The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

New Life :Leica R lens on Nikon D3

robmac

Well-known member
Hey Leica, tough call... and not a bad choice to have to make. ;>

That D3x+80 Lux combo looks sexy as hell. My lux looked sweet on my 1Ds2, but aesthetically, the Italian design origins of the D3/X adds that extra something.
 

Leica 77

New member
Hello deepdiver,
Excellent digital image -- great subject, lighting, color, and bokeh!!! Lux 80 is a superb lens!!! Leica 77 :)
 

episa

New member
Great lighting and bokeh deepdiver!

What difference do you experience between the 80 Lux and 100mm ZF, aside from the focal length when you do portraits?
 

deepdiver

New member
Thx Leica 77 and Lylod :)

Hi Episa, from my experience, shooting with lux 80 and ZF 100 is completely different. Zeiss 100/2 is definitely sharper at F2 compare to lux 80 at F2.
Lux 80 will give u a "glowing" image at F1.4 to F2 + the result is not very sharp.
I'm kind of like the way lux 80/1.4 at F2 give me the final result, where the image is a little bit glowing and not super sharp.
This way, I don't have to worry with the wrinkle/blemish on the model's skin :D :D
If i want to sharpen the image, I just need to sharpen the eyes + hair area only :)
On the other hand, If I really want to get super sharp image + details, I can just set the aperture to F2.8
at F2.8 this lens is a magic...
Another thing that I can tell for sure, this lens has deeper Bokeh compare to ZF 100/2 (maybe it's due to the big aperture F1.4)

Andree
 

episa

New member
Thx Leica 77 and Lylod :)

Hi Episa, from my experience, shooting with lux 80 and ZF 100 is completely different. Zeiss 100/2 is definitely sharper at F2 compare to lux 80 at F2.
Lux 80 will give u a "glowing" image at F1.4 to F2 + the result is not very sharp.
I'm kind of like the way lux 80/1.4 at F2 give me the final result, where the image is a little bit glowing and not super sharp.
This way, I don't have to worry with the wrinkle/blemish on the model's skin :D :D
If i want to sharpen the image, I just need to sharpen the eyes + hair area only :)
On the other hand, If I really want to get super sharp image + details, I can just set the aperture to F2.8
at F2.8 this lens is a magic...
Another thing that I can tell for sure, this lens has deeper Bokeh compare to ZF 100/2 (maybe it's due to the big aperture F1.4)

Andree
Than you for the very informative feedback deepdiver! I can see why this lens is a great portrait lens. I realize I should have also asked you your thoughts on comparing the lux 80 with the 85mm/1.4 ZF which is even more appropriate for a comparison....

I do not have the 85mm from Zeiss but own the AF 85mm/1,4 from Nikon: I was wondering if I decided to "upgrade" from this already good lens from Nikon, would you recommend the Leica lux 80mm or the Zeiss 85mm ZF?
My use would be for portraits and low level photography like in concerts or bars, using a full frame body (D700).
Thanks
 

deepdiver

New member
Hi Episa.
it's depend on ur taste :)
Leica 80/1.4 have a unique look and smoother bokeh BUT it's not very sharp at F1.4 - F2. this lens is starting to get sharp image at F2.5 and above.

With ZF 85/1.4 u can get a sharp image starting from F1.4, and starting from F2 the result is already super sharp.
But u will not get the same bokeh and look from Leica 80/1.4
again it's ur preference :)

Nikon 85/1.4 is a really good lens. there is nothing wrong with it. If ur work needs a lot of AF, then none of those lens above can beat Nikon 85/1.4
In My case, I don't need the AF at all.
I don't shot at bars or at concerts :D
So IMHO, It's better for u to stay with Nikon 85/1.4
 

episa

New member
Thank you very much deepdiver. It sounds as you said that all these lenses (Leica Lux 80/f1.4, Zeiss 85mm/f1.4, Nikon AD 85mm/f1.4) are top quality lenses and that the choice of one vs the other is really linked to the type of photography we do.
If I understand you correctly I could summarize as follows:
Leica Lux 80mm f/1.4: excellent for portrait because of softer wide open and great bokeh
Zeiss 85mm/f1.4: excellent for photos requiring absolute sharpness wide open (statues, objects, landscape etc...)
AF Nikon 85mm/f1.4D: best for action photos where AF tracking is needed.

Thank you again deepdiver...
 

deepdiver

New member
Thank you very much deepdiver. It sounds as you said that all these lenses (Leica Lux 80/f1.4, Zeiss 85mm/f1.4, Nikon AD 85mm/f1.4) are top quality lenses and that the choice of one vs the other is really linked to the type of photography we do.
If I understand you correctly I could summarize as follows:
Leica Lux 80mm f/1.4: excellent for portrait because of softer wide open and great bokeh
Zeiss 85mm/f1.4: excellent for photos requiring absolute sharpness wide open (statues, objects, landscape etc...)
AF Nikon 85mm/f1.4D: best for action photos where AF tracking is needed.

Thank you again deepdiver...
Well said Episa :thumbs:

Glad that I can help u :)
 

robmac

Well-known member
Having owned the 80 lux and 100 ZF (both on a 1Ds2), I concur with Andre's comments on the two - not really comparable. The 100 is sharper WO, but I saw more CA and bokeh is not as buttery (tends to have double edges).

The Lux has that Mandler glow from 1.4-2 and while not sharp WO is still nicely defined. "Softly sharp"? I dunno. Great bokeh, little CA for such as fast telephoto, very flare resistant. From F2.8 on in center it will cut glass, so to speak.

What I also liked about the lux vs others fast telephotos is that the transition from foreground to plane-of-focus to background is very smooth and gradual. It looks very natural (as our brains would see it) vs. the sudden 'in your face' DoF transitions you can get from other fast longer glass. I tend to find such sudden "look at the sliver of focus" shots look artificial as the transition is TOO sudden and dramatic. YMMV.

On what 80-85 to use in clubs, etc. I'd stick with an AF lens. Trying to do stop-down and manual focus in that style of situation would be an exercise in frustration. The Nikon is no slouch (had an AiS versions years ago), but will show more CA, especially off reflective objects. Ideally a user would own both ;> One for convenience, one for more artistic shots.

Now, on a different track. Am shooting with a borrowed Mamiya M645 80/1.9 via adapter - Love it. First 2-3 shots told me I had to have one. Softish WO, but VERY sharp starting 1 stop down, nice color. Low-contrast, but I prefer that as can always boost macro contrast in post yet no tendency to rush to deep blacks. Very smooth operation and amazing 'pop' in VF when in focus. I suspect it's actually faster than 1.9 in real life (e.g. T stop vs F stop) - that and all the large glass pump a lot of light along.

Liked it so much, just ordered my own to go with my M645 150/3.5 and 200/2.8 APO. If you come across one, give it a try. I use the fotodiox pro adapter. Under $200 for the C model.
 

episa

New member
Very instructive info robmac on your Mamiya experience. I used to own a Mamiya 645PRO with all manual lenses and was very pleased with their lenses (especially for portraits). I was wondering actually if there was a possibility to adapt their larger lenses on a Nikon Body. I will look into your suggestion of the fotodiox pro adapter.

Of course there is an adjustment ratio so that a 150mm Mamiya lens is not a 150mm lens when adapted on Nikon FF body.
 

robmac

Well-known member
Actually 150mm is 150 - same angle of view, you just cut the outer 1/2 of the image circle. You get the sweet spot. I thought same thing when thought of MF glass on my FF DSLR, but nope, 150mm FL is 150mm.

The way I explain it to people is to treat all FL marking on lenses as if intended for 35mm FF. Medium format, FX, Leica M, etc.,

As you move the a given lens from FF 35mm 'down' to a crop sensor, the effective angle of view decreases due to the smaller sensor, so get crop factor - 80mm/1.9 becomes effective 120/1.9 (assuming Nikon Dx body).

However, as you move that 80/1.9 'up' from 35mm FF to Medium format, the reverse happens. The effective angle of view increases and reverse crop factor kicks in - 80/1.9 becomes an effective say 50/1.9.

In short you're say 200/2.8 Mamiya APO will have same FoV as your 200/2 VR G on a D700/D3_.
 

episa

New member
Thanks rob.
Since we are in the "Leica R lens on Nikon body" thread what is your experience of the fotodiox adapter to mount a Leica lens on Nikon. Anybody else?
I have use the leitax bayonet and am very satisfied. I just never heard of this other adapter....
 

DonWeston

Subscriber Member
Robmac- as good an explanation as I have ever heard for this. This has been discussed for ever with DX stuff and now for users of digital backs. It never was an issue for some of us old guys who actually used MF and LF in the film days, we just bought a lens for field of view with what ever that was in our 35mm or mf minds' sense, and the only other considerations were did you like german or japanese glass characteristics better and cost....guess for some, not much has changed:) It really never mattered what the number actually was on the glass for FL, you just bought what you needed ....
 

robmac

Well-known member
Don - Thanks.

episa - never heard of that adapter. I can't see how it would work w/o removing the existing Nikon mount. They have a Leica M39-Nikon adapter (39mm threaded rangefinder mount), but I have no experience with it.

My experience with Fotodiox 35mm adapters has been ok, not great. I much prefer custom-encoded chipped adapters (for Canon) from Rudloph at happypageHk on Ebay. He's well-respected in the alternate forum on Fred Miranda. On the medium format side, the Fotodiox Pro adapters are nice, the non-pro, not so much.
 

DonWeston

Subscriber Member
Would the group advise me to have a 90mm Summicron R converted with a Leitax adapter as an upgrade to the 105/2.5 Nikon I use from time to time? For most family or quick travel grabs, I just use my zooms, but for serious landscape stuff, I have noticed improvements using a MF Nikor or Voigtlander. But between these two lenses would I see enough difference in large prints between the 105 ais Nikon and the 90mm Summicron to be worth the cost of the adapter? Assuming large prints[14x21 and up] and that most of these are shot at f8 or smaller? Interested in hearing what folk have for experiences..thx
 
D

ddk

Guest
Thank you very much deepdiver. It sounds as you said that all these lenses (Leica Lux 80/f1.4, Zeiss 85mm/f1.4, Nikon AD 85mm/f1.4) are top quality lenses and that the choice of one vs the other is really linked to the type of photography we do.
If I understand you correctly I could summarize as follows:
Leica Lux 80mm f/1.4: excellent for portrait because of softer wide open and great bokeh
Zeiss 85mm/f1.4: excellent for photos requiring absolute sharpness wide open (statues, objects, landscape etc...)
AF Nikon 85mm/f1.4D: best for action photos where AF tracking is needed.

Thank you again deepdiver...
This formula, if you want to call it that, is way too narrow and meaningless. I have no experience with the Leica but I own the other two lenses. Both are designed as "PORTRAIT" lenses and both are very competent but have totally different rendering.

The Zeiss is actually very soft wide open and you get a very dreamy look with it at f1.4, but will sharpen up with great bokeh as you close down. The Nikon on the other hand is pretty sharp at f1.4, very creamy bokeh. The AF is handy more often than not as the Zeiss is kind of slow to focus with. My personal preference is for the Zeiss over the Nikkor where I can help it and the subject is stationary. I'm sure that the Leica is also a great performer but since both the Zeiss and the Nikkor, along with the Canon equivelants are such stellar performers, I just don't see the point to mess around with a lens that you have to manually stop down and use with an adaptor.

Dismising any of them in that manner is wrong.

(Edit) PS. Looked at the picture posts here with the 80mm and based on these I don't see any reason to pick this lens over the others. If anything its the 50mm which looks like worth looking into.
 
Last edited:
Top