Site Sponsors
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 51 to 100 of 108

Thread: SLR Magic HyperPrime LM 50mm T0.95 Review

  1. #51
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    281
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: SLR Magic HyperPrime LM 50mm T0.95 Review

    Quote Originally Posted by StephenPatterson View Post
    Red Loctite is designed as a thread locking compound, but SLR Magic are using it as an epoxy to hold the lens together. Andrew explained to me (after my second lens failure) that there is insufficient room in the mechanical design for traditional screw fasteners to hold the lens together. Without the use of adhesives this lens would not be possible to assemble. As using epoxy would destroy the lens during disassembly the only choice for SLR Magic was to use Loctite.

    Using Loctite in this way is unlike any other manufacturer (in spite of SLR Magic's attempted claims to the contrary) and is not what Loctite is designed for. No Leica or Zeiss lens is held together with thread locking compound, from Loctite or any other manufacturer. I believe over time, especially in high heat and humidity, all of the SLR Magic Hyperprime lenses will fail. I urged Andrew to recall this lens, but I believe he is ignoring the facts and hoping the problem will just go away.
    Your post makes perfect sense; I have seen loctite used in many situations, and used it myself - as a threadlocker! Of course "Loctite", the corporation, makes adhesives as well, but it seems the product used here is a threadlocker.

    Obviously, if there is no room for proper fasteners, it is a design problem. There is no way that Leica and Zeiss use Loctite to hold together mechanical parts of their lenses, they use it for locking the threads on screws. Does anyone know where these lenses actually originate? I know the earlier "Noktor" m4/3s lenses were re-purposed security camera lenses. Maybe this lens uses the glass from similar lenses (though with larger coverage) and they cobble them together to make an m-mount lens?

    Of course people can spend their money on whatever they would like, but it just seems illogical that anyone would pay $5000 for this lens rather than an F1 Noctilux that won't fall apart when the loctite melts. But I guess you could go for the non-RF version and save $2000! (btw, $2000 + another $1000 gets you a new Summilux Asph) Leica couldn't ask for a better competitor to make their lenses look like a great value!
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  2. #52
    Member StephenPatterson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Hubei, China
    Posts
    209
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: SLR Magic HyperPrime LM 50mm T0.95 Review

    I see another Hyperprime owner in Hong Kong is trying to sell his lens on Steve Huff's site. I love the ad, because it features the "new and improved" shipping box that is supposed to solve all of the focus issues customers are having with the Hyperprime.

    I have never seen a company come up with so many excuses to explain why their lenses are not properly calibrated and fall apart. Blame the shipping company, blame the customer's rangefinder, blame the customer. My first lens was so far out that my hit rate was zero, and Andrew actually told me I needed to focus and then make a muscle memory adjustment to achieve proper focus. I should have known then that this guy is clueless. The second lens was better from 1m-10m, but hopeless beyond that (and the aperture ring fell off). The third improved focus accuracy out to around 15m, but the mount was screwed up and the lens barrel and aperture blade coatings started coming apart and shedding debris inside the lens. After three failures I knew it was time for me to find another lens.

    Show Ad - LNIB SLR MAGIC HYPERPRIME LM T0.95 for Leica M/Rangefinders - Hong Kong - Hong Kong - Cameras, Lenses, & Everything Photo! | STEVE HUFF PHOTOS

  3. #53
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    430
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: SLR Magic HyperPrime LM 50mm T0.95 Review

    Not being in focus across range for a normal lens: The focal length of the optics is off, or the index of the cam does not match the exact focal length of the optics.

    For a lens like this: I would expect the exact focal length to agree with the Leica standard of 51.6mm, as that is what the RF is calibrated to. If the focal length deviates, the Cam of the lens needs to be indexed across range- and for a normal lens, this cut in the cam would be less than 0.1mm as it goes from 1m to infinity.

    After reading Stephen's experience here and at the other forum, this lens should be avoided.

  4. #54
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    281
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: SLR Magic HyperPrime LM 50mm T0.95 Review

    Quote Originally Posted by Brian S View Post
    Not being in focus across range for a normal lens: The focal length of the optics is off, or the index of the cam does not match the exact focal length of the optics.

    For a lens like this: I would expect the exact focal length to agree with the Leica standard of 51.6mm, as that is what the RF is calibrated to. If the focal length deviates, the Cam of the lens needs to be indexed across range- and for a normal lens, this cut in the cam would be less than 0.1mm as it goes from 1m to infinity.

    After reading Stephen's experience here and at the other forum, this lens should be avoided.
    Installing a proper RF coupling and and adjusting it sounds better than using "muscle memory" to focus!

    High quality lens development and production is a precision proposition; it makes one wonder how a company can pop out of the cyber-ether and come up with, and actually sell $5000 lenses. How can one expect Leica quality (as implied on the Huff site) from a company with no history/track record at all? CV and Zeiss have a hard time accomplishing that, sometimes they succeed, most times not - and we are talking about a pretty big company with state of the art factory and glass plant.
    Last edited by GDI; 5th August 2012 at 06:03.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  5. #55
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    430
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: SLR Magic HyperPrime LM 50mm T0.95 Review

    I was asked recently if my 50 year old Canon 50/0.95's had any play or wobble in the mount. I've owned an RF coupled version and an early uncoupled (TV, but not marked "TV") version for 10 years. Both are very smooth, well damped, and do not show any wobble. Canon used a Cam directly coupled to the optics, and the focus is accurate at F0.95 across the entire focus range. The TV lens- was used in an outdoor weatherproof enclosure, saw some hot temperatures.

    These lenses were designed and manufactured 50 years ago. They are not epoxied together, and are possible to work on. I cannot understand why this company cannot make the fittings larger to accommodate proper assembly.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  6. #56
    Member StephenPatterson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Hubei, China
    Posts
    209
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: SLR Magic HyperPrime LM 50mm T0.95 Review

    Quote Originally Posted by Brian S View Post
    I cannot understand why this company cannot make the fittings larger to accommodate proper assembly.
    I believe this was a marketing decision. The Hyperprime is already 40% larger and heavier than the 0.95 Noctilux, and they wanted to keep it as close as possible in appearance to the Leica lens. The Hyperprime is so heavy that when mounted on the M9 you can cause the rangefinder patch to move a significant amount just buy supporting the weight of the lens or letting in hang in the mount. Now I know that certain designs, such as jet airliner wings, are designed to flex...but M mount lenses, not so much.

    Andrew likes to point out that the 0.95 Noctilux has all of the same problems as his lens, but that certainly has not been my experience. I've been using my new Noctilux for the past month and have experienced none of the problems that I did with the Hyperprime. My focus is accurate across the entire range, the lens is solid as a tank, and there is no debris inside the lens.

  7. #57
    New Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Northern Germany
    Posts
    5
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: SLR Magic HyperPrime LM 50mm T0.95 Review

    I got the impression that at the moment there are a few people talking quite loud about negative experiences with that lens and some others just jumped on that train in order to spread their subjective perception from other readings. At the moment this is propably no representative balance to satisfied users/customers simply using that lens and not spending their time writing in forums.

    So far I recognized complaints only about the LM (RF coupled) version of that lens and those people that had problems with their early prototypes either got a replacement or a refund.

    I also got one of the early six prototypes (the CINE version without RF coupling). What I recognized by comparing my sample images with others was that the early prototypes seemed to be different in calibration and may be also in coating. All seemed to have a good center sharpness but the out-of-focus rendering looked different. Some copies had circles of confusion (COC) with hard rings, some others were rendering very neutral (my copy as well).

    My first copy had some debris inside as well and the focus ring was a bit too free-moving. The debris was not directly visible but seemed to cause a spot close to the center of the COCs. The mechanical condition was still unchanged after carrying it three weeks on a round trip through Cuba where it had a hard time.

    After SLR Magic had enough feedback about their early concept samples that may have pointed out these prototype issues they decided to send me a replacement as well. The new copy is clean, has a perfectly smooth rendering of out-of-focus areas and very neutral circels of confusion. The operation of the focus ring feels perfectly now and is comparable to the operation of the earlier Noctilux 50/1.0 that I preferred because it had a longer focus throw than the current 50/0.95 Noctilux. Andrew said that there was a change in the mechanical design so that the lens also weighs a bit more now. Image samples can be found in this flickr group: Flickr: SLR Magic HyperPrime CINE 50mm T0.95

    This lens has nothing to do with the earlier Noktor 50/0.95 (that did not cover the fullframe sensor and was far away from the optical performance of their new construction). One of the design goals of that lens was that it should have less vignetting than the current Noctilux. This required larger lens elements (some are said to be made by Schott, Germany; in fact it has an 0.92 aperture) and so a larger barrel.

    Although I am not speaking for the LM (RF coupled) version, I think that my experiences regarding the excellent optical performance can be applied to current samples of that version as well. It has at least the same center resolution, less vignetting and less purple fringing at open aperture as the Noctilux 50/0.95 and I would judge the out-of-focus rendering on the same level.

    As far as the RF calibration is concerned, I can not understand those people recommending the older Noctilux 50/1.0 as this had significant problems with focus shift and a strong vignetting that you even see when adapting it to a little FourThirds sensor and disturbed out-of-focus rendering at open aperture. I could use the old Noctilux only at F1.4 with satisfying results so that I decided to replace it by a Summilux 50/1.4 ASPH. Fot the few situations that justify an even wider aperture, the HyperPrime is doing a good job for me.

    So for those who do not need the RF coupled version (adapting to NEX, X Pro 1 or may be a M10 later when it does not rely on rangefinder focusing exclusively anymore), I see no reason to avoid that lens. For those looking for the RF coupled version I think you should wait until more reports exist that give a better basis for an objective decision. Personally I believe that SLR Magic is knowledgeable enough and will be able to learn from those early customers that in fact have a problem with the quality of that lens (and not with the limitations of the rangefinder system with lenses at or below F1.0 in general) and should be given that time and credit.

  8. #58
    Member StephenPatterson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Hubei, China
    Posts
    209
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: SLR Magic HyperPrime LM 50mm T0.95 Review

    Quote Originally Posted by 3D-Kraft.com View Post
    I got the impression that at the moment there are a few people talking quite loud about negative experiences with that lens and some others just jumped on that train in order to spread their subjective perception from other readings. At the moment this is propably no representative balance to satisfied users/customers simply using that lens and not spending their time writing in forums.
    I also get the impression that you are talking quite loudly and positively about the Hyperprime, based upon the fact that 100% of your posts on Leica Users Forum and here at GetDPI are in defense of SLR Magic, so let's call a spade a spade...

    Quote Originally Posted by 3D-Kraft.com View Post
    So far I recognized complaints only about the LM (RF coupled) version of that lens and those people that had problems with their early prototypes either got a replacement or a refund.
    By Andrew's own admission there is no mechanical difference between the LM (RF coupled) version and the CINE or non-calibrated version. It's the same lens, so trying to suggest that the problems are limited to only a small selection of lenses is false. Also the communication from SLR Magic and demand for 20% penalty for those seeking refunds for faulty lenses is nothing short of criminal.

    Quote Originally Posted by 3D-Kraft.com View Post
    My first copy had some debris inside as well and the focus ring was a bit too free-moving. The debris was not directly visible but seemed to cause a spot close to the center of the COCs. The mechanical condition was still unchanged after carrying it three weeks on a round trip through Cuba where it had a hard time.
    I was at the Steve Huff LA Workshop in January where Andrew showed us the lens and allowed us to purchase at $2600. There were around 25 people in attendance, and I believe around 12 of us ordered lenses. Of that group I believe the failure rate to be around 80%. At this point every person I know who has received this lens has either had a mechanical failure, has received a lens so far out of calibration as to be unusable, or has decided to not keep the lens and sell. Not very impressive.

    Quote Originally Posted by 3D-Kraft.com View Post
    This lens has nothing to do with the earlier Noktor 50/0.95 (that did not cover the fullframe sensor and was far away from the optical performance of their new construction). One of the design goals of that lens was that it should have less vignetting than the current Noctilux. This required larger lens elements (some are said to be made by Schott, Germany; in fact it has an 0.92 aperture) and so a larger barrel.
    To quote Gary Tyson from F8 Photography in Hong Kong, "The Hyperprime vignettes worse than a fat whore's thighs".

    Quote Originally Posted by 3D-Kraft.com View Post
    Although I am not speaking for the LM (RF coupled) version, I think that my experiences regarding the excellent optical performance can be applied to current samples of that version as well. It has at least the same center resolution, less vignetting and less purple fringing at open aperture as the Noctilux 50/0.95 and I would judge the out-of-focus rendering on the same level.
    I'm a pretty big fan of the optical properties of the Hyperprime, although I did have issues. I agree that center resolution is excellent, I disagree that the lens vignettes less than the 0.95 Noctilux (which I own) and I agree that the Hyperprime also has less purple fringing, although this really is a non-issue as it is easily corrected in post. It's just too bad that these elements are not in a lens built by Zeiss or Voigtlander. None of the Hyperprime lenses I used was capable of sharp focus at infinity, and I have heard this same complaint from several other early adopters.

    Quote Originally Posted by 3D-Kraft.com View Post
    So for those who do not need the RF coupled version (adapting to NEX, X Pro 1 or may be a M10 later when it does not rely on rangefinder focusing exclusively anymore), I see no reason to avoid that lens.
    You really see no reason why customers should avoid buying the Hyperprime? Seriously? When an overwhelming majority of the early adopters either had mechanical and or calibration failures you see no reason not to recommend this lens? To make a statement like that, coupled with the fact that you have only posted on Leica forums on this issue in defense of SLR Magic, leads me to seriously question whether your statements are those of an unbiased customer or rather an employee or associate of SLR Magic.

  9. #59
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    GTA, Canada
    Posts
    587
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: SLR Magic HyperPrime LM 50mm T0.95 Review

    Regardless of the optical qualities, the fact is that the lens is put together by loctite. I'm not touching it with a ten foot pole.
    Scott
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  10. #60
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    281
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: SLR Magic HyperPrime LM 50mm T0.95 Review

    Quote Originally Posted by 3D-Kraft.com View Post
    I got the impression that at the moment there are a few people talking quite loud about negative experiences with that lens and some others just jumped on that train in order to spread their subjective perception from other readings. At the moment this is propably no representative balance to satisfied users/customers simply using that lens and not spending their time writing in forums.
    But it isn't just unreasonable complaints from a few customers. Responses from the company rep confirm that the lens uses threadlocker as a mechanical fastener, and that he feels the focus problems are to be expected. (If the posters here can be trusted in their accounts; and I can see no reason to doubt them).

    Some copies had circles of confusion (COC) with hard rings, some others were rendering very neutral (my copy as well).
    Wouldn't that imply that these lenses had different optical formulas? Or very sophisticated compensating lens elements? What was the explanation for this?

    One of the design goals of that lens was that it should have less vignetting than the current Noctilux. This required larger lens elements (some are said to be made by Schott, Germany; in fact it has an 0.92 aperture) and so a larger barrel.
    Now your are getting somewhere. One of my biggest questions was "where are they sourcing the glass for the optics?" However, the claim that the glass is made by Schott in Germany is not borne out by the SLR Magic website, which indicates it is made in Japan.

    Is there really documentation that the optical glass is created by Schott for SLR Magic, or, even, that it comes form the Schott catalog? It seems if it truly Schott glass, some of the most prestigious glass made, a small company like SLR Magic would anxious to identify it as such.

    Although I am not speaking for the LM (RF coupled) version, I think that my experiences regarding the excellent optical performance can be applied to current samples of that version as well. It has at least the same center resolution, less vignetting and less purple fringing at open aperture as the Noctilux 50/0.95 and I would judge the out-of-focus rendering on the same level.
    Indications from the website are that the only difference between the versions are the mount and RF coupling, and of course that would make sense. And from what I have seen, the OOF rendering from this lens is far short of any Noctilux version, and even other lenses.

    As far as the RF calibration is concerned, I can not understand those people recommending the older Noctilux 50/1.0 as this had significant problems with focus shift and a strong vignetting that you even see when adapting it to a little FourThirds sensor and disturbed out-of-focus rendering at open aperture.
    Focus shift has nothing to do with a lens not being able to properly focus across its range. If the RF indicates focus at one distance that is correct and another that is not correct, the lens is simply flawed. I can't imagine such a lens would see the light of day if from Leica, or CV/Zeiss. (See Brian's post above).

    As to why choose a Noctilux over this lens, there are a number of reasons; the RF mechanism actually works, it is smaller, it has overall better quality and is not threadlocked together, the images are better (very subjective indeed), it has a known pedigree from what is arguably the most respected maker of photographic equipment in the world and it is a far better value.

    So for those who do not need the RF coupled version (adapting to NEX, X Pro 1 or may be a M10 later when it does not rely on rangefinder focusing exclusively anymore), I see no reason to avoid that lens.
    Yes, using a different camera is a solution for an unusable RF mechanism.

    If you enjoy your lens, that is great, I hope you continue to do so and have good luck with it.

  11. #61
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    ashwinrao1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Seattle, WA - USA
    Posts
    3,276
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: SLR Magic HyperPrime LM 50mm T0.95 Review

    I will just put in that I have very much enjoyed the lens. I have asked Andrew to address the Loctite issue publicly, if he is willing. I decided to sell the lens, not due to any lack of optical prowess or capacity, which I found to be fantastic, but rather because I have had the f/0.95 Noctilux and found the SLR magic to be redundant in the face of a pending M Monochrom purchase.

    I have not had any mechanical failures or issues to date. Focus has been well within the tolerances of my own photographic style. This is a very specialized beast, and it does what it needs to do (shooting wide open or nearly wide open) well, despite its size.

    I think it's rendering is second only to the f/0.95 Noctilux, in terms of the options at around f/1 (this is entirely a personal opinion).

    I have pulled the lens from the GetDPI sales forum, since there's so much negative discussion about it...yet, unlike others, I have yet to experience a failure or issue. I suspect that there are only a handful (10? 20?) of these lenses floating around. In its favor, one of the test copies that made it around was built robustly enough to withstand multiple travels and use by multiple reviewers, albeit within a short window. Unfortunately, other copies, including Stephens, were not up to the same build quality. Andrew has been in touch with me, but hasn't responded yet on the Loctite issue. He has many theories on focus calibration related to DOF of this lens and rangefinder and lens miscalibration, and apparently has some individuals of far higher regard than I are in the process of reviewing it to weigh in with their opinions. I sincerely hope that this lens can find a way to the market that's peaceful and instills confidence in its owners. It's clear to me, from Stephen's comments and those of another couple of friends with whom I have shared discussions (all of us have owned the lens) that the lens is capable of greatness, but is flawed in some copies and for some photographic purposes...For the purposes of my image capturing skills, it is entirely adequate, and for the time being, I plan to keep using it regularly, as it is a capable photographic tool. JMHO, as a user...(and in my case, as a happy user to date)...

    But I do feel firmly that the loctite/lens assembly issue and focus calibration should be discussed and addressed by SLR magic.

    Until then, here are some photos that I have taken with the Hyperprime:

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/ashwinr...7629597129504/
    Ashwin Rao
    Seattle, WA
    My Photography

  12. #62
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    ashwinrao1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Seattle, WA - USA
    Posts
    3,276
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: SLR Magic HyperPrime LM 50mm T0.95 Review

    Oh so controversial, but the lens still takes some nice shots...here with the XP-1 and Hawks M adapter to get even closer....harsh midday sun...





    Plus four from the M9...






    Last edited by ashwinrao1; 5th August 2012 at 12:59. Reason: added picture
    Ashwin Rao
    Seattle, WA
    My Photography

  13. #63
    New Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Northern Germany
    Posts
    5
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: SLR Magic HyperPrime LM 50mm T0.95 Review

    Quote Originally Posted by StephenPatterson View Post
    By Andrew's own admission there is no mechanical difference between the LM (RF coupled) version and the CINE or non-calibrated version. It's the same lens, so trying to suggest that the problems are limited to only a small selection of lenses is false. Also the communication from SLR Magic and demand for 20% penalty for those seeking refunds for faulty lenses is nothing short of criminal.
    That's nonsense and neither I said that nor did I read from SLR Magic representitives that there is no mechanical difference. They share the same optical design but of course there is a mechanical difference due to the additional mechanics required for the RF coupling. Put them on a weigh or in an X-ray and you will see the difference. As I read so far, SLR Magic took off the transaction-cancellation fees and shipment costs from those who insisted on a refund without giving the chance for repair or replacement. If you feel that this is criminal that should be discussed with your lawyer and not in a photo forum.

    Quote Originally Posted by StephenPatterson View Post
    There were around 25 people in attendance, and I believe around 12 of us ordered lenses. Of that group I believe the failure rate to be around 80%.
    "Around", "I believe", "I believe"... that all sounds very reasonable...
    Provides us their reports and we may believe.

    Quote Originally Posted by StephenPatterson View Post
    To quote Gary Tyson from F8 Photography in Hong Kong, "The Hyperprime vignettes worse than a fat whore's thighs".
    That's ridiculous and not suitable for the work of Gary Tysen. If you read his blog about that lens, it speaks a different language: SLR Magic 50mm 0.95 first look in Hong Kong | F8 Photography

    I could not find what you quoted. I could not test it on fullframe but on APS-C it vignettes less and the next time I can compare it on the M9 I will show facts. Unless you do not show proofs of the opposite, this is simply a subjective proposition from someone who seems to have an open bill with SLR Magic.

    Quote Originally Posted by StephenPatterson View Post
    None of the Hyperprime lenses I used was capable of sharp focus at infinity, and I have heard this same complaint from several other early adopters.
    Again I do not have an issue with focussing at infinite (with both samples I got). May be that this is another difference between the LM and the CINE version but again I am not sure what your expectation is here. If you expect a lens optimzed for open aperture shooting and creating creamy bokeh in out of focus areas to render landscapes as sharp at infite as an APO Summicron, you propably have an expectation that the HyperPrime can not fullfill.

    Quote Originally Posted by StephenPatterson View Post
    You really see no reason why customers should avoid buying the Hyperprime? Seriously? When an overwhelming majority of the early adopters either had mechanical and or calibration failures you see no reason not to recommend this lens? To make a statement like that, coupled with the fact that you have only posted on Leica forums on this issue in defense of SLR Magic, leads me to seriously question whether your statements are those of an unbiased customer or rather an employee or associate of SLR Magic.
    I only spoke for the CINE version and I still see no reason why customers should avoid that lens. I can not and do not speak for the LM version but as long as there is a discussion that tends to be biased I say what I think and depict the caveats that I see. I am neither an employee nor associated or affiliated with SLR Magic. I simply like those products that they designed by themselves like the HyperPrime 12mm/T1.6 and the 50mm CINE T0.95, because they provide good optical results for a reasonable price in very specialized segments and my personal experience with their products and service is good so far. I had some problems with a (paid) sample of the six early prototypes as well but I do not expect prototypes sent to volunteers to be perfect from start. After I provided neutral feedback and pointed out the problems of that lens with detailed reports and proving photos it was replaced and the new copy is simply good.

    If you read my articles on 3D-Kraft.com about their lenses, you see that I also provided realistic critics and image samples for all my findings. I tested products from Leica, Zeiss, Nikon and other more notable manufacturers as well which have their strenghts and weaknesses as well so I believe I know how to valuate also SLR Magics products.

    I also do not see this "overwhelming majority of early adopters with failures" but I saw other bloggers like Steve Huff putting out a warning on their site although they did not report problems with their own copies. As long as we have this situation, it is not possible to judge on a reasonable basis of documented reports. Not for the LM version and especially not for the CINE version (and I am sure I am not the only single person in the world using that).

    Quote Originally Posted by GDI View Post
    Wouldn't that imply that these lenses had different optical formulas? Or very sophisticated compensating lens elements? What was the explanation for this?
    I have seen reports about an early prototype with only 9 lenses but I think the early six samples used in the beginning of this year were all the newer 12 lens versions. I read that they might have had differences in coating and in adjustment/calibration. They also had different rings on the front element etc. I think that's a normal situation when a company sends out early test prototypes.

    Quote Originally Posted by GDI View Post
    And from what I have seen, the OOF rendering from this lens is far short of any Noctilux version, and even other lenses.
    Thats nonsense as well and there are already enough comparison photos on Steve Huff's site, on my site and others with the Noctilux, the CV Nokton 50/1.1, the Summilux 50/1.4 and others as well. You may also take a look at the latest comparison photos I took at open aperture with the HyperPrime CINE T0.95 and the Noctilux 50/0.95 today: SLRMCINE-NOCTILUX-Vergleich (PRIVATE!) - a set on Flickr
    OK, they were taken with a NEX-7 so there is an APS-C crop and the situation did not offer motifs with high contrast or highlights but at least you can compare the OOF rendering quite well and if I did not write it below the images I am quite sure you were not able to say what is from the Noctilux and what is from the HyperPrime.

    Quote Originally Posted by GDI View Post
    Focus shift has nothing to do with a lens not being able to properly focus across its range. If the RF indicates focus at one distance that is correct and another that is not correct, the lens is simply flawed. I can't imagine such a lens would see the light of day if from Leica, or CV/Zeiss. (See Brian's post above).
    Focus shift was not the only focussing issue that users had with the Leica Noctilux 50/1.0 as well. Everyone who tried to focus with that lens at close distances propably knows what I mean and this was one of the several reasons why it was replaced by the 50/0.95 ASPH.

    Quote Originally Posted by GDI View Post
    Yes, using a different camera is a solution for an unusable RF mechanism.
    I think that is one of the few points in that we agree althogh again coming from different sides but this is propably not the right place to trigger another discussion about the limitations of the RF mechanism (in general).

  14. #64
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    430
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: SLR Magic HyperPrime LM 50mm T0.95 Review

    I will take the opinions of users with first-hand experience with the RF lens mounted on an Rf camera, rather than someone using it for cinema. The mechanism is different, the method of focus is different, and the tolerances are far more critical.

    All this has shown: there are more than one versions of the RF version of the lens, and it seems Stephen's is closer to the intended production unit. It has problems, and the fix to these problems has not been addressed by the company. Head in the Sand attitudes show this company is far from ready for prime time.
    Last edited by Brian S; 5th August 2012 at 14:51.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  15. #65
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    281
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: SLR Magic HyperPrime LM 50mm T0.95 Review

    Quote Originally Posted by 3D-Kraft.com View Post

    Thats nonsense as well and there are already enough comparison photos on Steve Huff's site, on my site and others with the Noctilux, the CV Nokton 50/1.1, the Summilux 50/1.4 and others as well. You may also take a look at the latest comparison photos I took at open aperture with the HyperPrime CINE T0.95 and the Noctilux 50/0.95 today: SLRMCINE-NOCTILUX-Vergleich (PRIVATE!) - a set on Flickr
    OK, they were taken with a NEX-7 so there is an APS-C crop and the situation did not offer motifs with high contrast or highlights but at least you can compare the OOF rendering quite well and if I did not write it below the images I am quite sure you were not able to say what is from the Noctilux and what is from the HyperPrime.
    No it is not nonsense; please don't get too excited, this is just a conversation.

    Have you looked at the samples posted on Ashwin's Flickr link? The out of focus areas in multiple shots show significant "nervous", or double-line boke. Personally I have have rarely seen such rendering with a Noctilux F1.0.

    Here is an example: http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7100/6...34618be1_b.jpg


    Focus shift was not the only focussing issue that users had with the Leica Noctilux 50/1.0 as well. Everyone who tried to focus with that lens at close distances propably knows what I mean and this was one of the several reasons why it was replaced by the 50/0.95 ASPH.
    It was not obvious you were comparing it with the new Noctilux, it seemed you were comparing it to the Hyperprime. Anyway, if the reports of the inability to achieve consistent focus across the range of distance are true, then focus shift is going to be of secondary concern. I would agree that the new Noctilux is desirable over the Old one, but that has nothing to do with a comparison with the Hyperprime.

    Also, you didn't reply to my question regarding the use of German Schott glass in the lens. Is there documentation on that? To me this is an important questions to establish credibility for a company whose prior products were re-purposed CCTV lenses. Personally, I would want to know who designed the lens,what the optical formula was, see diagrams and MTF measurements, as well as understand how the RF was designed and calibrated, before spending $5000 on it. Of course the answers to those questions for other name-brand lenses is clear, and transparent.

    Again, I hope you keep enjoying your lens...
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  16. #66
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    ashwinrao1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Seattle, WA - USA
    Posts
    3,276
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: SLR Magic HyperPrime LM 50mm T0.95 Review

    In speaking with Andrew back in January, he reported directly to me that the lens elements were essentially obtained either through Schott or through Japanese manufacture. When attempting to use only Japanese glass, a prior prototypel had unusually yellow rendering, so the decision was made to use Schott glass in at least some of the 12 elements to counteract that yellow cast in the model that we are all debating. This is from my recollections, discussing the lens design directly with Andrew.

    As for nervous bokeh, yeah the Hyperprime (my copy) definitely demonstrates more of that than the 10K f/0.95 Noctilux...the lens rendering reminds me of some of the older, more "classic" designs with busier bokeh, though in some instaces, the lens is capable of very creamy bokeh (see some of the images above). Much depends on what is in the background, and how far from the focused distance the background objects come into play....
    Ashwin Rao
    Seattle, WA
    My Photography

  17. #67
    New Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Northern Germany
    Posts
    5
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: SLR Magic HyperPrime LM 50mm T0.95 Review

    Regarding the bokeh in fact I saw differences as well. If you check my samples at Flickr: SLR Magic HyperPrime CINE 50mm T0.95 there are enough different situations with highlights, high and low contrasts, different distances to background etc. In no case I would rate it "nervous". But I saw also examples of other users (e.g. also the early copy that Seb Farges received) that did show less neutral circles of confusions (COF) and some of Ashwins examples also appeared a bit nervous (similar to that what I saw with a Noctilux 50/1.0 E60 copy that I owned for some time in 2010).

    When I used that lens at F1.4 I preffered the bokeh to that of the Noctilux (also the 50/0.95) because of the COFs keept nicely round by the HyperPrime aperture blades whereas the Noctilux COFs already had visible edges at F1.4. The most perfect bokeh at F1.4 had the Summilux 50/1.4 ASPH in my tests.

    Regarding glass elements from Schott and other manufacturers I heard similar things like Ashwin. In fact, this is less important for me as I valuate what comes out at the rear end and not what it says on the label.

  18. #68
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    GTA, Canada
    Posts
    587
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: SLR Magic HyperPrime LM 50mm T0.95 Review

    There is no point to talk about image quality here because that is not the main point of concern.
    It's probably best to wait for a formal reply from Andrew himself to address the issue with loctite.
    Scott

  19. #69
    Member StephenPatterson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Hubei, China
    Posts
    209
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: SLR Magic HyperPrime LM 50mm T0.95 Review

    Quote Originally Posted by 3D-Kraft.com View Post
    I can not and do not speak for the LM version but as long as there is a discussion that tends to be biased I say what I think and depict the caveats that I see. I am neither an employee nor associated or affiliated with SLR Magic...

    I also do not see this "overwhelming majority of early adopters with failures" but I saw other bloggers like Steve Huff putting out a warning on their site although they did not report problems with their own copies. As long as we have this situation, it is not possible to judge on a reasonable basis of documented reports. Not for the LM version and especially not for the CINE version (and I am sure I am not the only single person in the world using that).
    How is it that I am biased? Does the fact that I had three failures of the Hyperprime qualify me as biased? How about Dave Grady in Sydney, who received his new Hyperprime only to find that the rangefinder calibration rendered the lens unusable on his M9. Of course Dave tried to use the lens on his NEX7, but within three days the focus ring broke apart (because it's held on with Loctite) rendering the lens an expensive doorstop. Does that make us biased? How about Jason Howe or Max Klimov, who both received Hyperprime lenses that were unusable due to being hopelessly misaligned. These users never got a chance to see if the lens would hold together, because the samples they received were not properly calibrated. This is but a sample of actual users experiences as I do not have permission to repost every failure, poor customer service or demand for huge restocking fees that I have received from customers in private correspondence.

    The only one here who seems to be biased is you, because of your unflagging support and endorsement of the Hyperprime in spite of the overwhelming evidence of the early adopters calibration and mechanical failures.

    When SLR Magic and Andrew recall this hopelessly flawed lens, refund everyone's money without charging a 20% fee and redesign the mechanical housing of the lens to completely do away with Loctite thread locking compound to hold the lens together then I will be happy to give this lens a second look.

  20. #70
    Member StephenPatterson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Hubei, China
    Posts
    209
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: SLR Magic HyperPrime LM 50mm T0.95 Review

    Quote Originally Posted by 3D-Kraft.com View Post
    That's ridiculous and not suitable for the work of Gary Tysen. If you read his blog about that lens, it speaks a different language: SLR Magic 50mm 0.95 first look in Hong Kong | F8 Photography

    I could not find what you quoted. I could not test it on fullframe but on APS-C it vignettes less and the next time I can compare it on the M9 I will show facts. Unless you do not show proofs of the opposite, this is simply a subjective proposition from someone who seems to have an open bill with SLR Magic.
    Gary Tyson's (not Tysen) quote that "The Hyperprime vignettes more than a fat whore's thighs" was made in person to me in Hong Kong, as I was asking him about his experiences with the lens. At the time my lens was broken (I believe #2), so I was interested in his experiences. Gary wrote a nice article on the optical qualities of the lens, but like many of us his experience with the mechanical qualities left much to be desired. Shortly after writing the review he sold his lens, and was very happy to do so.

    My personal experience with the Hyperprime on the M9 full frame sensor is that vignetting is extreme, much more so that with the 0.95 Noctilux.

    The only one who seems to have an open bill with SLR Magic is you, more than likely in the form of free or substantially discounted lenses.

  21. #71
    New Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Northern Germany
    Posts
    5
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: SLR Magic HyperPrime LM 50mm T0.95 Review

    Quote Originally Posted by StephenPatterson View Post
    Shortly after writing the review he sold his lens, and was very happy to do so.
    This could have other reasons as well - e.g. simply to make profit for other planned investments.

    Stephen, you write a lot (also about what others may have said) but what portion of that is proved? Your controversal wording does not help to make this more reliable and lets me speculate about different interests like you impute that to me. I also had private conversations which show some aspects in a different light than you reported so there is still opinion against opinion - both unproved with respect to others privacy.

    Of course I have no doubt that there were samples with mechanical flaws especially in the first LM prototypes and may be also in the early production batches - also my first sample was not in perfect condition and I reported that as well. But I saw that SLR Magic learned from that and handled it in a satisfying manner.

    Beside all speculation you also could read here that not everyone had these mechanical issues and that SLR Magic tries to solve those which are known from the early samples or reported accurately. So it is not a general problem affecting all samples and I do not see a general problem in the usage of adhesives at all as I see that in the aeroplane industry as well (not only to fix screws) but of course it must be done in a lasting manner and needs experience and may be a learning curve. I hope for them that they find a good way to prove that as I still feel confident about the optical quality of that construction.

    As I am fed up with all these uncountable discussions about RF calibration issues (not only related to that handful of SLR Magic lenses) I will not participate in and suffer from that anymore (that's why I am using the CINE version). I am quite sure that as soon as the first hybrid fullframe mirrorless with an EVF comparable to that of the NEX-7 will appear on the market, these discussion will become history anyway (except from those who think they must protect their RF investment).

  22. #72
    Senior Member chrism's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    893
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: SLR Magic HyperPrime LM 50mm T0.95 Review

    I can't see myself going on flogging a dead horse this much unless I'm being paid to do it.

    Chris
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  23. #73
    Member StephenPatterson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Hubei, China
    Posts
    209
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: SLR Magic HyperPrime LM 50mm T0.95 Review

    Quote Originally Posted by 3D-Kraft.com View Post
    Stephen, you write a lot (also about what others may have said) but what portion of that is proved? Your controversal wording does not help to make this more reliable and lets me speculate about different interests like you impute that to me. I also had private conversations which show some aspects in a different light than you reported so there is still opinion against opinion - both unproved with respect to others privacy.
    My statements are not opinion, but fact, and the facts are these...

    1. The Hyperprime is capable of some beautiful images, but has had an unacceptably high number of mechanical failures.

    2. The Hyperprime mechanical design cut corners, and to quote Andrew from SLR Magic "It would be impossible to build the Hyperprime with conventional hardware, so we had to use Loctite to hold it together. We use blue Loctite because it isn't permanent, and often the lens has to come apart several times during calibration". When he told me this after my second failure I was, to say the least, shocked. I don't know why he told me this, and he probably regrets he did, but that is the way it happened.

    3. SLR Magic (actually Andrew, as I now believe there are fewer than three people working for this company and everything is subcontracted out in mainland China) is absolutely terrible at communication and has a bad habit of not responding to emails. One friend of mine in Paris finally gave up trying to buy a Hyperprime, and instead purchased a new Noctilux (to his great relief now). He likes to tell people that there is only a 14 day return policy, even though no warranty or terms of purchase were ever supplied. He then started the whole 20% restocking fee, which was anything but popular. Some people who had not even received the lens yet, but wished to cancel due to all the reported failures, were charged restocking fees. This is absolutely criminal.

    After my third failure I demanded a refund, which Andrew did not agree to. He suggested I sell the lens to some Hong Kong shop in a convoluted three way transaction. I suggested he return my money, which he finally did, but then took it upon himself to send emails to a friend of mine in Hong Kong saying how I had "blackmailed" him. What utter nonsense. At this point I lost all respect for Andrew and his unprofessional company.

    The fact of the matter is I am just a former customer, albeit a dissatisfied one, who received three flawed copies of the Hyperprime, asked for and received a refund, and was personally attacked for not being a fanboy. I did receive a substantial (40%) discount on the purchase of the Hyperprime, and in the beginning I was quite impressed with it's performance, but my opinions have never been for sale and I now see that the lens and the company (Andrew) are a train wreck. I am doing my utmost to inform people of the facts as they occurred, in the hope that others will not make a $5000 mistake.

  24. #74
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    rayyan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    5,887
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: SLR Magic HyperPrime LM 50mm T0.95 Review

    Mr. 3D-Kraft.com methinks that thou dost protesth too much. Here, there and everywhere.

    Best regards.

  25. #75
    Not Available
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    1,864
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: SLR Magic HyperPrime LM 50mm T0.95 Review

    Quote Originally Posted by rayyan View Post
    Mr. 3D-Kraft.com methinks that thou dost protesth too much. Here, there and everywhere.
    I'd have to agree.

    While I can understand offering another user perspective, the defense of this lens across multiple forums is a little... Tedious. Perhaps the CINE is different from the LM. All we know is that the LM version has *multiple* problems and the company itself is essentially unknown. That's all that really needs to be said.

    In any event, I'm shipping out the copy I used for the review this thread is about and should be getting a fresh copy to compare against. The review will be updated where appropriate... And who knows, maybe that 50mm Ultra-fast Shootout can finally happen.

  26. #76
    Not Available
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    1,864
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: SLR Magic HyperPrime LM 50mm T0.95 Review

    How predictable that the thread on LUF has turned into yet another shitfest too.
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  27. #77
    milesab
    Guest

    Re: SLR Magic HyperPrime LM 50mm T0.95 Review

    Hi,

    I have just received my Hyperprime 50mm 0.95 lens and I need some advice. I have had some problems focusing the lens. I have been in contact with Andrew and he said that lenses with large apertures may have some front focusing issues. So I have completed a number of tests and comparisons with other lens I own.

    I have used 3 lens. SLR Magic, Voigtlander f1.1 and a Zeiss f1.4. They are all 50mm lens and all are shot at the widest aperture.. The first photos are taken using a focus chart. Distance to chart was about 1.1m. As you can see the SLR Magic front focuses a lot. The other two lenses are focusing around the zero mark. Also the photo doesn't really seem to be in focus compared to the other two lenses. It isn't sharp.

    On the infinity test I used the SLR Magic with the ND8 filter so I could shoot side open. I compared it with the Zeiss with an ND filter (as I don't have an ND filter for the voigtlander I didn't test that). The SLR Magic does seem to have a halo effect at infinity as well. See the white flag pole. The Zeiss does not have this.

    I bought this lens on the review of Steve Huff who stated that this lens is about as pin sharp as the Leica Noctilux (new version). I did take some test shots around 2m and over and the lens looked ok. However I'm concerned about this front focussing which is much more than any other lens I own. Also the lens isn't so pin sharp.

    SLR Magic


    Zeiss F1.4


    Voiglander F1.1


    SLR Magic 0.95


    Zeiss 1.4


    The question is if this focus shift is acceptable. I would have great difficulty guessing to have objects in focus that are within 2m or more. Also these photos seem to have a halo effect which is more pronounced close up.

    Any feedback would be appreciated because I'm in a discussion with Andrew to see if I need to send this lens back or is this the best that this lens offers?

    Regards,

    Miles

  28. #78
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    430
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: SLR Magic HyperPrime LM 50mm T0.95 Review

    This amount of focus shift is not acceptable.

    The amount of front-focus shown is large, the optics are too far from the image plane. Alternatively, the focal length of the lens might be wrong. Focus the lens on an object at infinity and post some cropped shots. If the focus is accurate at infinity, but the lens front-focuses at close range: The focal length is too short. If focus is off across the range, the optics module needs to be moved closer to the image plane.

    Back-focus can be easily and quickly corrected by making the RF cam thicker. I used 1 layer of copper tape for my Nokton 50/1.1 and 35/1.2 on the M9.
    Last edited by Brian S; 19th August 2012 at 06:47.

  29. #79
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    3,676
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: SLR Magic HyperPrime LM 50mm T0.95 Review

    Quote Originally Posted by Brian S View Post
    This amount of focus shift is not acceptable.

    The amount of front-focus shown is large, the optics are too far from the image plane. Alternatively, the focal length of the lens might be wrong. Focus the lens on an object at infinity and post some cropped shots. If the focus is accurate at infinity, but the lens front-focuses at close range: The focal length is too short. If focus is off across the range, the optics module needs to be moved closer to the image plane.

    Back-focus can be easily and quickly corrected by making the RF cam thicker. I used 1 layer of copper tape for my Nokton 50/1.1 and 35/1.2 on the M9.
    Brian, from my experience it may be possible that a lens who's focal length is too short, may exhibit obvious font focusing at close range (min. distance), but when the same lens is shot at infinity objects at that distance may actually appear in focus due to the increase in size of the depth of field.
    The halo effect thats being seen at infinity sounds more like "uncorrected "SA" or alternatively may be that the focus is off at that distance (which can induce a halo effect on brightly lit objects) but its too hard to see with such small detail at that disctance.

    Crops of the test images "above" would be quite useful to see.

    Dave (D&A)

  30. #80
    milesab
    Guest

    Re: SLR Magic HyperPrime LM 50mm T0.95 Review

    I made one mistake in my past post. The lens I used was a Zeiss f1.5 not f1.4.

    Anyhow, This is the SLR Magic at infinity cropped:

    The second photo is the Zeiss f1.5 cropped.

    I think the Zeiss looks better and cleaner.

  31. #81
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    430
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: SLR Magic HyperPrime LM 50mm T0.95 Review

    I believe the focal length of the SLRMagic lens is off. The cropped image at infinity is in good focus, too good to be the shim being off. The close-up/wide-open shot is way off.

    This is what I think is going on: From the pictures shown, infinity in good focus and close-up showing front-focus: the focal length is too short, less than 51.6mm required to work with a Leica standard RF. At infinity, focus agrees. The focus throw from infinity to 1.1m as shown is too far for the focal length of the optics. The RF is calibrated for 51.6mm, the actual focal length is off.

    My hands-on experience with adjusting focal length on a lens to agree with a Leica RF is limited to Jupiter-3 5cm F1.5 and Summarit 5cm F1.5 lenses. The Summarit: actual was 51.1mm, front-focus at close range, good at infinity. I moved the rear module out to make it work at F1.5 across all ranges. Jupiter-3: had focal length too short on one, moved out rear. Too-long on most, moved the rear module in closer to the front optics.

    Dave: Lenses are usually shimmed for Infinity. So of Four Summarit 5cm f1.5 lenses that I have examined, all were sharp at infinity and all front-focus at F1.5. Internally, they were scribed "51.1". On Jupiter-3 lenses: they are made to the Zeiss Contax 52.4mm (Nominal) standard. If you shim them for Infinity, they will back-focus when used close-up. I shim them for best focus used close-up. On most, infinity is good by F2.8 because of rear-ward focus shift. If it is off, I decrease the focal length my moving the rear triplet in. I had ONE 1950 J-3 in Contax mount that looked unused. It was unused: the actual focal length was closer to 50mm. I moved the rear optics out, converted it to Leica mount. The Zeiss serial number on it shows it as being made in April 1945. It was assembly practice for KMZ.

    Send the lens back. I cannot understand why this problem was not caught before the lens was shipped to you.
    Last edited by Brian S; 19th August 2012 at 08:12.

  32. #82
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    3,676
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: SLR Magic HyperPrime LM 50mm T0.95 Review

    Brian,

    Thanks for your response and explanations. The infinity crop of the SLR magic lens looks soft (even if I didn't see the comparison crop of the Zeiss). Based on this one crop, it sort of appears to be in focus but I'd need to see additional tests at infinity. Its sort of hard to tell if focus is correct at infinity or not, based on my experience of testing optics.

    I do hope this all gets sorted out for those who have purchased this lens and are experiencing problems.

    Dave (D&A)

  33. #83
    milesab
    Guest

    Re: SLR Magic HyperPrime LM 50mm T0.95 Review

    Brian thank you for your answer. It does indeed seem that there is something wrong with the lens. Even shooting at 1.1m with f0.95 the focus point isn't even in the depth of field.

    Here are some more sample pics at different fstops.

    SLR Magic 2.0


    SLR Magic 2.8


    SLR Magic 5.6


    SLR Magic 8.0



    I also tried a few shots around the apartment to see how it handles for normal photos. This was taken at 3.5m f0.95. I took 5 shots and even though I know this lens front focused I couldn't nail a single shot. Of course if I kept playing with the focus I would eventually get it but that isn't really the point. Sometimes you only have one chance to take a photo.


  34. #84
    Member StephenPatterson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Hubei, China
    Posts
    209
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: SLR Magic HyperPrime LM 50mm T0.95 Review

    Quote Originally Posted by milesab View Post
    Any feedback would be appreciated because I'm in a discussion with Andrew to see if I need to send this lens back or is this the best that this lens offers?

    Regards,

    Miles
    Miles, it's not the worst SLR Magic calibration I've seen, but it's completely unacceptable. My third lens was much better than this at 1m, but looked about the same at infinity (soft with a definite halo effect). I think you can probably judge from my previous posts how I feel about this lens and whether or not you should keep it.

    Good luck (I'm afraid you're gonna need it)...

  35. #85
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    3,676
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: SLR Magic HyperPrime LM 50mm T0.95 Review

    Hi Milesab,

    I tried clicking on your posted images but they it wouldn't lead to a more maginified view, so its very hard to judge. IS it possible to post your images with the long side at approx 1100 pixes and possibly something higher than 72dpi (if thats what you have it set to). It would then be easier ot judge what you are observing although from your worded description, it does appear the lens needs to be looked at.

    Thanks!

    Dave (D&A)

  36. #86
    milesab
    Guest

    Re: SLR Magic HyperPrime LM 50mm T0.95 Review

    Dave,

    All the photos are on Flikr. Here is the link to the set.

    Testing SLR Magic Hyperprime 0.95 - a set on Flickr

    You can zoom in on the photos as well.

  37. #87
    milesab
    Guest

    Re: SLR Magic HyperPrime LM 50mm T0.95 Review

    I also received a reply from Steve Huff. I wanted to see if he has had similar issues. This was his reply:

    "I posted an update to my review months ago because 1-2 guys have told me they had issues with the lens they received. I had no problems with my lens at all, none, and it was the same for the 5 lenses at my LA Workshop that everyone shot with. Keep in mind that fast lenses like an f/0.92 will sometimes have issues on certain Leica bodies as the bodies are sometimes out of alignment for fast lenses. You say your Voigt and Zeiss glass are fine but what are the apertures of those lenses? If the front focusing is an issue (and I HATE any kind of misfocus) you can either send it back for warranty repair, refund or maybe have another shop/repair person adjust it. I hate it when lenses do not focus correctly and my old Leica Noctilux 0.95 was awful in this area. Never focused right and had to go to repair 3 times. I have had two 50 Lux ASPH's that didnt focus right. The issue is not just with SLR Magic, Leica has the problem as well mainly due to the fact that some Bodies go out of alignment just a little and when they do it can cause havoc with fast glass.

    Now I have no idea if it is your lens or body but just stating possibilities. Also, my lens was sharper than my Leica Noctilux when focus was nailed. But keep in mind I resize and add slight sharpening to my images to make them pop (do this with all photos of mine). Last time I used my lens was when I shot it with the Monochrom in Berlin, and again, no issues.

    Good luck with the lens and let me know how it goes."

    It's good to know he has had some good experiences with the lens but other lenses have given him trouble as well.

  38. #88
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    430
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: SLR Magic HyperPrime LM 50mm T0.95 Review

    The focus on your camera is fine with two fast lenses. The infinity focus with your SLRMagic lens is good. The close-up focus is way off, not just a little off. I think the focal length is off, a second possibility is one suggested by Stephen: the weight of the lens makes the focus unstable, the lens does not stay perpendicular to the camera, and pushes against the RF Cam of the lens.

    To test this second possibility: focus on something a few feet away first supporting the weight of the lens- then let the lens go, support only by the camera. If the image shifts in the RF, it "wobbled" and interferes with correct focus. My experience with this is limited to a Wartime Zeiss Sonnar with a worn helical, and some worn Russian lenses. I made a sleeve for the wartime sonnar to keep it from wobbling. In the case of the SLRMagic lens- not sure what to do to correct this problem.

  39. #89
    Member StephenPatterson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Hubei, China
    Posts
    209
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: SLR Magic HyperPrime LM 50mm T0.95 Review

    With my third Hyperprime (the previous two both lasted less than one day) I found that the rangefinder calibration had been done with the lens completely unsupported in the mount. I had to be very cautious when focusing, as supporting the weight of the lens in my hand would cause the rangefinder patch to move a significant amount. How significant? At 3 meters I could focus on a person's eye and by simply supporting the lens cause the eye to move completely outside the rangefinder patch. I was NOT happy when I discovered this.

  40. #90
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    3,676
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: SLR Magic HyperPrime LM 50mm T0.95 Review

    Stephen,

    If the shear weight of the lens causes the position of the cam to move, then short of redesigning the glass (elements), I would assume barrel and compontent material might have to be changed. The weight of the glass itself must be significant but whether some aluminum or light weight alloy would help in this regard is hard to say.

    This doesn't sound like the only issue with the lens and certainly QC needs to be addressed, but reduction of weight (not so much size) might be a serious issue in affecting focus from whats been described.

    Dave (D&A)
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  41. #91
    Member StephenPatterson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Hubei, China
    Posts
    209
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: SLR Magic HyperPrime LM 50mm T0.95 Review

    Quote Originally Posted by D&A View Post
    If the shear weight of the lens causes the position of the cam to move, then short of redesigning the glass (elements), I would assume barrel and compontent material might have to be changed. The weight of the glass itself must be significant but whether some aluminum or light weight alloy would help in this regard is hard to say.

    Dave (D&A)
    The problem is not just the extreme weight of the Hyperprime (nearly 1kg) but the fact that a significant portion of that weight is at the front of the lens. Just like in aviation when we would calculate a weight and balance before takeoff it isn't just the total weight, but the moment (i.e. weight x the arm or distance).

    The Hyperprime is both longer and heavier than the Noctilux 0.95, and I am not convinced that the Leica M mount is designed to handle the stress caused by having such a heavy unsupported lens attached without affecting the calibration of the mount itself, possibly causing focus issues with other lenses. Over time it might even damage the mount itself.

  42. #92
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,610
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: SLR Magic HyperPrime LM 50mm T0.95 Review

    It is fascinating to read about all the potential problems while ~50 year old Canon 50/0.95 lenses are still going strong and very usable.

  43. #93
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    3,676
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: SLR Magic HyperPrime LM 50mm T0.95 Review

    Quote Originally Posted by StephenPatterson View Post
    The problem is not just the extreme weight of the Hyperprime (nearly 1kg) but the fact that a significant portion of that weight is at the front of the lens. Just like in aviation when we would calculate a weight and balance before takeoff it isn't just the total weight, but the moment (i.e. weight x the arm or distance).

    The Hyperprime is both longer and heavier than the Noctilux 0.95, and I am not convinced that the Leica M mount is designed to handle the stress caused by having such a heavy unsupported lens attached without affecting the calibration of the mount itself, possibly causing focus issues with other lenses. Over time it might even damage the mount itself.
    Hi Stephen,

    Very much appreciate your the feedback on the lens. I understand your description of the lens being front heavy and all associated issues with regards to focusing and the cameras mount. It's just an asumption on my part, but I would suspect if the overall weight of the lens could be reduced, even if the ratio of weight front to back (of the lens) remains the same, this might be the easiest approach for the manufacturer to implement in order to address some of these issues. Combine that with better QC before each one leave the factory and at least its a start. I'm sure there is a lot of investment poured into the development this lens and obvious from a optical standpoint, it has a lot of potential.

    Dave (D&A)

  44. #94
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    92
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: SLR Magic HyperPrime LM 50mm T0.95 Review

    Even if I could afford it, it'd be a cold day in hell before I bought it!! LOCTITE??? Good grief. Blue Loctite? Yuk. Has this company changed its policy with respect to refunds?? Just askin.... (and saying too)

    excellent thread btw; kudos to Stephen
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  45. #95
    Member StephenPatterson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Hubei, China
    Posts
    209
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: SLR Magic HyperPrime LM 50mm T0.95 Review

    Quote Originally Posted by D&A View Post
    Hi Stephen,

    Very much appreciate your the feedback on the lens. I understand your description of the lens being front heavy and all associated issues with regards to focusing and the cameras mount. It's just an asumption on my part, but I would suspect if the overall weight of the lens could be reduced, even if the ratio of weight front to back (of the lens) remains the same, this might be the easiest approach for the manufacturer to implement in order to address some of these issues. Combine that with better QC before each one leave the factory and at least its a start. I'm sure there is a lot of investment poured into the development this lens and obvious from a optical standpoint, it has a lot of potential.

    Dave (D&A)
    Hi Dave,

    As Ashwin, Steve Huff and other users have pointed out there is some very good glass inside the Hyperprime. You cannot build a 50/0.92 lens with crap elements and get the sort of results we have seen. I believe the problems are twofold:

    1. To save money SLR Magic have designed the Hyperprime without any aspherical elements or floating lens groups (also referred to as a floating lens element or FLE). The lack of aspherical lenses within causes the entire lens to be larger and heavier, and I believe the lack of a floating lens group is the primary reason so many people are experiencing focus issues, especially at close range. The Hyperprime is made up of twelve spherical lenses. For comparison the Leica Noctilux 0.95 is made up of eight lenses, six spherical and two aspherical, which comprise a floating lens element.

    2. In order to properly house the twelve elements of the Hyperprime lens would in my opinion require a package substantially larger and heavier than the one now being offered by SLR Magic. Something on the order of the Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L for a size comparison. It would also need to be designed with a tripod mount on the lens. I don't believe this is a viable option from both a cost and a marketing perspective.

    The Hyperprime is an incarnation of that old engineering proverb, "Good, Fast, Cheap; pick any two". As much as we would all like to have a $4000 or even $5000 lens as good as a Noctilux 0.95 with no mechanical or focus issues the reality is that it's probably an impossible task. Even SLR Magic probably realize that this experiment is now over, as they have no control over the prices charged by their suppliers for the exotic glass which is required to make the Hyperprime function at all. With no volume orders and numerous delays I believe the suppliers have all raised prices significantly, which is why SLR Magic was forced to raise their price even before the lens was released.

  46. #96
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    430
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: SLR Magic HyperPrime LM 50mm T0.95 Review

    I wonder if the flexing of the lens on the camera is due to the helical tolerances of the lens being too loose. Just a guess, I've seen it in some Russian lenses. Heavy grease used to hold things tight rather than better machining for all of them. Some lenses- smooth as butter, accurate across range. Most are "good enough", some play in the action. Others- part them out. I have a couple of Jupiter-3's that are as good as any Zeiss lens. And some that were awful, new-old-stock lenses that I parted out.

    Manufacturing tolerances and quality control seem to be lacking with SLRMagic lenses. I'm wondering if those shown at Steve Huff's workshop were simply better made, and done so to show off the lens. Those made after orders were in- not as much care taken.

  47. #97
    cicada
    Guest

    Re: SLR Magic HyperPrime LM 50mm T0.95 Review

    Hi,

    As an owner of an SLR Magic FT0.95, I'd like to add my experiences.
    First of all, as I'm using it with a SonY NEX-7, I'm not experiencing any focus -shift problems. Nor has anything dropped off and I can't see any 'debris' inside the lens. The focus is smooth and the aperture ring is just right.
    All good so far.
    However, in use, I'm finding it somewhat soft at the critical full aperture.
    From f2 onwards, it performs about as well as my Zeiss 50mm f2 planar a very fine little lens.
    On the following flickr site:

    Zeiss Planar 2/50ZM compared with SLR Magic Hyperprime T0.95 - a set on Flickr

    I've set out more comments concerning my usage of this lens including a comparison with the Zeiss 50. I've also tested it along with the SLR Magic F0.95 budget version and a Nikon 50mm, but I haven't put the results of these tests up on flickr.
    In conclusion, assuming that normally these SLR T0.95 lenses can more or less at full aperture, deliver performance equal to a Leitz Noctilux, then either my lens isn't performing as well as it should, or my assumptions about how these lenses should perform are unrealistic.
    Anyway, have a look at the test results and those who have experience with both lenses ( and the Zeiss 50), may be able to add some helpful comments.

  48. #98
    milesab
    Guest

    Re: SLR Magic HyperPrime LM 50mm T0.95 Review

    Hi, Thank you for your help. I have agreed with Andrew to send my lens back and have it adjusted. I have ordered a spyderlenscal (which is the same device that SLR Magic use in their test shots). I will take some photos with the spyderlenscal at different apertures, send the photos to SLR MAgic and then send the lens back.

  49. #99
    Member StephenPatterson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Hubei, China
    Posts
    209
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: SLR Magic HyperPrime LM 50mm T0.95 Review

    Quote Originally Posted by milesab View Post
    Hi, Thank you for your help. I have agreed with Andrew to send my lens back and have it adjusted. I have ordered a spyderlenscal (which is the same device that SLR Magic use in their test shots). I will take some photos with the spyderlenscal at different apertures, send the photos to SLR MAgic and then send the lens back.
    Yes, I did the same thing before receiving my first Hyperprime from Andrew, as did Dave Grady and several of the other early adopters to show exactly how our rangefinders were calibrated. In the end all of our work didn't help us receive properly calibrated lenses.

    For anyone who is not familiar with the Spyder LensCal it is a $70 lens focus target designed to be used to adjust focus at home with autofocus lenses. I cannot imagine that you would see them in use at Zeiss or Leica.

  50. #100
    milesab
    Guest

    Re: SLR Magic HyperPrime LM 50mm T0.95 Review

    AS SLR Magic use the Spyderlenscal I have also bought one now to see correctly the issue with the lens. See below:



    This is the link to the Flickr page to see a close up.

    SLR Magic Hyperprime 50mm f0.95 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

    The focus shift is quite apparent and the zero mark isn't even in focus. I have arranged to send it back for an adjustment.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •