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!

Xpro1 or X-E1 for Leica M lenses?

jamriman

New member
Greetings,
I'm thinking of getting into a mirrorless system. I have a decent collection of M lenses. Would focusing be easier with the new EVF on the X-E1? As I understand the optical VF on the Xpro1 doesn't couple so in a sense is useless. Thanks.
 

jonoslack

Active member
Hi there

If you're using mid to longer lenses, then either would be fine ( but you'll want to use the EVF ) if you want to use the wider lenses (wider than 35 ). Then I'd guess your better off getting a second hand M9 or wait for the M (the first full frame mirror less camera!?)

I've used Leica M and R lenses on NEX and micro 4/3( not on the Fuji, but the news seems to be the same), and most of the wider lenses don't do so well towards the edges. . . . but some bodies are better than others.

Have you considered a Ricoh GXD. with the M module? That might be a better bet as they have actually designed the sensor with M lenses in mind.

Best to do some research with your own lenses before jumping in.

I hope this is helpful
 

jamriman

New member
Yes! Many thanks! I have an M9-P which I don't want to give up for a new M. I still however would like to have video capability and live view. Maybe the GXR is the way to go.
 

scifitographer

New member
i've got the voigtlander 12mm m mount lens and it works pretty well. manual focus is pretty easy to handle with that lens.

couple of examples with the x-pro 1 and voigtlander 12mm. click through for larger images.


 

Lloyd

Active member
I also use M-Mount (Leica and CV) on the X-Pro1, and I'm using the Fuji M-mount adapter, which allows lens corrections (if needed. Here are the instructions:. Works very well, but I've honestly found little reason to make corrections.

Contrary to what Jono suggests, I've had no problems focusing wider lenses, and most use my 28, 35, and the CV 21mm and 15mm. I've also used three different 50mm M-mount lenses on the X-Pro1, including the Nocti f1.0, as well as the 75mm, and the 90 Elmarit. All with good results.

Beth's example shots with the 12mm CV are even more telling.

I tend to use EVF, but have mounted a 21mm external VF for use with the CV 15mm a couple of times. Not really needed, but it worked.
 

jonoslack

Active member
Contrary to what Jono suggests, I've had no problems focusing wider lenses, and most use my 28, 35, and the CV 21mm and 15mm. I've also used three different 50mm M-mount lenses on the X-Pro1, including the Nocti f1.0, as well as the 75mm, and the 90 Elmarit. All with good results.

Beth's example shots with the 12mm CV are even more telling.

I tend to use EVF, but have mounted a 21mm external VF for use with the CV 15mm a couple of times. Not really needed, but it worked.
Hi There Lloyd
I wasn't referring to focusing with wide angles, but to corner resolution and colour effects - I quite agree that Beth's samples look splendid- I also have to emphasise that this is simply a reflection of what I've read - not of personal experience.

My interpretation is that none of the mirrorless cameras (of which the X-pro1 is obviously one) makes the best use of the non-telecentric M lenses, with the possible exception of the Ricoh.

I've not spent enough time with the camera to make a proper personal judgement, I'd just come to the conclusion that it was less than ideal with M lenses - perhaps I'm wrong (I usually am! :deadhorse:), and what little time I have spent is with an older version of the firmware.

So, Lloyd - I'll now ask you an oblique question. with the earlier firmware, focusing M lenses with optical VF was really not a viable option - is that still the case with firmware 2?
 

Lloyd

Active member
Hi There Lloyd
[snip]

So, Lloyd - I'll now ask you an oblique question. with the earlier firmware, focusing M lenses with optical VF was really not a viable option - is that still the case with firmware 2?
I have used the optical VF with some of the wider lenses when I've used Zone Focus. (And in those same circumstances used the external VF.) However, I adapted fairly quickly to using the EVF, especially with the ability to zoom in to 100% for focusing (although with the wides that is not always necessary), so using the EVF is now my preference.

And, to your original point, I still think the M9/M8/MM are superior places for the M-glass to reside, but the XP1 is certainly growing on me.
 

jonoslack

Active member
I have used the optical VF with some of the wider lenses when I've used Zone Focus. (And in those same circumstances used the external VF.) However, I adapted fairly quickly to using the EVF, especially with the ability to zoom in to 100% for focusing (although with the wides that is not always necessary), so using the EVF is now my preference.

And, to your original point, I still think the M9/M8/MM are superior places for the M-glass to reside, but the XP1 is certainly growing on me.
Thanks for that - I wouldn't like to be misleading people - So, is it actually possible to focus manually on somebody's eye (for instance) at 5ft with, say, a 50 M lens at f4 with the OVF? (I don't mean zone focus). I'm seriously interested here, because for me it's the OVF which defines a rangefinder type camera, and whilst I'm quite happy using an EVF . . . . I'd rather use one on an OMD or a Sony NEX 7, with very fast refresh rates, high resolution and no tearing. . . . . and after much practice I've learned that I can't be bothered using M lenses with either of these cameras - the corollary being that I wouldn't use them on an XP1 with it's less good EVF either . . .but if the IQ is good, and you can focus properly with the OVF, then that might be different!
 

jamriman

New member
I don't think the OVF couples with the M lens adapter for focusing. That's why I think the OEVF on the X-E1 might be a better option for M lenses.
 

Lloyd

Active member
Thanks for that - I wouldn't like to be misleading people - So, is it actually possible to focus manually on somebody's eye (for instance) at 5ft with, say, a 50 M lens at f4 with the OVF? (I don't mean zone focus). I'm seriously interested here, because for me it's the OVF which defines a rangefinder type camera, and whilst I'm quite happy using an EVF . . . . I'd rather use one on an OMD or a Sony NEX 7, with very fast refresh rates, high resolution and no tearing. . . . . and after much practice I've learned that I can't be bothered using M lenses with either of these cameras - the corollary being that I wouldn't use them on an XP1 with it's less good EVF either . . .but if the IQ is good, and you can focus properly with the OVF, then that might be different!
No, sadly not with the OVF. Only with the EVF. It works well, but it's not a rangefinder, for sure.
 

sjg284

Member
I own the XPro1.. and used only an M lens for the first 2 weeks I had it.
Using the ZM25/2.8, being relatively slow & wide, I did a lot of zone focus.
In slow moving situations I checked focus on EVF and shot away with OVF.

In general, I do I find myself using the EVF more than I expected
I think being w/o the OVF, and forced to use EVF 100%, I would still miss it.

Certainly look forward to improved EVFs, as while the XPro1 is one of the best EVFs I've used, I know its not state of the art anymore.

Not sure which is more or less ideal for M lenses, honestly.
While the improved EVF of the X-E1 may make focussing a bit easier, I don't think focus is that hard on the X-Pro1 as it is. The OVF does allow one to pretend the XPro1 is a Leica when zone focussed.
It's not going to get substantially better unless they introduce firmware features like focus peaking or other focus assistance.
 

jonoslack

Active member
I own the XPro1.. and used only an M lens for the first 2 weeks I had it.
Using the ZM25/2.8, being relatively slow & wide, I did a lot of zone focus.
In slow moving situations I checked focus on EVF and shot away with OVF.

In general, I do I find myself using the EVF more than I expected
I think being w/o the OVF, and forced to use EVF 100%, I would still miss it.

Certainly look forward to improved EVFs, as while the XPro1 is one of the best EVFs I've used, I know its not state of the art anymore.

Not sure which is more or less ideal for M lenses, honestly.
While the improved EVF of the X-E1 may make focussing a bit easier, I don't think focus is that hard on the X-Pro1 as it is. The OVF does allow one to pretend the XPro1 is a Leica when zone focussed.
It's not going to get substantially better unless they introduce firmware features like focus peaking or other focus assistance.
I think all this is a really interesting subject (outside of camera loyalties). There was an interesting discussion about focus overlays in optical rangefinders - but of course, registration becomes a real issue with lenses which have no electrical contacts.

I quite agree about the use of EVFs, I also use them more than expected, and going back to an optical viewfinder sometimes leaves one wanting. One thing I would say though, having used the Olympus VF2 on several different cameras, is that it's not the resolution that makes an EVF good . . . . . it's the refresh rate (OMD and latest NEX are great here) . . .and the contrast (NEX too much).

This suggests to me that the EVF on the X-E1 will not actually be very much better than the one in the Xpro-1 (at least, not based on the resolution), as, as far as I can see the refresh rate is 24fps (for instance the OMD does 60 or 120).

The Leica M has a similar refresh rate, and I guess that the VF2, will be very similar to the EVF on the Xpro-1 (it'll be interesting to see). The VF2 on the X2 however (60 fps refresh) is excellent.

On the other hand, if I were to buy into the Fuji system, I'd want the optical viewfinder - and I guess I'd end up using it for Fuji lenses rather than M lenses. I still reckon that if you must use a non-leica body for M lenses, the GXD is probably the best solution right now.
 

Braeside

New member
Regarding the EVF in the XE-1.

A Japanese web magazine published Fujifilm Mr. Ueno's interview.
1. EVF is the same speed as X-Pro1 46fps. (Sony Nex 7 60fps) The reason why X-E1 is slower than Sony is X-Trans CMOS.
2. EVF latency is less than 20ms, which should be totally acceptable.

The OMD refresh is also 60fps/120fps.

I only had the Fuji X M adaptor for a short time before returning it for a refund. At the time the firmware did not allow live previewing of the vignetting, corner colour corrections (it does now). I was also using version 1.x of the firmware which did not have the much better manual focus magnification choice that the newer software has.

I also have a Ricoh GXR A12 M mount and use that with my M lenses (ex my M8). I did a quick comparison and actually preferred the results from the GXR better than the same lenses on the X Pro 1. Corners were sharper. The Ricoh was designed for M mount lenses, the only digital camera apart from the Leica that is currently in production.

I decided that there was not a good reason to use my M mount lenses on the Fuji, when Fuji already has 3 great (AF) lenses and more in the pipeline. I have preordered the 18-55mm Zoom, to try their OIS, which is the one thing I miss when coming from the OMD to the Fuji.
 

Rayto

New member
Today, over on Steve Huff's site, there's a review of the xe with a write-up on using about a half dozen Leica mount lenses. The review devotes about a parargraph on each lens so it may be worth a read.
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
My M-mount lens kit is now my primary system, and it happens that I like the rendering qualities of the modern Color Skopar 21/4, 28/3.5, 35/2.5, and 50/2.5 quite a lot. Their compact size and light weight also appeal to me quite a lot too.

I use these lenses on Leica M4-2, CL, M9 and Ricoh GXR-M bodies, and tried them on NEX and Micro-FourThirds bodies. They work great on the film bodies, of course, and of these digital bodies the GXR has the best out of camera results currently. (The 21 and 28 with the M9 really need CornerFix to shine.) I've seen result with them on the Fuji sensor and was not impressed; never mind that so far I've been unimpressed with the processing options for Fuji raw files.

The GXR-M is my choice for using these and my other M-mount lenses for video until such time as I acquire the new M.
 
Top