5d2 D700 or...

[sfage]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Right.

 

That makes sense. Thanks for that!

[Advertisement]

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

[elansprint72]

There is no "simple" adapter solution for mounting an R lens on a Nikon body because R's mount clockwise and Nikons mount anticlockwise. You have to change the mount.

 

The Leitax ones that I use are extremely well made.

 

Andy, I've just been studying the Nikon bayonet arrangement and I can't see a reason why a mount could not be made which stays with the body, rather than the lens (of course I've on got half of the problem on my bench, as I don't have a R lens). Could you bring along your outfit tomorrow, so that I can take a squint? I have a friend who is custom-building adaptors at the moment, for all sorts of combos.

 

General comments on the D700: build/design is robust, by modern standards but nowhere near my old Nikon F, bullet-proof, literally, as Don McCullin proved. The body looks like some plastic/resin but is actually Magnesium alloy. The flash unit is a flimsy bit of plastic, as is the battery door, pack a roll of gaffer tape.

 

Several of my pro motor-sport snapper chums have D700 and the various D3's, every single one says that no human eye can tell the difference between the images, their advice- buy the 700 plus a battery pack (but only for the extra 3 frames per second). I shot 3k+ images over a week at Le Mans without a battery pack and still had power left in the battery!

 

Image quality: check out Andy Barton's recent posts in the Landscape photo forum; totally different shooting scenario from yours but you'll get an idea how D700 + R glass works. Canon combo may be just as good but I can't recall any shots on this forum.

[andybarton]

Because, as Andy said above, the mounting distance for Leica and Nikon lenses is almost identical. There is no room for an adaptor, especially one which needs to mount the lens in the opposite direction.

 

I will bring my camera and a lens with me tomorrow. I don't own any Nikon ones though.

[Paolo.Battista]

This is interesting. You bring up some of the more "baffling" things about the end product imagery.

 

Well, this is my experiece.

Having used both Nikon and Leica/Olympus digital bodies with R lenses, the results from Digilux 3 and Oly E-3 are more pleaseable for my taste. This is because working in RAW with Summicron and Summilux R lenses on the 4/3 cameras permits me to easily obtain a richer number of tonalities from the RAW files. They are more tridimensinal too.

 

I tried the RAW files from 5D mkII and D700 (with their own lenses), and I feel that is easier to work with files from the Nikon cameras. Obviously, this is for my limited experience.

 

Of course E-3 files are 10 mp and not 21 mp, but it really depends on the shooting habits. If you are shooting from larger distances and then crop the photo (for critical subjects, for example), well, a 4/3 10 mp sensor, as pixel density, corresponds to a FF sensor of 36 mp. 16 mp (Pana GH2) from 4/3 are about 57 mp from FF.

 

So resolution depends even from the crop factor you apply to your photos.

I must admit that I really like to shoot with my R lenses from a little larger distance, since I'm using them most on human figure, wildlife (well, a sort of that... I'm not Doug unfortunately) and reportage. For close up reportage, something like Diglilux 2 or X1 or X100 (Fuji ) is more adequate than an heavy DSLR. Okay, or an Mx at your taste, but since I'm more on the R side... :D

[Guest]

You're in a project where your gear (and hopefully not your own safety) could be at risk. Hence imo you're right not to overinvest.

At the same time you need bigger prints.

So maybe a 2nd hand body you mentioned: the 5D mark I (for much less than 1k, even in the US) and an adaptor for under 100?

Or your mid-format Bronica/Rollei, where film costs are the extra expense?

In any case we got it right: the normal focal length is your choice?

[sfage]

Yeah generally tri. I use a 50 cron and a 60 elmarit macro. I need to make the next move up from the D3 in terms of megapixel count. And yes, I know, film is going to be above the 5d too. I'm not concerned about film costs. I do most of that in-house.

[CXC21]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have a 5DM2 for two years. The sensor is superb, still superior to anything you find in Nikons currently. IQ is fantastic, low light performance outstanding. I usually do 30x40 inch

prints. Menue options are limited - you have figured that out in an hour max. You need the best lenses to take advantage of that camera.

[CXC21]

I tried the RAW files from 5D mkII and D700 (with their own lenses), and I feel that is easier to work with files from the Nikon cameras. Obviously, this is for my limited experience.

 

Not sure what you mean. Did you use Canon's DPP? It is quite good. I use Aperture for both Nikon and Canon raw. There is no difference for me.

[Guest]

Wellcome to this forum CXC21.

I'm also the proud owner of a 5D2.

The chips in the 3Dx or 3Ds are not so bad, but they're in a different league.

 

Sfage:

Using your Bronica or Rollei might have 2 advantages:

It could make your trips safer, since the resale value of stolen analog cams might as well be nill, since there is no buyers market.

Since film costs and their processing is alredy part of your existing buget and routine, why invest at all?

[sfage]

Yeah, the Rollei is the one I can't afford to loose. It's too good.

[elansprint72]

Wellcome to this forum CXC21.

I'm also the proud owner of a 5D2.

The chips in the 3Dx or 3Ds are not so bad, but they're in a different league.

 

Sfage:

Using your Bronica or Rollei might have 2 advantages:

It could make your trips safer, since the resale value of stolen analog cams might as well be nill, since there is no buyers market.

 

From what I hear street robbers are none too fussy about checking before they bash you and steal your camera, they'll just dump it if it is no good- not much consolation to the snapper who loses his shots, gear and, possibly, blood.

 

I sometimes shoot in rough areas and always dress down (even more than normal!), never use a silver camera, I've enen blacked-out the NIKON on my D700 and I tend to shuffle around with a plastic carrier bag in one hand. I usually get taken for a harmless old tramp- which is a pretty accurate description, actually!

[sfage]

People don't "generally" bother me because I look like Jesus.

 

It's the threat of divine retribution, methinks

[adan]

BTW - when I mentioned "chipped" adapters before - this is what I was referring to: an adapter R to EOS that has EOS electrical contacts.

 

Leica R to EOS

[sfage]

I assume -owing to the depth or thickness of the adapter- this isn't going to change my 50 cron to a 100 like the Leica will on my D3?

[lct]

I assume -owing to the depth or thickness of the adapter- this isn't going to change my 50 cron to a 100 like the Leica will on my D3?

The original field of view will remain the same on full frame bodies, but not on APS ones. R to EOS adapters are not thick BTW. Those with steel springs (Fotodiox on the left) are more solid and expensive than others with slots. Useful for heavy lenses or if you intend to mount a single adapter permanently on the body.

 

[giordano]

Andy, I've just been studying the Nikon bayonet arrangement and I can't see a reason why a mount could not be made which stays with the body, rather than the lens (of course I've on got half of the problem on my bench, as I don't have a R lens). Could you bring along your outfit tomorrow, so that I can take a squint? I have a friend who is custom-building adaptors at the moment, for all sorts of combos.

 

The R register is longer than the F's and the diameter's pretty similar. I'm pretty sure I've seen photos of an F or F2 that had had a Leicaflex bayonet grafted on the front, so it should be possible.

 

With the D700 there's the AI coupling, the AF motor coupling and the contacts for ROM/AFS lenses to complicate matters, but I guess this just means a bit more excavation.

[sfage]

The original field of view will remain the same on full frame bodies, but not on APS ones. R to EOS adapters are not thick BTW. Those with steel springs (Fotodiox on the left) are more solid and expensive than others with slots. Useful for heavy lenses or if you intend to mount a single adapter permanently on the body.

 

 

Hmm. Interesting.

 

I get it.

[sfage]

The R register is longer than the F's and the diameter's pretty similar. I'm pretty sure I've seen photos of an F or F2 that had had a Leicaflex bayonet grafted on the front, so it should be possible.

 

With the D700 there's the AI coupling, the AF motor coupling and the contacts for ROM/AFS lenses to complicate matters, but I guess this just means a bit more excavation.

 

I have tried some of the Canadian manufactured lenses upon my SL2. They won't actually twist on to the body. There is another part in the way with the newer lens. Is this going to be a problem?

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[phancj]

People don't "generally" bother me because I look like Jesus.

 

It's the threat of divine retribution, methinks

 

Thats a new one, cracks me up:D

[giordano]

I have tried some of the Canadian manufactured lenses upon my SL2. They won't actually twist on to the body. There is another part in the way with the newer lens. Is this going to be a problem?

 

Presumably the lenses that don't fit your SL2 are ones that only have the third cam (for R3 onwards) and don't have the first or second cams (for Leicaflex and SL/SL2 respectively). The bayonet on the third-cam-only lenses was modified to prevent them being used with the older bodies. There are also some twin cam lenses that can't be used on the original Leicaflex or the SL.

 

On the hypothetical R-mount D700, it would depend which model Leicaflex/Leica R the bayonet mount was taken from; I imagine that a mount from an R-camera with its ROM contacts removed would be the most widely compatible.

 

BTW, I found an account of the R-mount F2 : Leica FAQ — R6.2 alternatives