Leica R Lens on Nikon D 700

[Ario Arioldi]

I have several R lenses on which I'have mounted the Leitax bayonet to use on my D700.
Everything else being perfect I found that for any aperture smaller than the max aperure there is a general tendency to underxepose.
I made a detailed comparison test using Nikon 50 1.4, Zeiss Planar 50 1.4, CV 58 1.4 and Leitz R 50 1.4 setting the spot metering for all of them.
At 1.4 the exposure was perfect in any case but at 2, 2.8 and 4 only the pics taken with the Summilux were uderexposed by at least one stop.
I do not know how much this can be relevant but the only difference I can see between the lenses I've used in this respect is that the camera has no information about the effective opening when the Summulux is in, while when using any of the other lenses this information is somehow available.
I will do other test with other lenses as soon as I can, but in the mean time,
is anybody having a similar experience?
Ario

 

[glenerrolrd]

Ario

we discussed this in the thread about new life for leica r lenses on Nikon. It may be solved by identifying the lens as a non CPU lens in the menu settings. We know for example that with Canon ...the camera adjusts for small differences in how the exposures are calculated at different F stops. It can t do that for alternative lenses without some input about the lens. You may still have to manually use exposure compensation to get this right . Normally it isn t off by a full stop more like 1/3-2/3 range.

 

[episa]

I have several R lenses on which I'have mounted the Leitax bayonet to use on my D700.
Everything else being perfect I found that for any aperture smaller than the max aperure there is a general tendency to underxepose.
I made a detailed comparison test using Nikon 50 1.4, Zeiss Planar 50 1.4, CV 58 1.4 and Leitz R 50 1.4 setting the spot metering for all of them.
At 1.4 the exposure was perfect in any case but at 2, 2.8 and 4 only the pics taken with the Summilux were uderexposed by at least one stop.
I do not know how much this can be relevant but the only difference I can see between the lenses I've used in this respect is that the camera has no information about the effective opening when the Summulux is in, while when using any of the other lenses this information is somehow available.
I will do other test with other lenses as soon as I can, but in the mean time,
is anybody having a similar experience?
Ario

I also read that when using such a conversion the Nikon body no longer uses the Matrix metering mode but works instead with central metering. This might have an effect on your results depending of the type of scene you photograph wide open vs at smaller aperture.

 

[robmac]

Is the same when using unchipped adaptors or chipped adapters that are not custom-encoded on Canon.

Ario

we discussed this in the thread about new life for leica r lenses on Nikon. It may be solved by identifying the lens as a non CPU lens in the menu settings. We know for example that with Canon ...the camera adjusts for small differences in how the exposures are calculated at different F stops. It can t do that for alternative lenses without some input about the lens. You may still have to manually use exposure compensation to get this right . Normally it isn t off by a full stop more like 1/3-2/3 range.

 

[robmac]

I believe, IIRC, it's the same using AiS lenses on bodies after the F4. Like the man says - you don't get somethin' for nothin'

I also read that when using such a conversion the Nikon body no longer uses the Matrix metering mode but works instead with central metering. This might have an effect on your results depending of the type of scene you photograph wide open vs at smaller aperture.

 

[JanRSmit]

I have several R lenses on which I'have mounted the Leitax bayonet to use on my D700.
Everything else being perfect I found that for any aperture smaller than the max aperure there is a general tendency to underxepose.
I made a detailed comparison test using Nikon 50 1.4, Zeiss Planar 50 1.4, CV 58 1.4 and Leitz R 50 1.4 setting the spot metering for all of them.
At 1.4 the exposure was perfect in any case but at 2, 2.8 and 4 only the pics taken with the Summilux were uderexposed by at least one stop.
I do not know how much this can be relevant but the only difference I can see between the lenses I've used in this respect is that the camera has no information about the effective opening when the Summulux is in, while when using any of the other lenses this information is somehow available.
I will do other test with other lenses as soon as I can, but in the mean time,
is anybody having a similar experience?
Ario

Ario,

I have just finished converting my Leica R lenses to the nikon bajonet. I also entered non-cpu lenses in the nikon menu.
Sofar i have not noticed a difference in exposure when stopping down. I have not tried without a non-cpu lens defined.
This weekend i will give it an extensive try-out in a Dutch national park: Oostvaardersplassen. Initial shots today in and around the house look promising.

Focusing is quite easy on a D700, viewfinder is quite clear, the focus confirmation helps.


Jan R. Smit
IQ is Technology, PQ is YOU!

 

[robmac]

As Jan indicates, once you enter the non-cpu data (focal length and max aperture), you should be fine +/- a hair. Assuming it's an 80 Lux but you're stopped own to say F5.6 - the camera will just assume it's wide open but in a dark environment.

 

[fotografz]

Ario,

I have just finished converting my Leica R lenses to the nikon bajonet. I also entered non-cpu lenses in the nikon menu.
Sofar i have not noticed a difference in exposure when stopping down. I have not tried without a non-cpu lens defined.
This weekend i will give it an extensive try-out in a Dutch national park: Oostvaardersplassen. Initial shots today in and around the house look promising.

Focusing is quite easy on a D700, viewfinder is quite clear, the focus confirmation helps.


Jan R. Smit
IQ is Technology, PQ is YOU!

I just installed a diagonal Split Circle/Microprism Ring focusing screen in my D700 from Bright Screen ... OMG! it's the biggest split circle I've ever seen! And the microprism collar is also huge. But strangely it doesn't cause a distraction. I checked it with the 200/2 and there was no half split blackout. Mounted the Zeiss 85/1.4 and it was super easy and fast to focus. Highly recommended for these fast MF lenses.

 

[JanRSmit]

First experiences this weekend with my LeNi:

Pictures of my wife working on one of her sculptures in her atelier, taken by hand with APO-macro-elmarit 100mm, developed in LR with fill light to compensate the strong back-light (except for the image of sculpture).

Really enjoying the combo: affectionately called NeLi.

Thus far modified my Elmarit 28mm, Summilux 50mm, APO-Macro-Elmarit 100mm.
Next week the Summicron 35mm and APO-Telyt 180mm.

Up to F5.6 focus confirmation works fine.


Jan R. Smit
IQ is Technology, PQ is YOU!

 

[kididdoc]

using leitax adapters is there some way to set up to get audible focus confirmation...?

with aperture priority and manual focus...?

thanks, Steve

 

[Mitchell]

Does anyone with experience have an opinion on Image Quality: D700 with Leica R lenses versus DMR?

Thanks,

Mitchell

 

[kididdoc]

not likely that one person is doing both...from photos I have seen I doubt a tangible difference, though people who use the DMR are convinced that it is the best...

can this be seen in a blinded test? does it matter?


Steve

 

[fotografz]

Does anyone with experience have an opinion on Image Quality: D700 with Leica R lenses versus DMR?

Thanks,

Mitchell

IMO, DMR wins at lower ISOs ... then the D700 screams past it all the way to ISOs not even on the DMRs selection menu :bugeyes:

Had both cameras, used with Leica glass. Sold it all and now use a A900 with Zeiss optics in place of the DMR.

 

[kididdoc]

fascinating, and thank you...


tell us about your current setup, please...

Steve

 

[fotografz]

Just go over to the Sony section and eyeball some of the shots in the "Fun with Sony thread".

Zeiss AF lenses on a 25 meg body. Easy to use, fast to shoot with, Zeiss optics.

 

[Stuart Richardson]

Does anyone with experience have an opinion on Image Quality: D700 with Leica R lenses versus DMR?

Thanks,

Mitchell

I posted a thread of the D3 versus the DMR a year or so ago. You might try searching for it. I did an extensive comparison with samples from both cameras. For my intents and purposes, they were more or less equal at low ISO´s, but the Leica lenses are better. Color has more depth with the DMR, but I don´t think this is a huge concern in the real world, assuming you have the workflow nailed down with both cameras. In terms of utility as a camera, the D3 was light years ahead of the DMR for me. As much as I hated to stop shooting with those Leica lenses, the ability to shoot at ISO 3200+ with great image quality, in the rain, in the dark, with autofocus, a big LCD with 900,000 pixels, at 9fps, live view, etc etc...I just could not ignore the advantages of the D3 re the DMR in the long run.

The Sony is an interesting case though -- I would love to try one on an extended basis one day.

 

[kididdoc]

now you can shoot Leica lenses on the D3...

leitax,


Steve

 

[Stuart Richardson]

I do, but it's not the same -- the lenses are stop down only, there are metering problems other than wide open, and some lenses seem to suffer -- for example, the 50/1.4 E60 performs better wide open on film than it does on the D3. I believe there are some fundamental incompatibilities between the mounts. That said, the telephotos like the 100mm APO and 180mm APO Elmarit work beautifully on the D3...