an E-system body 
>> compared
>> to an OM body).
>>
>> This then would give a revised register of something in the region of
>> 38.80mm.(which actually sounds more likely).
>>
>> Kind regards,
>>
>> Andy.
>>
>
> Thank you, very interesting data!....:))
>
> My guess: Olumpus made a serious error in the design of this adapter,
> since 0.13mm difference is suspiciously close to the thickness of
> film, a error that has been fauling up register-spec's of other
> brands/systems as well....
> IOW: they measured the film-flange distance from the wrong
> surface....a weird analog/digital anomaly....
>
> Btw, just to be sure that I understand your 'correction' right: an OM
> lens mounted to a 4/3-body requires you to shift the focus towards
> you, to regain infinity focus?
> (which equals extension)
>
> (the other way around would have been much worse of course....:))
> (only larger tele lenses allow focussing beyond infinity)
> (while wide-angles, mounted at a too large register, would need it
> much more)


Hi Willem-Jan,

Yes, when an OM lens is mounted on an E-system body it reqires extra 
extension to focus at infinity - (like some long telephotos do,  of course 
to take into account thermal expansion etc.)
It is not really a problem as long as you don't try to rely on the distance 
scale !

At least with the slightly too thin adaptor you can be certain that you can 
focus at a real infinity point, as it is possible to go past this!

Kind regards,

Andy.







http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/forums/showflat.php/Cat/0/Number/368665/an/0/page/0
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Re: Voigtländer Ultramatic RIP  [Re:  TH-Photos]
      #372091 - 29/09/2006 21:10

The Ultramatic mount was in fact made by Deckel (manufacturer of Synchro 
Compur shutters) and as such was fitted to over twelve different cameras:

Reflexes
Kodak Reflex S, lll & IV - Instamatic Reflex
Voigtlander - Bessamatic & Ultramatic
Edixa Electronica
Braun Reflex Automatic

Rangefinders
Retina lllS
Voigtlander Vitessa T (?)
Iloca Electric
Balda Baldamatic lll
Braun Colorette & Colorette Super


So you have an abundance of cameras (& indeed lenses to choose from) 
Basically what made them different was a small edge cam that varied in 
position. With that modified (a small file will suffice), your lenses 
will fit the other maker's models.

Paul

--------------------
Paul Winter (IRIPN)

Web Site: UKCamera.com 
http://www.ukcamera.com







From: "Alf Beharie" 
To: 
Subject: Please add Mamiya ZE (35mm) registration distance to your list...
Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2007 20:16:54 -0000

Just found out that the 35mm format Mamiya ZE series SLR lenses have a
registration distance of 45.5mm, please could you update your list
accordingly.

Many thanks

Alf Beharie.










Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2008 17:19:41 -0700
From: James Richard Tyrer 
To: w.j.markerink@a1.nl
Subject: mounts.html web site

First, thank you for you site.  It has been a great help.

I notice that you don't list Leica "N" thread.

See attached.

It looks to be 1.0 pitch metric thread larger than 50mm and smaller than 
52mm.  Since this is for use on a Focoslide, I suppose that the register 
distance would be the distance for a Focoslide when mounted on a thread 
mount Leica rangefinder camera.

Thanks for any info you might have.

-- 
JRT










From: Willem-Jan Markerink 
To: James Richard Tyrer 
Subject: (Fwd) mounts.html web site
Cc: Marc James Small , Marc James Small 
Reply-to: w.j.markerink@a1.nl
Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2008 13:38:40 +0200

Hello James,

I'll forward this data-request to my friend Marc James Small....whenever I see 
notes 'inbetween' and 'pitch', especially in the context of Leica, we are 
entering the minefield of a perverse match between metric and imperial 
sizes....:))

Willem 
(currently getting another imperial headeache, from a Volvo C306 firefighter, 
which has different types/sizes of oilplugs compared to the regular military 
configurations, being a derivate from a military batch to Malaysia (and all 
with portal axles made in the UK)) 
Jan



------- Forwarded message follows -------
Date sent:      	Mon, 30 Jun 2008 17:19:41 -0700
From:           	James Richard Tyrer 
To:             	w.j.markerink@a1.nl
Subject:        	mounts.html web site

First, thank you for you site.  It has been a great help.

I notice that you don't list Leica "N" thread.

See attached.

It looks to be 1.0 pitch metric thread larger than 50mm and smaller than 
52mm.  Since this is for use on a Focoslide, I suppose that the register 
distance would be the distance for a Focoslide when mounted on a thread 
mount Leica rangefinder camera.

Thanks for any info you might have.

-- 
JRT

------- End of forwarded message -------











Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2008 10:57:23 -0400
To: w.j.markerink@a1.nl,James Richard Tyrer 
From: Marc James Small 
Subject: Re: (Fwd) mounts.html web site
In-Reply-To: <486A3358.2578.47D0766C@localhost>

At 07:38 AM 7/1/2008, Willem-Jan Markerink wrote:
 >
 >I'll forward this data-request to my friend Marc James Small....whenever I see
 >notes 'inbetween' and 'pitch', especially in the context of Leica, we are
 >entering the minefield of a perverse match between metric and imperial
 >sizes....:))
 >

 >It looks to be 1.0 pitch metric thread larger than 50mm and smaller than
 >52mm.  Since this is for use on a Focoslide, I suppose that the register
 >distance would be the distance for a Focoslide when mounted on a thread
 >mount Leica rangefinder camera.

Gosh.  This is taking me for a stroll down Memory
Lane -- I did a fair amount of research on the
Focaslide/Visoflex adapter sizes fifteen years
back.  Let's see what I can find with a bit of rapid research.

The "N" thread was adopted in 1958 and is in
51mm.  I am 99% certain that this is a 1mm
standard DIN pitch but cannot seem to find
confirmation for this and I cannot locate my
pitch gauge to measure some of my N-gauge
stuff.  But it is almost certainly 51mm by 1mm
DIN.  This was a significant step for Leitz as it
was the first thread-mount adopetd by them which
was straight DIN -- true LTM, for instance, is
39mm by 26 turns per inch Whitworth, Whitworth
then being a standard microscope thread
size.  (The "Royal Screw" used on microscope
objectives remains in Whitworth to this day.)

N-gauge adapters were used on both LTM and M BM
Leica Focaslides and also appear on some of the
Visoflex II/IIa/III reflex housing adapters.

Best wishes,

Marc

msmall@aya.yale.edu
Cha robh bàs fir gun ghràs fir!











From: "Lars Finn Petersen" 
To: "Willem-Jan Markerink" 
Subject: Register data for the new Samsung NX-10
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2010 20:18:58 +0100

2010-01-04 Copenhagen, Denmark

HELLO

Here is some new information for your site with camera mounts & registers.

Samsung has announced the NX10, the first of its NX series of mirrorless 
interchangeable lens cameras.

It has a new lens mount design.

This source http://www.dpreview.com/previews/samsungnx10/  claims that 
the register is 25.5 mm. See also picture below. That information may be 
inaccurate but I will try to check it later.

Best regards, Lars Petersen










Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2010 17:29:43 +0100
From: "Michael Sorms (Lukoszek)" 
To: w.j.markerink@a1.nl
Subject: correction for the lens register list

Hi Mr. Markering,
I've a litte correction for the lens register list. Praktiflex M40x1 
(with "k"!) has the lens register of 44,0mm it's different from M42 with 
45,5mm! Reference is Lutton, Thomas Ralph: Luttons List. 1992. On my 
page you can download a pdf with lens registers of Dresden-cameras. 
http://www.dresdner-kameras.de/files/adaptierung.pdf

Best regards,
Michael Sorms

-- 
www.dresdner-kameras.de ...die private Homepage zur Geschichte der Dresdner Fotoindustrie









xxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.crypticide.org/users/alecm/astronomy/lens-mountings.txt
xxxxxxxxxxxxxx


xxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.mapug.com/ragreiner/adapters.html#Flanges
xxxxxxxxxxxx


xxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.wrotniak.net/photo/oly-e/any-lens.html
xxxxxxxxxxxx


xxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.outbackphoto.com/the=5Fbag/paul=5Flens=5Fadapters/essay.html
xxxxxxxxxxxx


xxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.bobshell.com/adapter.html
xxxxxxxxxxxx


xxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.cameraquest.com/adaptnew.htm
xxxxxxxxxxxx


xxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.dslrexchange.com/
xxxxxxxxxxxx


xxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.cottysnaps.com/snaps/mods/eoskmount.html
xxxxxxxxxxxx



xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.lensation.de/en/products.html
xxxxxxxxxxxxx



xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/eosfaq/manual_focus_EOS.html
xxxxxxxxxxxxx






xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.cameraquest.com/frames/4saleReos.htm
xxxxxxxxxxxxx







If you have any question, remark, comment, want to share some philosophy or just want to express your opinion about these pages, feel free to send email to: w.j.markerink @ a1.nl

Back to main page & table of contents: Main Page