Guy Mancuso
Administrator, Instructor
It's a dumb adapter but works okay. I had to tighten down all the screws.
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!
I've tried three Metabones adapters (one for mFT, two for NEX) and returned all three. Poor fit, the lenses would not lock in on them correctly and/or they had play on the camera mount.ah then it may be the one to get. Metabones adapters are usually pretty well made albeit Guys experience.
In a horrifying moment of weakness yesterday, I ordered one of these lenses—in the box with hood, caps, etc—at a price I can rationalize as being worth it and affordable. Ugh.
Hanging out with this crowd of equipment magpies is a dangerous business. ;-)
Anyway, I couldn't possibly rationalize the cost of a series II model and it wouldn't work on my Leicaflex SL bodies anyway. It was not cheap, but it wasn't "break the bank" expensive.
These moments of weakness come from working my butt off and seeking escape in shopping therapy. They'd be less frequent if I didn't work so much. Of course I wouldn't have the money then either. Hmm ... =8^O
NOW I really really have to start selling some of the excess unused gear around here... !
R lenses are equally good in performance and usually cheaper than similar M lens. Also R series has longer alternatives. Technically the R series are a better fit, especially for focal lengths below 50mm due longer flange to sensor distance.
Many of the wider M lenses aren't really suited for the 7's causing weird coloring and smeared corners in pictures.
In practise slr lenses work better than rangefinder lenses for 50 and below, regardless of the lens brand.
//Juha
Thank you Juha and Eeraj - I am assuming with introduction or Fuji and Sony, Along with Canon / Nikon option, they won't stay cheap for long.Not at all, no question is dumb. I can only give my perspective - I cannot adapt M lenses on DSLRs, hence R lenses are preferable in some cases for me in case I want to go to a 50MP Nikon when it comes out. Other reason is that most R wides work well on mirrorless. Most M wides are horrible on anything other than a Leica M. Price is another consideration - in some cases R lenses are cheaper than M counterparts with no loss in IQ.
For the two R lenses I bought above, I feel they are truly unique and best of the best so when the opportunity arose I bought them. Again, my personal subjective opinion.
Hope this helps.
Eeraj
Not a dumb question at all.I have what will probably be considered a dumb question.
Here goes - why would you consider an R lens as opposed to a M lens?
Not a dumb question at all.
- Adapting SLR lenses proves more compatible with large sensors than adapting RF lenses. This is a side effect of the necessity to design them for a deep mount register to clear the swinging mirror.
- Leica R lenses are in many cases as good or better performers than Leica M lenses. In fact, since I really only have rather old M lenses or Voigtländers, my R lenses are in most cases better performers.
- I bought the Leicaflex SL body and most of these lenses last year to shoot with them on film and hoped to use them as telephoto lenses on smaller format bodies. I found I missed having their designed capabilities expressed in the full format they were intended for ... that's why I bought the A7. I will never buy a Sony lens for the A7, my intent is purely to use it as a "one-size-fits-all" replacement for SLR cameras.
G
Thank you all, in Summary it appears that;Also the lenses are different in design as well the 80 lux being a Mandler design when wide open will have more lens aberrations but thats what gives it the look. Lets not forget lens coatings here as well. Canon being a more modern lens coatings