Jump to content

Older M Lenses on M9 & M240 bodies


SonomaBear

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I own the Q and love it.  It has brought me back to REAL photography.  From the Q forum, I wrote:

 

Last night I shot over 300 images with the Q at a local Shakespeare performance.  I am astounded at what good images I can extract from mere portions of the RAW in Lightroom (and how well the details can be extracted) -- But now I want a 50mm and my Canon lens/sensor quality is so very inferior!

 

So maybe a M with 50 Summarit is in my future (75 to follow).

 

Question for the M crowd :  Being a manual sort of person, do old 50s and 75s perform well on M9 and M240 bodies? {maybe I should jump to the M forum}

My equipment budget has expired with the Q purchase...

 

Do I really need 6 bit whatever and ASPH glass when the old film days were so good with Leica 2.8 primes?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Even current M lenses are all manual. I'm not really sure what "being a manual sort of person" means in this context. 

 

I've been using Leica lenses, as well as some Voigtländer and M-Rokkor, on my M9, then M-P, and additionally now M-D, since 2012. Most 50mm and longer lenses work just fine with few issues, uncoded. Shorter focal lengths benefit most from the six-bit lens codes and manually assigned lens profiles, and some more than others. 

 

My current standard lens kit for the M-D is a 1972 Summilux 35 v2 (which has been six-bit coded) and a new Summarit-M 75mm f/2.4. Both lenses work splendidly. I also have used a WATE (Tri-Elmar-M 16-18-21mm f/4 ASPH), a Nokton 50/1.5, a Color Skopar 50/2.5, an M-Rokkor 90/4 (original, German manufacture) and a 1959 Hektor 135mm f/4.5 on this body. All have produced excellent results. I tried a Color Skopar 28mm f/3.5 and found too many issues with color shading and corner aberrations to be useful other than for B&W rendering work.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I love using older Leica lenses on the M9 and M8!

Apart from a few exceptions, they can all be used with good results.

 

The old summicrons and summiluxes have a particular kind of rendering that combines very well with digital IMO.

They often have less contrast than their ASPH or APO modern counterparts. This can be easily corrected in LR or similar.

Often they compensate the lack of contrast by giving a lovely bokeh and excellent micro contrast and tones.

In fact for most purposes I like them more than the modern ASPH lenses. But that is just personal.

Edited by dpitt
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

On the M9 6-bit is more a conveniance than a necessity. You can select the lens in the menu and get the same results as with 6-bit. The M8 does not have a lens selection menu, so on the M8 6-bit is necessary, mostly for wider than 50mm to get the best results.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

My Dad had a iiib with 50mm Summitar - I now use that lens sometimes on my M9-P and love the results! I had to select the correct LTM to M adaptor to ensure the right frame lines appear in the viewfinder..I haven't bothered with 6-bit coding. Only care point is to mount and unmount lens when it is extended, to minimise risk of damage inside the body. People tell me that once the lens is attached it can safely be collapsed (i.e. it won't touch the sensor) - but I haven't risked that.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Which Canon & 50 are you talking about?

 

The Canon EF 50 f1.8 is a decent lens, the 1.4 is better. Or you can buy a Summicron R and use that with a simple adaptor (manual focus and stopped down).

 

the 50 f2.5 compact macro is pretty good too - but i do prefer the files out of my M240 to those from my Canon.

not sure if its lens, sensor, focus accuracy or Raw vs Jpg but the M leaves the 1DX for dead as far as image quality goes.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you everyone.

 

By "manual sort of guy" I meant that I very often shoot my Canon DSLRs with manual focus in AV mode -- just like I shoot the Q.

In fact, the Q autofocus is better (IMHO) than most DSLRs with all their focus points thus necessitating some sort of selection process.

The Q also has focus points out to the edges (sorely lacking in most DSLR bodies.

 

But as much as I love the 28mm Summilux on the Q, it was too wide for last nights shooting.  Thankfully the DNG files are so beautifully rich in detail that Lightroom delivered acceptable images for the production company.

 

Knowing how I shoot, I feel that the M240 with live view would do everything for my style of shooting (Even though I rarely use LV on the Q, there are times I need it)

So I shall soon start the search for a used 240 and some older Leica glass.

 

{the Leica dealer has a 24 hour loan of the new SL and I might take them up on it to reshoot the play this week!  Better not like it -- my budget might be decimated !!!}

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you everyone.

 

By "manual sort of guy" I meant that I very often shoot my Canon DSLRs with manual focus in AV mode -- just like I shoot the Q.

In fact, the Q autofocus is better (IMHO) than most DSLRs with all their focus points thus necessitating some sort of selection process.

The Q also has focus points out to the edges (sorely lacking in most DSLR bodies.

 

But as much as I love the 28mm Summilux on the Q, it was too wide for last nights shooting.  Thankfully the DNG files are so beautifully rich in detail that Lightroom delivered acceptable images for the production company.

 

Knowing how I shoot, I feel that the M240 with live view would do everything for my style of shooting (Even though I rarely use LV on the Q, there are times I need it)

So I shall soon start the search for a used 240 and some older Leica glass.

 

{the Leica dealer has a 24 hour loan of the new SL and I might take them up on it to reshoot the play this week!  Better not like it -- my budget might be decimated !!!}

I gave a little bit of an answer on the Q forum. If you shoot the Q manually, you should like the M as will be easier but will have to get used to the rangefinder or use an EVF if going for the 240. The EVF on the 240 is no match to the Q EVF. If rumors are true, hold out for the next M which should be a major improvement in the EVF department. But my guess will cost as much as the SL, so if you like the SL.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Shooting M240 primarily with EVF or LV may lead to disappointments coming from cameras with faster and higher res EVF. Be warned.

 

M240 shines with RF focusing. Almost all old M lenses work well. My oldest is 40 summicron-c and I love its output.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...