Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by tthorne

  1. I am measuring it for the purposes of shooting a panorama. I think that "nodal point" is actually a misnomer in this case and I am looking for the exit pupil or the point of no parallax. There are some videos online demonstrating the method that I use. Essentially I mount the camera/lens on the tripod and place one nightstand directly in front of it about 65" away and another one directly behind that about 250" away. Then I watch on live view and swing the camera back and forth. As it moves left to right the rear light stand becomes more visible. So then I adjust the rail moving the camera forward or back until the two light stands stay in line despite panning left or right. 


    This has always been easy, but I have never done it for a focal length this long. 

  2. I was just wondering if anyone here has measured for the nodal point at any focal length on the 90-280mm. Usually I have no problem doing this with wider lenses, but I am having a difficult time with my normal dual light stand method. Particularly looking for the nodal point at 280mm. 




    I get it..majority of you guy here are old folk, retired and have the lot of time on your hand. You might rarely take your camera out in the field and use it. For me, we use it every week, we'll put lots of mileage into it. I don't mind to have back up BUT to have a back up for the "slow respond" from service time is not make any sense.



    We get it, we get it, you are a working photographer, but remind us all one more time please. My SL gets used for work every day and I never worry about it because I have 2 of them. If work is that critical to you then redundancy is an absolute must, and that is how it is handled professionally. So you are making a big deal out of the reliability of a camera that has not broken on you and service that has not failed on you, and yet that level of angst mixed with professional obligations has not prompted you to carry a second body? That doesn't add up. 


    And for the record, Leica's pro service is fantastic when it comes to maintenance, repair, loaners, demos... 

  4. I know there is something I am doing wrong here, and there must be a simple answer, but I am stuck, so here we go...


    I shoot on a pair of SLs and it seems that when I use the Leica SL-R adapter, the lens corrections in Lightroom apply no problem. Great. 


    Then when I use the Leica SL-M, M-R stacked, I don't seem to get the same info to transmit. Is it supposed to?


    Even more odd is that when I load my DNG files in Lightroom and manually select, for example, Leica R 21-35mm, then select the focal length of the shot, nothing happens. No corrections are applied. Isn't this supposed to work manually as well?


    Interestingly enough, other profiles from Nikon and other manufacturers will apply changes to the raw file, but any Leica R profiles simply give no response to the distortion or vignetting...

  5. Just for curios... is it THIS ONE the Shift adapter you quote ?

    Yes, this is the one. I also use the Cambo Actus, but the Digital Back version. Most of what I do requires shift movements at least, and sometimes tilt as well. I have found, however, that using the Canon and Nikon t/s lenses with direct adapters causes internal reflections when shifted especially in certain conditions. If you don't catch it on the LCD then you are left to curse at the computer screen later. My hope is that the construction of this adapter along with shifting the camera instead, will result in less of these reflections if not mitigating the issue all together.


    The issue is finding the lenses. At 35mm there are a few good medium format solutions out there with aperture rings. Wider than that and the problems begin. I know the Zeiss Otus 28mm in Nikon mount will allow some shift as well with an aperture ring. That is an expensive but formidable combination. But wider than that and things get iffy. I would like something in the 20-24 range and that will require some testing of image circles.


    It looks like my first choice of Leica R lenses is out of the race unfortunately. The only mechanical aperture t/s lens out there is the Samyang. Some of the Nikons have the rings, but they do not operate without the electronics, thus not mechanical. I may try the Samyang 24mm tilt/shift just to have something that tilts as well has a large enough image circle and aperture ring. That aside, there are a few 20mm lenses I am curious about, like the Nikon 20mm D, Samyang 20mm, Voigtlander 20mm, and Sigma Art 20mm in Nikon mount (Nikon to EF adapter has aperture control lever).


    We'll see. I know the Leica 28mm PC is a longer option as well, but I have had a few and the good ones are great, with some variance in the others. There is also the Schneider 28mm Super Angulon but that is too expensive for the mixed reviews I have seen. I also know I can preset aperture on certain lenses and it does make a 16-35mm zoom sound interesting.


    Any opinions or suggestions are welcome and appreciated. Thanks everyone.

  6. I am wondering if anyone knows of a wide R lens with a large-ish image circle to use on the SL with a shift adapter. I am really hoping for the 21-35mm to work, but I am also curious about the 19mm options as well as the 21mm and 24mm. 


    I know the 28mm PC will cover, but I was hoping to keep it between 19mm and 24mm. By the way, if there are any other lenses you know of in that range that may work, I am all ears. My lust for an R lens to work is mostly about having a mechanical aperture ring. 

  7. I have a JAS Contax 645/EF adapter and tested it with Novoflex Canon EF-lenses to Leica SL adapter.


    Nothing worked.


    No aperture info and no AF


    Maybe there is a trick to do it.


    Thats too bad. I just ordered the Novoflex EF to SL and the Kippon Contax to EF, so I will test that out and see, but I feel like I will likely be returning those. It is too bad there isn't pass through functionality on the Leica Contax to S and S to SL adapters. 

  8. Interesting question. 

    I have a Canon adapter for the SL and some Schneider-Kreuznach lenses for my PhaseOne XF. 

    Can you provide a link to the Contax 645 adapter? Maybe I will buy one and check.



    Link below, but this is meant for Contax 645 mount, so the Phase/Schneider lenses will not work with it. I am curious though if there is another way to make that work because I have a nice collection of blue ring Schneiders with the XF also, and there are a few I wouldn't mind being able to use on the SL. 



  9. Is there any way to remap the quick touch functions of the main 4 buttons surrounding the LCD? Here is my specific situation. I am using a Nikon 19mm PCE lens on a Novoflex smart adapter, and it seems that with this adapter I can not punch in the zoom as I would normally with my M lenses, which I do with the joystick. If there is a way to retain this function with the joystick when using this adapter, I am all ears. 


    Short of that, I can punch in with the lower left button, which works fine as well, but if I can not use the joystick for this function, I would love to be able to map it to the lower right button if possible. 

  10. This really depends on what you are looking to do with the camera. I have the 007 with a few S lenses and the entire collection of Contax lenses. I LOVE the S, but i am finding it more and more difficult to hold onto as I really miss the flexibility of working with a wide shift lens. I am all but certain that the 30mm tilt shift Leica planned on making for the S system has been abandoned at this point. I use the SL with Canon TSE lenses for work a lot, however, on the bigger projects where I want to step things up a bit and use my medium format setup, this factor can be limiting. 


    I am now knocking the idea around of selling and getting into a Phase One IQ150 with a Cambo tech camera for this very reason. If I could I would keep the 007 as well but that isn't in the cards for me. 


    So my advice is this. If you movements are near and dear to you, then there really is no choice to be made here. However, if they are totally unnecessary, then the 007 and S lenses are just about as fine as it gets when it comes to image quality, and especially handling. I will be distraught when I sell/trade in my 007. 

  11. What is the deal with not being able to stack the S/SL adapter with the Contax/S adapter? Is it simply that it will not AF? Will it work manually as a dumb adapter at least? I am not aware of an SL to Contax 645 lens adapter out there, so if anyone knows of one, I would love to hear. Otherwise I would assume the Contax lenses could at least be used manually in this configuration seeing as they have aperture rings. 

  12. In fact, I think this reinforces my point.


    When you play hockey, experience teaches you to keep your head up. You don't play with blinkers on, you rely on your innate ability to learn what is most effective, even if initially there's a strong temptation to do otherwise and look at the puck the whole time. Experience enables you to do without external props.


    I have nothing against the M-D, nor against anyone enjoying it. I'm all in favour of people enjoying their photography, and having different cameras available for all tastes.


    But I object to the fairly widespread and sometimes quite disparaging comments about "chimping".


    Firstly, that is not the only use for a screen. It can transform a camera from being a pleasant companion to a seriously capable tool for a vast range of applications.


    Also, "chimping", for those who do it, is fine. There's nothing wrong with it. But I still find it hard to believe that when you're seriously in the zone, working your ideas and connecting with your subject through that wonderful, irreplaceable viewfinder, snapping away to your heart's and mind's content, that the temptation to interrupt the whole imaginative and creative process is too great to resist. But even if it is, so what? Perhaps it's part of that creative process. in fact, for many photographers, it almost certainly is, so why discourage it?


    Another reason I bang on about it: Both the M-D and the Monochroms can have a tendency to reinforce the conservative side of photography. This doesn't apply to all users by any means. Perhaps it's just a tiny minority but I'm always uncomfortable when I hear people talking about traditional virtues, skill and so on, ( this is where the analogy with sport really breaks down: photography is not a sport and should never be regarded as one, and skill is just a small element of it) and how these cameras make you concentrate on the essentials.


    That's the side of photography that I'm a little allergic to, hence my breaking out like I do when I come across it!



    I would say to this that you should not let other people's opinions bother you so much. It seems to me that there are a lot of people who would rather have the LCD, and they have that option. In fact, they have that option in abundance. With just Leica alone you have the M240, M-P240, M246, and M262 from the current M lineup. So I do not see any reason or accountably in all the negative regarding the M-D. Perhaps people just want to be heard, even on the subject of a camera that they will not likely ever purchase or use. Thats totally okay I guess, but still seems nonsensical to me. 


    I am a pro photographer, and for most of my work I shoot on the S 007 and the SL. I love those cameras. Modern features on them really help my workflow. In fact, the S 007 was a great improvement over S 006 for me due to the addition of live view. So I get the use of modern functions, chimping, and all the usefulness of a good LCD. 


    When I shoot my M's, however, I am shooting a lot of street photography and documentary style work. For me, there is a time and place for everything, and this is the time and place where there is simply too much going on and I want my camera to go back to the basics. This is one of the reasons I still shoot my MP film cameras a majority of the time in this situation. 


    In any event I do not find the presence of an LCD objectionable, and obviously I find the option of a digital M without an LCD a great idea. Neither one offends me. Users of either one do not offend me. Opinions about the subjects of chimping and modern features do not offend me. If you like to do it, then do it. There are more options out there for you then there are for someone like me. So I don't really see what any of the fuss is about. 


    Again, in this day and age, it was obvious that M-D users would be a minority, but that they would really connect with the camera. It is not something for everyone, but you have to appreciate that it may be everything for someone. This is why I thank and applaud Leica for making such a camera when nobody else would. 

  13. Why should anyone resist the impulse to look at their photos if they feel it?


    What a weird bunch photographers can be.



    It really just depends on the photographer. I grew up playing ice hockey and when handling the puck, beginners always look down out of necessity in order to make sure they keep it on their stick. This works, but sometimes players keep up that impulse even after they are able to handle the puck without looking down at it. At higher levels, that impulse gets you knocked flat on the ice. Rule #1: Keep your head up!


    I liken this to how I feel about the impulse to look at a screen. Sure, there is no danger in it physically, however, once rid of this impulse, you are able to keep your head in the game for followup shots and so on as the scene develops. One of the things that I love about the M is that we have no blackout in the viewfinder. So following a scene or subject becomes so organic. If we chimp, then we eliminate that particular advantage. Now, that is perfectly okay, as your gear is yours to use as you like, however, you can see that there are real reasons out there to answer your question. 

  14. I am not going to bother to read the entire thread because I get the gist of the disagreement some have. I will just add to the conversation that I have had my M-D since last week and I love it. Recently I have really only been shooing my MP film bodies and there is really no escaping the fact that it is a different experience vs shooting my recently retired M-P240s and M246. I love them all, but if I am being honest, I still love shooting film far more. Of course for my work I shoot digital on the SL and the S007, but when I am just shooting for me, it is the M all the way and film is generally the preference. 


    Anyhow, the M-D so far is exactly what I wanted it to be. It is an extension of my film cameras, nothing more or less. Same experience and operation on the street. Everything I love and nothing extra. It is no surprise that every shot taken with it so far has been properly exposed and focused. I mean, come on, this is really nothing new. And with the Optical viewfinder of the M, there is no black out, so it is easy to see when someone flinches or blinks, and simply take a followup shot. Pretty simple. I find the lack of LCD very fitting to my shooting style and I am thrilled to have an analog ISO dial. 


    My only wish is that the M-D version finds a permanent home in the M variants with future models and Monochrom models as well. I honestly question whether I could bring myself to buy another M with an LCD after this experience. 


    Of course, I don't expect that everyone should have the same style or flow on the street or with whatever they are shooting. I don't expect that everyone really have the desire to match their digital experience so closely to that of their film. With respect though, I do know that there are a lot of us who do feel this way, and as such, I am very thankful that Leica had the fortitude to make such a camera. Words cannot express my thankfulness. 

  15. Afternoon


    As a previous S shooter with 006 and 007 bodies, and now a Phase shooter with an XF and IQ260, I can honestly say that increasing mp's does very little in terms of image quality, they are just bigger files. I bought the Phase because I wanted to use a tech camera for a contract with full movements and for that, the P1 is excellent, but having 60mp does not make me happier than when I owned the S. I would return to the S in a heartbeat when this contract is finished, if I could have afforded both I would have kept the 006. Large files are great for lots of reasons but for usability and ergonomics, the S is in a class of its own, just turning the focusing ring with the Schneider LS lenses is horrible compared with the feel of the S lenses and the extra bulk is pretty noticeable although the tech cam is always on a tripod.


    I have files from the S reproduced on display stands 6m wide and they look amazing, I have a stitched P1 image being printed at the moment 6m wide for a job so will be interesting to see what difference there is but if you aren't regularly printing that big then the quality of the file from the S for me loses nothing to higher mp cameras. For what it's worth, as a commercial photographer, 37mp does absolutely everything a client has ever asked me for, just a shame there are no t/s lenses! There will always be those wanting or needing 100mp and it's great there are options available but for pure image quality at reasonable file sizes, the S is unbeatable in my view.





    Right there with you. Larger files than what I get already out of the 007 have the potential to be a great headache. I update my Mac computers with almost every cycle, and while my tower is extremely robust, the highest end laptop they offer really struggles with the huge 100MP files I tried on it. There are times, to be honest, where I do want to access files on the laptop, and that would just make me crazy. I also agree that practical usage for commercial work would yield very few advantages that clients might actually be able to articulate. 


    I am in the same boat as you with the need for movements, though, and it is a frustrating dilemma. While I have gotten used to shooting without my movements and working around the limitation, a wide T/S, like 30mm, would REALLY make a difference to me. It would be the lens that would get me to buy a 2nd 007 actually. So currently I am also looking at a P1 system and a tech camera instead to use along side my 007, but I really wish I didn't have to. The tech cameras obviously offer more by way of movements, but for my work, I could get along just fine with a T/S lens on the 007 and would actually prefer it. 


    If anyone from Leica is listening, please PM me and tell me to stop shopping for a P1 because you have a 30mm T/S on the way. Then prepare to ship me another 007. 

  16. Based on what I have read here thus far, I am inclined to believe that my issues have more to do with my own techniques working with the camera. I went back and looked at some shots along with my notes and I realize that I am actually being inaccurate in my comparisons. I am really not using the 80/2 much at all, particularly because I prefer the image quality of the S70. Where I am noticing the real difference in focussing is between the S70 and the 140/2.8, which may or may not be a good comparison. 


    I started thinking back to my first time using a camera with Contrast Detection AF vs my old DSLRs which used Phase Detect, and how Contrast Detection got much easier once I had a better idea of how it worked and how to best use the camera. Truth be told, I have not used AF in some years and so this may be a pretty good reason why I might be handling the camera incorrectly. Even for my work where I use the S24 a lot, I am manually focussing on a tripod pinched in on the subject using live view, so the times when I am using AF are so few that I can see myself needing more practice. 


    I do, however get a lot of hunting going on with my S70, and some clear misses/back focussing. But then there are times when I do nail it, so I am still inclined to believe that I am doing something wrong. I also had the same intermittent issue with the S100 when I borrowed it, so that leads me to believe it is user error as well.


    I have the split prism focussing screen installed, however I have yet to really get in tune working with that. When the lines are clear though, it is pretty easy to manually focus. I have yet to try adjusting focus manually simply by eyeballing it in the viewfinder. Seeing as how it is a really huge and brilliant viewfinder, do any of you actually do that? 


    Any tips or advice anyone has is greatly appreciated. This is just me trying to get better with the S and use it for more than just my work, where I do everything manually anyway. Thanks guys. 

  17. Hi everyone, I know there are some folks here like Jip and others who have a good deal of experience with Contax 645 Lenses on the S, so I am wondering if I can get opinions on whether my experience is all in my head or if it coincides with what others have experienced using these lenses. 


    First off, but in my opinion, both the Contax and the Leica lenses are optically fantastic, however, from what I have seen, the Leica lenses are noticeably superior on this department. Still, I find the Contax lineup plenty great, so this inquiry really isn't about that. 


    So a close friend of mine brought a bag over to my house with EVERY Contax 645 lens (and tele-converter) made. All in mint condition. He even picked up a Leica/Contax adapter for me and told me to have a blast with these on my 007 to see how I liked them. He still has his 645, but is thinking of selling it, and wanted to give me time to see if I wanted any/all the lenses. Needless to say, this is a really great friend!


    Currently my S setup consists of the S-24mm and the S-70mm. I use the 24mm a lot for work, so it is essential and it doesn't have an equivalent focal length wise in the Contax world. So that lens is a must. Now, when I compare my S-70mm to the 80/2, or the 140/2.8, or the 45/2.8, I notice that the Contax lenses focus much faster, more sure, and more accurately. My S-70mm jerks focus back and forth as it hunts and many times is cause for missing a fleeting moment. Also, it is simply off a great deal of the time, mostly back focussing by just a tad. I will say this though, when it is on, it is really on, and RAZOR sharp. I have noticed this same behavior testing the S-100mm and the S-120mm.


    Anyhow, the difference in sharpness, while noticeable, is somewhat inconsequential to me, but the ability to get focus reliably and quickly is of consequence to me. The S is the only AF camera that I own (I have the SL but I use it with the Leica 28mm PC lens) so I would like to use the AF with some ease. I don't expect it to be like a Canon or Nikon DSLR though. 


    So my question is if others have the same experience/findings that I have, or could there be something wrong with the lenses I have tested including my own 70mm? My dilemma is this. My ideal setup (leaving out a 30mm T/S lens that I dream of Leica making) would be the S-24mm, maybe a 35mm, a 45mm, a 70/80mm, and a moderate tele, like 100/120/140mm. Being a somewhat hardcore Leica fan, I tend to try to keep it all in the family, and I was just getting ready to purchase an S-100mm followed by a S-45mm sometime after. However, I feel like Leica may do something in the future to improve the performance on these lenses and I wonder if I should just stick to my 24mm and use Contax lenses from there on. 


    I would love to hear any and all opinions. 



  18. I posted this elsewhere, but seemed to fit this thread as well.....3 T/S lenses rumored for the SL...  http://leicarumors.com/2016/03/03/the-latest-leica-rumors-new-m-camera-without-lcd-screen-tilt-shift-sl-lenses.aspx/


    No details on focal length, anticipated timing.....or even degree of confidence in rumor.  But interesting if the S system is passed over for the SL in this regard.





    I saw this also, however, I am told that the rumor is untrue and that there are other lenses in the development lineup that would be of a higher priority than a niche lens such as a tilt/shift, much less 3 of them. Disappointing, and as much as I want my information to be wrong, it just makes sense. 

  • Create New...