Small (non Leica) lenses that have potential on the A7/7R

[Vivek]

Aside from the Leica mount lenses, there could be many old gems that could still be usable on the upcoming A7/7r. Of course, only real testing would show how useful they might be.

Here is a list (based on checking with projection on a GG and in some cases on my Leica MM) of probables:

First E mount lenses (not really "small" but I thought I will throw them in ):

1. 30/3.5 Macro (needs to get rid of rear baffle)

2. 24/1.8 (rear baffle has to go)

3. 50/1.8 (ditto).

4. 18-55 (possibly from ~28mm onwards)

Olympus pen F lenses (not sure of the corners!):

1. 40/1.4

2. 38/2.8

3. 42/1.2

4. 60/1.5

5. 70/2 (no worries)

6. 100/3.5, 150/4

If you anything to add, feel free.

 

[Michiel Schierbeek]

My first curiousity is to try the:

VC Heliar 15/4.5
Zeiss M Biogon 25/2.8

and compare them to the:

Contax Zeiss Distagon 18/4
Minolta MD 24/2.8
Contax Zeiss Distagon 28/2.8

 

[Vivek]

Untitled by Vivek Iyer, on Flickr

 

[Vivek]

Oops! It isn't entirely a non-leica lens!


Untitled by Vivek Iyer, on Flickr
NEX-6, APO Rodagon-D 75/4.5

 

[Guy Mancuso]

If my Leica r19 in Nikon mount would work on it than I may buy the Sony a7r.

 

[Vivek]

That will work fine but how long will the A7R last with constant use is an open question.

The Elmarit weighs ~100g more than the A7R without an adapter....

 

[Annna T]

The Zeiss Contax G lenses are very small and light. Plus they are very sharp.
You can read more about their characteristics in Ken Rockwell's pages.
I owned (well, still own, but don't use film cameras anymore) a G2. These lenses are very sharp, especially the 45mm F2 and the 21mm F2.8. The 90mm was producing less sharp results, but since I use it on MFT cameras and focus them manually I saw it was not so much due to the lens, than to the focusing mechanism.

They have a relatively busy bokey and can show purple fringing in the corners against a bright sky, but when you want a sharp picture with much DOF there is nothing like them.

None weight more than 200gr. So they should be well balanced on the A7s. People used to call that system the poor man's Leica M.

I'm sure that both the 45mm and the 90mm will perform beautifully on both FF A7s, but I'm waiting to see what the wide angle ones will deliver (I have the 16mm, the 21mm and the 28 in addition to the 45 and 90mm). I fear that the 21mm will not perform very well. But if it did well on the A7, I would be very tempted to get one. May be it is a sentimental thing : the Contax G was my first interchangeable lens camera system.

PS you can download the Zeiss data sheets for each of these lenses here.

 

[jfirneno]

I have the 45 and the 21 myself. The 45 has been a joy on the NEX cameras. I have a feeling the edges of the 21 may look a little funny but then again maybe not. Can't remember if anyone has tried the Contax G 21mm yet and given results on-line.

Good luck
John

The Zeiss Contax G lenses are very small and light. Plus they are very sharp.
You can read more about their characteristics in Ken Rockwell's pages.
I owned (well, still own, but don't use film cameras anymore) a G2. These lenses are very sharp, especially the 45mm F2 and the 21mm F2.8. The 90mm was producing less sharp results, but since I use it on MFT cameras and focus them manually I saw it was not so much due to the lens, than to the focusing mechanism.

They have a relatively busy bokey and can show purple fringing in the corners against a bright sky, but when you want a sharp picture with much DOF there is nothing like them.

None weight more than 200gr. So they should be well balanced on the A7s. People used to call that system the poor man's Leica M.

I'm sure that both the 45mm and the 90mm will perform beautifully on both FF A7s, but I'm waiting to see what the wide angle ones will deliver (I have the 16mm, the 21mm and the 28 in addition to the 45 and 90mm). I fear that the 21mm will not perform very well. But if it did well on the A7, I would be very tempted to get one. May be it is a sentimental thing : the Contax G was my first interchangeable lens camera system.

PS you can download the Zeiss data sheets for each of these lenses here.

 

[Vivek]

I have the 90/2.8 (I am sure it will be superb!) and lust a 16/8 Hologon.

 

[Annna T]

I have the 90/2.8 (I am sure it will be superb!) and lust a 16/8 Hologon.

Well, for me that 16mm was rather a youth error : it has a fixed focus of F8 and is vignetting like mad. So you have to add a special rectangular shaped filter which is sold with the lens along with the add-on OVF. That special graduated grey filter is taking you something like at least 1 stop if not more. So in the end that lens wan't very usable unless it was a bright day. But at the time, the 21mm wasn't yet issued and I wanted something wider than the 28mm to shoot buildings.

Anyway, the protruding rear elements are sticking so deep inside of the camera that you can't adapt it on any mirrorless camera.

They are going up to almost 2000$ on Ebay. Although there are some cheaper offerings. They seem to be handled like a collector item more or less.

 

[Vivek]

While certainly not youthful, I still lust after the Hologon. I think it is a 4 stop ND filter. Not for the faint of heart.

And, yes, you can use it on the A7/7R (with the expected color issues).

See: http://www.zeissimages.com/showreplies.php?qid=964

 

[Godfrey]

I have the 90/2.8 (I am sure it will be superb!) and lust a 16/8 Hologon.

I had the Hologon 16 when I owned the G2. With the filter, it was an f/16 lens (native corner falloff is about 1.5 stops). Very nice results, but awkward to work with due to the slow speed and very thin control ring ... It was hard to keep your fingers out of the FoV.

I replaced it with a Heliar 15 when I went back to M-mount. Not as great on performance but a far easier to use lens.

I doubt the Hologon will adapt well to any digital body, never mind a full frame sensor.

G

 

[Vivek]

Having used the Cosina 15/4.5 on every camera (film, digital FF, cropped), my lust for the Hologon got intense.

 

[Godfrey]

Having used the Cosina 15/4.5 on every camera (film, digital FF, cropped), my lust for the Hologon got intense.

Whatever turns you on.

The Hologon 16 was a particularly expensive lens, I bought it as a gift to myself when I received a windfall bonus for something or other. It was an amazing performer when used correctly, but that took a lot of work and I ended up not using it very much at all as a consequence. The Heliar 15 was much easier to use well, and produced a lot of good photos for me despite its lower performance. I did not miss the Hologon at all.

In the end, I have realized that generally speaking an EFoV much wider than about 20mm, or 90 degrees across the diagonal, was simply not my thing. I've been much happier and gotten much more use and many more satisfying photographs out of wides in the 20 to 28mm EFoV range.

G

 

[scho]

I have the 45 and the 21 myself. The 45 has been a joy on the NEX cameras. I have a feeling the edges of the 21 may look a little funny but then again maybe not. Can't remember if anyone has tried the Contax G 21mm yet and given results on-line.

Good luck
John

My copy of the 21g biogon has very poor edge/corner performance with lots of smearing. On center with cropping it is very sharp.

_DSC0868_ff-Edit.jpg photo - Carl Schofield photos at pbase.com

 

[jfirneno]

My copy of the 21g biogon has very poor edge/corner performance with lots of smearing. On center with cropping it is very sharp.

_DSC0868_ff-Edit.jpg photo - Carl Schofield photos at pbase.com

Hello Carl:

What camera were you using it on? Was it one of the NEX cameras?

Regards,
John

 

[Annna T]

My copy of the 21g biogon has very poor edge/corner performance with lots of smearing. On center with cropping it is very sharp.

_DSC0868_ff-Edit.jpg photo - Carl Schofield photos at pbase.com

Not sure what to do here : I can't add a "like" to your comment, because it is not a very good news. More or less what I feared, but I'm grateful that you are always willing to share your experience with those Contax lenses.

How much do you have to crop to get good enough corners ? Would you say that you are still getting a wider angle of view than with the 28mm ?

 

[Vivek]

Whatever turns you on.

The Hologon 16 was a particularly expensive lens, I bought it as a gift to myself when I received a windfall bonus for something or other. It was an amazing performer when used correctly, but that took a lot of work and I ended up not using it very much at all as a consequence. The Heliar 15 was much easier to use well, and produced a lot of good photos for me despite its lower performance. I did not miss the Hologon at all.

In the end, I have realized that generally speaking an EFoV much wider than about 20mm, or 90 degrees across the diagonal, was simply not my thing. I've been much happier and gotten much more use and many more satisfying photographs out of wides in the 20 to 28mm EFoV range.

G

Topogon design turns me "on". . The perfect lens design ever.

I have a tiny Topogon 1.3 cm f/3.5 lens that will work on m43rds. The GM1 is the most appropriate body, thusfar.

For the FF, the Topogon clones W-Nikkor 2.5 cm f/4 and the Orion-15 28mm f/6 will have to do for now (far better light fall off than the Hologon).

 

[monza]

Oops! It isn't entirely a non-leica lens!

The 40/2.4 Summarit is a wonderful lens, but the 40/2 Summicron is a lot easier to adapt.

 

[mmbma]

contax lenses. Conica Hexanon lenses, pentax three princesses. Especially the Hexanon primes, only 30 bucks on ebay!