I have two concerns with these adapters. 1) are the truly parallel to the focus plane and sensor? and 2) How precise is the machining when all of us can go past infinity for infinity focus? I guess I have a third question, How do these errors effect lens performance?
As far as the magenta shift, this has been a problem for Leica in the M8 and even M9/ Corner fix may be the only solution for this as long as the corners are relatively sharp. The corners will not be as sharp as the center and in the testing I have seen on Sean Reid's web site that has been rue for virtually all lenses with some having better corner performance than others but usually that was at a price to be paid some where else in the lenses performance. I don't expect performance at the corners that matches the center and to be honest in most images I rarely spend much time focusing on the corner of the picture. I just want decent such that it isn't obvious to the casual observer.
John, Planarity of the adapter should not be a problem. Machining (RJ, Hawk, etc) are done on pretty sophisticated machines that Novoflex and others use.
Going past infinity is truly trivial. Use the LCD screen to check the focus. This isn't a blind cam (until the LCD fails) to be doing zone focus.
If snaps are made past infinity, then the results will be horrible- no matter if it is a Leica lens or a Lens"baby".
Last edited by Vivek; 18th July 2010 at 00:15.
Vivek, good to know. Thanks.
Day 2 with the M adapter, just a few things to add to yesterday's report.
-- For the 35 Summarit, the slight IQ decline I mentioned towards the edges wide open at infinity distance is often very slight to nearly non-existent. It was hard to get decent infinity shots because of the haze today, but below I've posted a shot from yesterday that's maybe about 3/4 of the way to infinity at 2.5 and then at 5.6, with upper right 100% corner crops for each. At infinity, it is usually not too much worse than this, and sometimes better -- i.e., this may not be an issue for most. Again, at closer focus distance and/or stopped down, there is no issue and things look great. For mid-range focus points, sometimes the bokeh is a bit odd; at other times, it is very nice. Overall, the results with this lens are excellent, even without having RAW files to manipulate.
-- For the 50 1.5 Nokton, the IQ issues wide open as you move towards infinity focus are more significant. At 1.5 and generally at 2.0, as you move through the focus range a haze sets in and there is often CA, esp at 1.5. At close focus, on the other hand, it's really great wide open. Beginning at 2.8 and really by 5.6, it is great for any use. Bokeh is great for close-range focus points, sometimes not so hot for mid-range focus points.
-- I tried the CV 75 2.5 a few times today. Seems pretty good wide open, although some CA, very good by about 4.0 or 5.6. So far, I like the look of the Summarit and Nokton better, but this seems like a decent telephoto option and I may use it some more.
-- Did not get a chance to test the 35 Skopar further. Have not tried the CV 15 again since yesterday's magenta corner issues.
I suspect the Summarit or Nokton will stay on this camera most of the time until Zeiss releases primes. I would be very interested to see how a 35 Summilux or 50 Summilux performs.
For the photos, again, lenses and f-stop are in the file name. Focus point for the first photo is "Co.", for the second is the top of the third column. These are JPGs from camera, some minor levels/contrast adjustments in Lightroom 3, exported as JPG. I've played around a bit with sharpening jpgs in Lightroom 3 (but not with these), which is not ideal of course, but the results suggest that when we get RAWs to manipulate in Lightroom the results are going to be really good.
Last edited by MPK2010; 26th September 2010 at 12:16.
It takes a lot of patience to test each lens at different apertures and different focus distances. Thanks!
Ran a few more tests with the CV 15 4.5. I am still getting magenta coloration in the corners. I suppose "strong" is a relative term, but it is very noticeable, especially where the corners are supposed to be white or grey. Seems to be true from wide open at least through f11, haven't tested beyond that. Here are two more examples. FYI -- I am using the M-Mount, not the LTM.
I wonder if the CV 12 or another wide performs better.
Last edited by MPK2010; 26th September 2010 at 12:16.
MPK2010, do you have the NEX 16mm pancake? would you recommend it over the CV15?
I posted 12 shots taken with the 16 MM in the Fun with Nex thread starting at post #455. That should give a you a pretty good idea of how the lens performs as there are several shots where you can see edge performance and geometry. Considering I inadvertently shot these at ISO 800 they are very sharp and clear. You can also compare the image quality to theLeica 40/2 set that follows.
Yes, there is. Only a few hours ago, Terry helped me find it (for effective use) in my few days old camera.
BTW, all the OEM lenses will also focus past infinity. AF keeps them under control.
I just ordered a NEX5 kit from Monza yesterday. Is there any consensus on the "best" Leica M --> Nex adapter yet? Does anyone know of a place in USA that has adapters "in stock" or a way to get them before this weekend?
I ordered for the Metabones adapter and hope to receive it soon (being shipped out of Hong Kong, even though Metabones is a Japanese company). Around the net, the metabones adapter has a good reputation, even though douglasf13 was not very happy about its handling.
Others like Kipon etc are also available.
A900 with a few lenses, flashes etc.
Cool... Thanks for the info.
FYI, my metabones also focuses past infinity, which isn't a deal breaker, but I was kind of hoping it would nail it. However, unlike some adapters, the lens locks very tightly in place, which is nice.
A900 with a few lenses, flashes etc.
Agreed. The build quality is excellent, even though I did personally have problems with the size of the lens release. I find that I have to pull back focus just to the left of the infinity mark for true infinity focus. I tried to shim it, but failed at getting the right thickness a couple of times and just gave up.
On a related note, I noticed some interesting behavior with my CV 35/1.4 that I need to test more thoroughly. It seems that the extreme corners actually sharpen up when I focus PAST infinity a bit!? I wouldn't have noticed this if the adapter didn't let me focus past the infinity mark. I believe this means either one of two things. I'm crazy and I need to test the lens in a more controlled scenario, or the lens has some field curvature. I'm probably just crazy, but I'll test it some more later. Wouldn't it be hilarious if others having smearing problems at the edges with various just had adapters that weren't nailing infinity as well as they thought! (kidding, i doubt it.)
I'm interested to hear how your Summicron does with purple fringing. My only complaint about the CV is that I get quite a bit of it when I have blown highlights in a contrasty setting. For example, the chrome on a bumper, or an extremely backlit subject. The source for the kind of fringing I'm getting has been debated on forums forever. Sensor? Lens? The combination? So, I'm curious how the Summicron handles it, because Leica lenses on the M8/M9 exhibit this sometimes, too. Granted, it gets a little better on mine at f2, and much better at f2.8 (or, of course, not blowing out highlights )
Here is a link to the type of fringing I'm talking about. Mine is never this extreme: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-...82-post39.html
The examples from your link are extreme!! I have never witnessed anything like it before!!
What is interesting to me is that the author of that post over at LUF strongly believes that this is a characteristic of CCD sensors which both the M8.2 and M9 have of course. If this is so and can be corroberated why are you seeing it with a CMOS sensor?
I suspect that it is a combination of sensor and lens designs and possibly the edge photosites on the M9 exagerate this problem when the appropriate conditions exist.
I have to say that I have never witnessed anything like it on my CCD DMR Back on a Leica R9 with various R lenses or my CMOS sensored A900 with various ZA, G, Minolta and even a Tamron lens.
Either way it's not nice to see!
Yeah, don't get me wrong, my issues aren't even close to that extreme. I only linked that shot to illustrate the type of issues I'm having, because there can be confusion between purple fringing, longitudinal CA, lateral CA, etc. Apparently the 50 Noctilux and 24 Summilux seem to have the problem most often.
edit: Well, I feel a little better. It seems that Jono's fancy-pants Summilux can show this issue, too. These examples are more in line with what I'm seeing, generally. http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-...58-post16.html
Last edited by douglasf13; 20th August 2010 at 06:03.