LEICA M + R Adapter: adequate solution?

[wlaidlaw]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Nice to see David Llado is ahead of the game Leica-R lenses for Mirrorless cameras

 

Perhaps he is the right person to be asked to fabricate M-M to 41mm long tube and perhaps add tripod foot with Arca-Swiss style dovetail to his R-M adapter.

 

Mladen,

 

I had already asked and the answer to both was I am afraid "not planned at the moment"

 

Wilson

[wlaidlaw]

Just thinking ahead, once I am back in the UK, I have access to an excellent local machine shop, Eric Neve at Barcombe, who make things as complicated as a 1938 Auto Union Type D GP car gearbox from scratch. They used to make quite a few things for me when I was still building and racing single seat cars and don't mind small one off orders. They could easily machine a saddle to fit underneath the Leitax R to M adapter with a 1/4" tripod thread. It needs to have enough depth to clear the back of the lens and to allow a QR plate to be used. I have used Manfrotto PL12 plates for years but I know others use Arca, Kirk or other plates. If I go ahead with this idea, I will post images.

 

The alternative to a saddle would be a collar with a clamp screw, to allow rotation of the camera lens assembly on the tripod, which might be a better solution.

 

Wilson

Edited October 6, 2012 by wlaidlaw

[Advertisement]

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

[wildlightphoto]

... If I can persuade some company to make an M to M 41mm extension tube, I shall carry on using my Telyt V280/f4.8 Series 3 lens....

 

14127 or 14167 will convert the lens to R mount.

Edited October 6, 2012 by wildlightphoto

[wlaidlaw]

14127 or 14167 will convert the lens to R mount.

 

Doug,

 

I am just not keen on back to back adapters and I also sold both of my 14127's, thinking they would never be needed (motto - don't sell Leica stuff unless you have to). In fact I am not keen on adapters at all, as I explained on the mounting ring for R Zoom thread. JC tells me that Leica has made a 41mm bayonet/bayonet extension tube and is when he gets home, going to see if it has a letter or number code. Meanwhile, I have bought a cheap Visoflex 2 in not very good optical condition and with a mirror issue. I will strip out the mirror and replace the top screen with a blanking plate. I may strip out all the interior box work as well to cut the weight, depending on how easy it looks. That gives me a single adapter for Viso lenses.

 

Wilson

[wildlightphoto]

I am just not keen on back to back adapters

 

Neither am I. OTOH a 14127 + Leitax R-to-M conversion would result in a single adapter.

[wlaidlaw]

Doug,

 

Now that I have been successful in buying an 80-200/f4 Vario Elmar, the Visoflex lenses are going to be very occasional use only. The Viso II body will probably do me.

 

I understand what you mean by adding a Leitax R to M to a 14127. I did not know if the 14127 or 14167 had the same screw spacing on the rear to fit the Leitax.

 

Wilson

[sheikhrafiq79]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

leica m sounds good, but i m afraid about image quality is like my dmr or not.

 

thanks

[mmradman]

leica m sounds good, but i m afraid about image quality is like my dmr or not.

 

thanks

 

It will be different.

 

We still neeed to see M(240) images to compare to older digital cameras - DMR/M8/M9.

[stuny]

I too am anxious to see the image quality but I'll bet it will be at least as good as the M9's.

[wlaidlaw]

I will be disappointed if it is not better than the M9.

 

Wilson

[hamey]

I don't think Leica is going to compromise on image quality with the Leica M, they have to much at stake.

 

I would say it's going to be equal or better then the M9, the Leica M's future depends on it.

 

Ken.

Edited October 11, 2012 by hamey

[k-hawinkler]

Image Sensors World: CMOSIS Sensor in "Leica M" Rangefinder

 

Hopefully the new sensor also works well with non-Leica wide angle, wide open fast lenses.

They certainly promise excellent color rendition.

[wlaidlaw]

Image Sensors World: CMOSIS Sensor in "Leica M" Rangefinder

 

Hopefully the new sensor also works well with non-Leica wide angle, wide open fast lenses.

They certainly promise excellent color rendition.

 

K-H,

 

Surely light rays or photons are the same whichever lens they have been steered through. I would have thought if a lens e.g. a CV 15mm Super Wide Heliar works well on an M9 (better than I thought it would) when coded as a pre-ASPH 21/2.8 Elmarit-M, it should work just as well with the new sensor, coded similarly. I would hope it might be better, as the gherkin shaped micro lenses, one would hope, would be more consistent than the varying angled hemispherical ones, in that they are all the same.

 

Wilson

[k-hawinkler]

Wilson,

 

My hope is that all lenses should work better without the additional in-camera processing to avoid red edges for example. Also for lenses where there is no similar Leica M9 correction.

[lm_user]

Wilson,

 

My hope is that all lenses should work better without the additional in-camera processing to avoid red edges for example. Also for lenses where there is no similar Leica M9 correction.

 

 

My hope also. However, I think the cyan shift is caused by oblique light rays passing through the ir filter. I assume the ir filter is still in front of the sensor. The only way I see eliminating the color shift issue is to put the ir filter between the microlens and the sensor. The trade-off in ir filter placement is certainly a compromise with image quality that I dont understand

[mjh]

If your design goal is to shorten the optical stack (to quote CMOSIS: “The sensor reduces spatial crosstalk by its very small distance between color filters and photodiodes. This thin optical stack is optimized for an efficient light coupling into the silicon.”) you wouldn’t want to widen it by inserting another filter layer. And since you need a cover glass anyway, what would be the point?

[k-hawinkler]

Michael,

 

Thanks. Does the CMOSIS design avoid color shift or does that still need to be corrected computationally for certain lenses as in the M9?

[mjh]

Does the CMOSIS design avoid color shift or does that still need to be corrected computationally for certain lenses as in the M9?

I wish I knew. I didn’t have a chance to test it yet.

[k-hawinkler]

I wish I knew. I didn’t have a chance to test it yet.

 

Michael,

 

Thanks again.

 

When I first saw page 22 of Brochure Leica M Leica Camera AG - Downloads my gut reaction was:

 

Wonderful, Leica figured out a way to significantly reduce large angles of incidence and avoid the problems associated with that in M9s.

That's great as it should permit continuation of their traditional lens designs for digital cameras without having to resort to excessive in-camera computational corrections.

 

This is quite different from a fresh lens design approach, as for example Fuji did with their X Mount. FUJIFILM X-Pro1 | features - FUJINON Interchangeable “XF LENS” and Original “X Mount” | Fujifilm Global

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[sheikhrafiq79]

i think its not a real solution.