Which lenses get the best benefits from M8

[Einst_Stein]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

A lot of lenses perform well at the center, but expose the weakness at the corners. That's what usually differentiates an excellent lens from one less so.

 

With the reduced image circle, particularly in M8, are there any lenses previously considered inferior now step up into the front tier? what are they?

 

I think lenses with inferior CA probably won't get as much benefit, but lenses with inferior distorsion or corner fall-off or corner resolution are more likely to take the benefits.

 

I'm not interested in the price/performance ratio, I'm interested in the absolute image performance at the M8 image circle.

[lct]

Very few lenses are free from vignetting as you know. The others will benefit from the M8's cropping to variable extents depending upon their focal length and their vintage mainly. I would say along three or four stops on early wides and one or two stops on other lenses roughly. FWIW.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[jaapv]

There are very few RF lenses one can consider inferior, so this is a very hard question to answer.

[IWC Doppel]

I would look at the MTF's for older lenses with comments by Erwin, Souls and secrets.

 

You won't find any bargains, tbh. What effect FOV are you looking for ?

[Einst_Stein]

There are very few RF lenses one can consider inferior, so this is a very hard question to answer.

 

It's OK if you don't know.

[jaapv]

You're right, what do I know

I have twentyone lenses from three makers for M and both M8 and M9.... From the early Elmar to the Summilux 50 asph. Leica, Zeiss,CV

Each and every one has its use and strong and weak points. But inferior? none - first define inferior...

Edited June 25, 2012 by jaapv

[erl]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I thought the last but one, Noctilux would have got a mention by now. It notoriously has distinct corner vignetting that virtually dissapears on the M8. Personally I don't mind it and sometime artificial generate the vignette in PP. I am happier with it on the M9, back to serious vignetting!

[wda]

Answering in a different way: 135mm lens gives you 200mm equivalent, impossible on M9 without Visoflex. Very useful for air-shows and wild animals.

[brianv]

Sonnar formula lenses have high center sharpness, weaker corner performance. Field curvature is also high at the edges, the M8 tames it.

 

The Zeiss Sonnars, Russian Jupiters, Canon 50/1.5, Nikon 5cm lenses, etc- the M8 gives the sweet spot.

[wda]

Correcting my post above: 135mm is equivalent to 180mm on the M8; 200mm on K20D. Sorry!

[erl]

Answering in a different way: 135mm lens gives you 200mm equivalent, impossible on M9 without Visoflex. Very useful for air-shows and wild animals.

135mm on the M8 is exactly the same on the M9! The only difference is that the M9 needs to be cropped round the edges to match the M8 file. Being pedantic, the M9 also has a slightly different colour rendering than the M8, but I know that is not what you were discussing.

 

ie. The M8 only fills the frame because it is a crop sensor. The M9 captures the identical image, but in the centre of a larger 'piece of paper'.

[jaapv]

Yes Erl, 100% right, but Leica did calibrate the Digilux2 zoom ring in "equivalents' So David has backing.

[haroldp]

Answering in a different way: 135mm lens gives you 200mm equivalent, impossible on M9 without Visoflex. Very useful for air-shows and wild animals.

 

M9 has an M8 inside it, just crop

[lct]

...135mm is equivalent to 180mm on the M8...

Yes same FoV as a 180 on the M8 but no 135 framelines in the viewfinder (only 24/35). The only way to use the M8's VF for framing is to mount an Elmarit 135/2.8 which brings up 28/90 framelines magnified by its goggles. Makes a bulky but well balanced combo and the 135/2.8 is one of the cheapest Leica lenses on the s/h market. Focusing may be tricky at full aperture but no problem at f/3.5 and on.

[Robert_M]

Back to the OP's question, I'd say that the Telyt 400 and 560mm lenses using a Visoflex benefit the most from cropping. There is extreme vignetting of the corners of these lenses on any full frame M camera (using a visoflex). Attached is an example at infinity of the 400mm f/6.8 lens (at f/6.8) at infinity. Note that the image circle really is smaller than the diagonal of the 36x24mm format. I always crop any picture taken with these lenses.

 

RM

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[brianv]

Answering in a different way: 135mm lens gives you 200mm equivalent, impossible on M9 without Visoflex. Very useful for air-shows and wild animals.

 

The Komura 200mm F4.5 in LTM is RF coupled, would be decent at an airshow. Uncommon, but not expensive.

[Einst_Stein]

I would look at the MTF's for older lenses with comments by Erwin, Souls and secrets.

 

You won't find any bargains, tbh. What effect FOV are you looking for ?

 

I was thinking Nikon RF, Canon RF, Konica, CV, and of course ZM. But I can't find MTF for any except ZM. Maybe MTF was not invented at that time?

 

About Zeiss ZM, some are more desirable to me than Leica M, not need M* crop. The 85mm/f2 Sonnar is an example, it's a shame hardly available anymore, not even used one. But, most ZM's MTF curve start the more significant bending at ~16mm. They should be show significant improvement on M8.

 

I was hoping CV 15mm/4.5 to be a good candidate, but I don't like it's color cast at the corner, even with M8. PS does not help much. I dropped it from my ist.

 

I was interested in Konica too. Some early reviews gave it unbelievable favors. But I didn't find a sample that performed up to those reputations. I think it's so so.

 

Nikon RF and Canon RF are hard to find. Price are high.

 

How about the Zeiss Jena?

[Einst_Stein]

You're right, what do I know

I have twentyone lenses from three makers for M and both M8 and M9.... From the early Elmar to the Summilux 50 asph. Leica, Zeiss,CV

Each and every one has its use and strong and weak points. But inferior? none - first define inferior...

 

 

Impressive. I also have a lot of lenses, none are inferior, though not used very much.

 

Just curious, do you really carry all of them regularly, no preference or whatsoever?

If so, how much time do you spend on switching the lenses vs. really taking the pictures?

[Einst_Stein]

Back to the OP's question, I'd say that the Telyt 400 and 560mm lenses using a Visoflex benefit the most from cropping. There is extreme vignetting of the corners of these lenses on any full frame M camera (using a visoflex). Attached is an example at infinity of the 400mm f/6.8 lens (at f/6.8) at infinity. Note that the image circle really is smaller than the diagonal of the 36x24mm format. I always crop any picture taken with these lenses.

 

RM

 

If you need super tele, I'd suggest to consider a DSLR, Canon or Nikon. I don't see much points to stick on Leica for that.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[AB007]

If you need super tele, I'd suggest to consider a DSLR, Canon or Nikon. I don't see much points to stick on Leica for that.

 

Leica R lens + Nikon or Canon or Leica = Awesome

I think we see many reasons to stick with Leica