As we all know that Leica has lots of wonderful fun toys for the Leica M-series, the one that they missed the boat on is the 1.4X and 2x teleconverters for the M series (and screw mounts) too.

I do know that Stephen Gandy mentions Leica teleconverters for M prototypes. Unfortunately these number in the 10 range for series. Not much and not worth hunting down. SO... the big question is:

WHERE in the heck is the Leica M-teleconverters? After all, R users can get the advantage in that respect.

Another question: I saw some ads for the 2X teleconverters for Leica Rangefinders Cameras available in screw and M mounts for $499.95 at Cambridge Camera Exchange Inc. (800-221-2253 for those in the know) How is the quality of this particular sucker? 500 dollars is fairly cheap you know so I was just wondering whether it would be a worthy investment. Think of the possibilities here: (dreams on...)

1) Well you can convert your 50mm f1.0 Noct into a 100mm f2.0 Summicron which saves ya like a grand to 1.2 grand bucks :)... Not too shabby... or

2) You can create lenses which Leica can only dream of adding in their lineup. Such as the Apo-Telyt 135mm f3.4 into a Apo-Telyt 260mm f6.8mm which can used for birdwatching... hmm... those R users are quivering there.... or

3) You can convert a 50mm f2.8 Elmar-M into a 100mm f5.6 Elmarit-M which you can brag that you have the modern version of the Mountain Elmar... well well well

Granted people may complain about using an off-party brand for teleconverting Leica lenses and the questions about image degradation pop up again... but it's either... hmm... no teleconverter... teleconverter... dohhhhh!!! :)

Yes teleconverters are small and you lose a full stop but think about a portable pocketable modern Mountain Elmar without paying a 1000 ducks for it. Sounds convincing there.

Anyways, we use Leica lenses which we tend to "know" are the best. So adding a Cambron teleconverter at worst is going to convert our fine ASPH into a beautiful vintage lens. Come on, at least it won't become a Hektor from the 1930's :)... Okay, sounds like I need one of those Cambron suckers to play around with...

So question is... anyone else who uses a Cambron/Cambridge Leica teleconverter around here? :D

-- Alfie Wang (leica_phile@hotmail.com), April 13, 2002

Answers

Alfie, Buddy, April Fools was two weeks ago!

-- Glenn Travis (leicaddict@hotmail.com), April 13, 2002.

The Leica 2x Cambridge sells is the Komura Telemore 95, manufactured about 15 years ago, and it can be found used occasionally. I have owned several of them (including one I bought from Cabridge and returned and it took them 2 months and several letters threatening a lawsuit to get a refund...first and last time I'll ever buy from them). The biggest problem with these 2x's is not the optical properites (Leica lenses start out great and if you stop down so the edges of the 2x aren't being used, you're ok), it's thed so-called rangefinder coupling which is very poor. The finder is also extremely dim and the brightlines anything but bright. I finally got one, with no finder or case or M adaptor (the rear mount is LTM)for $75 from Woodmere Camera a few years ago. I use it with a 90 or 135mm lens, stopped down 2 stops, on a tripod, either set at infinity or else I rangefinder focus with the lens and then mount the 2x, keeping the lens set at the same distance. With the 135mm I use the rangefinder patch as a frame, and with the 90 I frame between the patch and the 135 framelines. For the insignificant number of times I need something longer than 135mm with my M, it's been a well-spent $75, and certainly more convenient than hauling a Visoflex with 200 and 280mm lenses.

-- Jay (infinitydt@aol.com), April 13, 2002.

Alfie, 1. I saw that thing, I forgot where, for 79$, so 499 is allot. I did not take it for that 79$, because: 2. It make no sense. the quality of the result would be a function of the weakest part of the chain, which would be the teleconverter, obviously. when you buy a lense, you don't have to consider how clear reality is, and take it as an advantage for the quality of the result. in the same sense, if leica lense would give you a "close to real" image, the teleconverter will start from that, and kill it. 3. I don't want to accuse anybody of anything without supporting my claim with data, but I myself buy from many dealers in the area of the dealer you mentioned, not including the one you mentioned. Hint: I did buy from him in the past.

-- rami (rg272@columbia.edu), April 13, 2002.

I wrote my answer before Jay posted his, I wouldn't have waisted anybody's time for saying what was said by Jay, in a much more aknowledged way than mine. and from one who experienced with the thing...

-- rami (rg272@columbia.edu), April 13, 2002.

FWIW, a post I placed on another forum last night:

>Hi All:

I have a Komura 2x extender for Leica M. It comes with a special "doubling" viewfinder for all of the standard lens focal- lengths and a case. It is LTM on the camera side, and "M" mount on the lens side, so with adapters you can use any combination of lenses on any body. It is RF coupled. I paid over $250 for it and never even tried it out as I rarely even use my 135 on the M. I know of a few other photographers that have it and give it pretty good marks when used with the 90 and 135 -- which is why I bought it originally.

It is used, but looks to be in very good condition. I've never bothered to try it out so I cannot speak to its performance. I will say it feels kind of whimpy and loose mechanically by Leica or even Voigtlander standards, so please don't expect much. I'm open to ANY offers, and can send a photo if interested, but would prefer this to be an "as is" sale. My loss = your gain?

Cheers,

Jack Flesher<

BTW, I have an offer of $75 and I am considering it...

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), April 13, 2002.

Two comments:

1-If you add a tele converter to an APO lens, the end result is no longer APO. Unless maybe in a very rare case where the converter has been designed for one specific lens.

2-It just might be that you can get better quality by enlarging the middle portion of an original Leica image rather than spoiling the lens by adding a converter. Has anyone heard of any actual comparisons?

Ilkka

-- Ilkka (ikuu65@hotmail.com), April 15, 2002.

To point 2 above: how would you suggest doing this with a transparency? You'd have to scan it, crop it, then output to a film recorder. That's why a teleconverter has merits.

-- Jay (infinitydt@aol.com), April 15, 2002.

I think a lousy teleconverter will still do a lousy job of magnifying the center of the image and so I think that the Komura 2X will still produce a pretty poor image. Of course, there might be a picture that is just unmissable in which case having the thing with you saves the day, but in general, as I am not a journalist nor paid to get a "result", I would never bother with one. To me a substandard picture (even if it could have been great) is just food for the circular bin. Just let the shot go. At the end of the day no one else will know.

-- Robin Smith (smith_robin@hotmail.com), April 15, 2002.