Jump to content

Future CMOS M10 + manual long lenses


chris_tribble

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

ASSUMING that the M10 has a CMOS sensor, Live View and the option of an EVF, can anyone advise on the potential for putting long manual lenses from other manufacturers onto such a body? I have in mind Canon or Nikon prime 200mm. One of these would be just what I need in order to help me to escape from needing a DSLR. I'd even be tempted to try my 300 2.8 USM Canon in Manual mode if the EVF were any good.

 

Feasible? Any thoughts on this?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd even be tempted to try my 300 2.8 USM Canon in Manual mode if the EVF were any good.

 

Feasible? Any thoughts on this?

You might have difficulty controlling the diaphragm, unless you would be satisfied using it wide open all the time. A 5DMkIII might be a cheaper and more effective solution you know, just flick the AF switch off.

Link to post
Share on other sites

An SLR can be focused with a plain matte finder screen. I have done that successfully. But a modern SLR ('modern' meaning post c. 1960) does have a 'focusing aid' that works even with a plain screen – the automatic aperture mechanism.

 

For this makes it possible to focus a lens wide open, where the depth of field is shallow and distinct, and have it stop down instantly for the actual shot. But if you don't have auto aperturing – which you won't have with M lenses or with any other brand of lenses – you will be hard put to focus on a plain screen because too much looks sharp to the eye. This goes for both long and short lenses. Believe me. I was there before auto aperture came in!

 

There are two contending 'systems' now with EVF cameras. One is the virtual finder loupe. You see a central part of the finder image magnified an extra 2x or thereabouts. But this works only with static subjects, and preferably with the camera on a tripod, because it makes focusing and final composition into two different procedures, separate in time. It slows you down in a way most experienced photographers find intolerable. You can not just 'focus-and-shot' as with a M camera or a SLR.

 

The other is focus peaking. This can work well by showing you which part of the subject is imaged with maximum contrast – which is normally the part in focus. This must work well with lenses of different focal length, and at different apertures, but within limits, it should help a lot.

 

It should also be remembered that even the best electronic viewfinders of today, which have a resolution of about 1.4 megapixels, are far inferior to all but the most miserable, cheap matte SLR screens. They cannot hold a torch to the bright, near 100% covering and near life size screen of my old Olympus OM cameras. We can hope that they will improve. But even if they were equal to that standard, they would need a focusing aid, as I have explained above. Without it, forget about manual focus.

 

The old man from the Optomechanical Age

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah well - two good reasons for not bothering with the M10. I'm perfectly happy focusing the AT 135 3.4 with the M9 and this lens addresses a pretty wide range of needs - for anything wider I prefer RF. For concert / theatre work where long lenses are needed I might just stick with the 5D2 for a few more years (the 5D is still totally usable too...) - and that way I keep the benefit of AF too + movie for the small number of jobs I get where this is required. As for the 5D3, it's nice, but doesn't feel like a necessity for the moment.

 

So, apart from higher ISO performance, I'm beginning to feel that I can't see ANY reasons for switching away from the M9. Hooray :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

The other is focus peaking. This can work well by showing you which part of the subject is imaged with maximum contrast – which is normally the part in focus. This must work well with lenses of different focal length, and at different apertures, but within limits, it should help a lot.

 

I suppose this might just make the difference. If focus peak is available on an M10 EVF, then a lens like the Nikon 180mm f/2.8 ED would make sense (and these are available really cheaply). The whole issue here is that for the vast majority of the time I'd be using RF with lenses in the 18-50 range. Having the option to use one long lens with the same body I use for everything else is tempting.

 

However - given how long it's taken to get the CMOS sensor on the M8/M9s working properly with micro-lens, RF filter, Italian flag issues and the rest, I might not be a first adopter as I was last time round.

Link to post
Share on other sites

However - given how long it's taken to get the CMOS sensor on the M8/M9s working properly with micro-lens, RF filter, Italian flag issues and the rest, I might not be a first adopter as I was last time round.

These are non-issues for SLR type lenses.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Chris,

 

You might try 2 bodies:

 

A Range/Viewfinder body for short lenses.

 

An SLR body for long lenses, bellows & close-up.

 

Also have some: Interchangable lenses usable on both R/Vfndr & SLR for intermediate focal lengths such as 90mm & 135mm.

 

2 bodies for 1 overlaping set of very versatile lenses.

 

Best Regards,

 

Michael

Link to post
Share on other sites

I suppose this might just make the difference. If focus peak is available on an M10 EVF, then a lens like the Nikon 180mm f/2.8 ED would make sense (and these are available really cheaply).

 

For me, "focus peaking" is about as useful (and about as much fun) as having a 2-year-old scribble on my ground glass with a yellow crayon.

 

I'm sticking with the Canon 5D2 and lenses that can be used wide-open all the time, thus dodging the stop-down problem. (APO-Telyt f/3.4 180, 21 f/4 (for video or ultra-close ultra-wide), 400 f/6.8). I have an old-fashioned split-prism screen (Canon EOS-1 converted for 5D by Haoda) and it has paired seamlessly with my M9s.

 

See images in: Second Place | Series or Special Section - Magazine

Link to post
Share on other sites

It may sound Luddite, but a Visoflex with an 280 mounted in the bag replaces the SLR system if you only want one extra long lens.

 

A man after my own heart! Even better (IMHO of course): the 400/6.8. Longer, lighter and more portable than the 280, and amazing sharpness and contrast. The most ironic thing: even though the Leica Visoflex lenses can mount directly to the camera, they will need an extension tube equal to the depth of a Visoflex in order to be practical on the M10 with live-view.

 

What would become useful with live view (though still of questionable quality) is the Komura 2X. The rangefinder coupling never worked worth a hoot.

 

But frankly, even with the M9, I find that I can get a good image from the 135 T-E cropped in half (270mm effective) using the rangefinder patch as a framing aid. Assuming the M10 resolution far surpasses the M9 (which it will have to for me to pony up), using a long lens and live-view should be even less attractive.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It may sound Luddite, but a Visoflex with an 280 mounted in the bag replaces the SLR system if you only want one extra long lens.

 

I agree.

 

And at least it's designed to work will in the Leica M system :)

 

All these other cobbled together ideas reliant on 'possible' M10 CMOS technology offer hardly any advantages as far as I can see.......

Link to post
Share on other sites

For me, "focus peaking" is about as useful (and about as much fun) as having a 2-year-old scribble on my ground glass with a yellow crayon.

 

I'm sticking with the Canon 5D2 and lenses that can be used wide-open all the time, thus dodging the stop-down problem. (APO-Telyt f/3.4 180, 21 f/4 (for video or ultra-close ultra-wide), 400 f/6.8). I have an old-fashioned split-prism screen (Canon EOS-1 converted for 5D by Haoda) and it has paired seamlessly with my M9s.

 

See images in: Second Place | Series or Special Section - Magazine

 

Aidan & Michael - further reasons for staying where I am - I was just trying to build up some enthusiasm. At the moment I have 2 M9s + Leica/Zeiss lenses from 18 through to 135 + Canon 5D2 and 85 1.2 / 70-200 2.8 / 300 2.8. This covers ALL the fields for me. The DSLR stuff almost never leaves the house, and the M's are with me all the time (as it should be). + I have a Visoflex 2 and bellows which pair up perfectly with the 135 Apo-Telyt 3.4 for macro (and the 90 and 50 come in when needed). At this level I'm the man who has everything!

 

Shoot - I suppose I'm just looking for excuses to get the M10 when it comes out. Maybe I'm just going to have to use high ISO as my excuse (even though I know that really isn't an issue). Heigh ho :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Algrove - it's a thought, though a) I imagine that the virtues of the high ISO sensor in the MM will have very different behaviour from that of whatever CMOS sensor is used for the M10, and B) I would really need the colour + BW virtues of a conventional digital sensor - despite the undoubted merits of the MM...

 

Ah well - the good thing is that in a few months the dust will have settled and we'll all have a clearer idea :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...