Rate R telephoto lenses from best downward excluding module from your own experiences

[phocus.org]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The 105-280mm could be a very versatile backup for my 280 APO. I'd be able to sell the 100 APO and 180 f/2.8 APO (outstanding lenses but lenses I seldom use them). I'd lose a stop and some MFD at the shorter focal lengths, replace the fiddly STA-1 on the 100 and 180 with an excellent tripod collar, and perhaps have some money in the bank. Hmmmm...... has anyone used the 105-280 with an extension tube?

 

Douglas,

 

The 105-280 is a fantastic lens but its tripod collar never convinced me. As such, it is stable like a tank, but it is quite short and equipped with rubber strips, making everything even more wobbly.

See my solution in post #115 of this thread.

 

Manfred

[Advertisement]

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

[phocus.org]

K-H: A friend of mine has a Nikon, I'll have a look at the mounts and compare the layouts. I'll let you know if it's possible, based on what I did. He is away for about 10 days for the holidays.

 

Best,

 

 

Mike,

 

Your findings and thoughts would be of great interest for me too!

 

Hm, the flange focal distance of Sony Alpha (DSLR/SLT) is 44.5 mm, no?

Leica-R is 47.0 mm. So you reduced the extender’s female flange by some 2.5 mm (depending on the net flange distance of the Sony female mount & extender -combo, I guess)?

As the flange focal distance of Nikon F is 46.5 mm, it would require an about 0.5 mm surgery (again, depending on the net distance), no?

 

Sadly, the layouts of the Nikon F female mounts I have here differ from that of Leica-R.

I did a quick comparison here between the mount of the D800, the female mount of the Nikon 1,4x TC14E II converter, and the Leica-R 10-holes design (105-280 and AME100). Even the two Nikon mounts (D800 vs. Nikon converter) have different layouts. The Nikon mount is also slightly smaller than that of Leica-R.

 

Cheers

Manfred

[robsteve]

The 105-280mm could be a very versatile backup for my 280 APO. I'd be able to sell the 100 APO and 180 f/2.8 APO (outstanding lenses but lenses I seldom use them). I'd lose a stop and some MFD at the shorter focal lengths, replace the fiddly STA-1 on the 100 and 180 with an excellent tripod collar, and perhaps have some money in the bank. Hmmmm...... has anyone used the 105-280 with an extension tube?

 

Doug:

 

I don't think I have used it with an extension tube. It focuses pretty close on its own. You wouldn't fill the frame with a hummingbird, but you probably could with a bluejay.

 

Here is an image I shot years ago on slide film at close focus. I can't remember what focal length, probably near 280mm. This is full frame on slide film. The theme was door knobs for our camera club. I was shooting some boats near the water by a fish shack, looked over and said that is a great shot for the theme contest. It won the competition.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[robsteve]

Douglas,

 

The 105-280 is a fantastic lens but its tripod collar never convinced me. As such, it is stable like a tank, but it is quite short and equipped with rubber strips, making everything even more wobbly.

See my solution in post #115 of this thread.

 

Manfred

 

Were you hanging a DMR behind it? I have had excellent results with it using both film and digital. It may be different with a lighter camera attached to it.

[wildlightphoto]

Douglas,

 

The 105-280 is a fantastic lens but its tripod collar never convinced me. As such, it is stable like a tank, but it is quite short and equipped with rubber strips, making everything even more wobbly.

See my solution in post #115 of this thread.

 

Manfred

 

Being able to rotate the camera quickly and easily is far more important to me than rock-solid stability. My subjects are moving, my camera supports are often improvised and at weird and changing angles.

[phocus.org]

Being able to rotate the camera quickly and easily is far more important to me than rock-solid stability. My subjects are moving, my camera supports are often improvised and at weird and changing angles.

 

Well, yes, my setup can only be rotated (quickly) as a whole.

 

Btw, for those of you, who don't need to rotate the AME100 but rather maximum stability, there is a much more solid alternative to the fiddly STA-1 tripod collar, I think: I put a CNC-machined concave Teflon basis under the AME100, featuring exactly the same radius as the focus ring of the AME100. The Teflon basis and the camera are attached to the same rail (see pics; unfortunately, the setup is for the 5DII, which I don’t have any more. I still have to make a spacer under the Teflon basis in order to compensate for the higher D800. For now, you have to imagine a camera mounted behind the lens ).

Obviously, it works only in landscape orientation (or rotated, via the head, +-30°).

 

Manfred

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[phocus.org]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Were you hanging a DMR behind it? I have had excellent results with it using both film and digital. It may be different with a lighter camera attached to it.

 

I used it with the 5DI&II and the 2x APO-Ext-R, and currently with the D800 with 1,4x APO Ext-R. Esp. the latter combo is as heavy as the R8/DMR, and with higher res.

In liveview mode there is no difference visible in the results (single-point vs. 2-points support). But the liveview image is much less nervous when focusing in magnified view. When shooting without MLU/liveview from the tripod, the 2-points support makes a difference with the D800/extender-combo. Yet, nothing to get crazy about.

 

[naturephoto1]

I used it with the 5DI&II and the 2x APO-Ext-R, and currently with the D800 with 1,4x APO Ext-R. Esp. the latter combo is as heavy as the R8/DMR, and with higher res.

In liveview mode there is no difference visible in the results (single-point vs. 2-points support). But the liveview image is much less nervous when focusing in magnified view. When shooting without MLU/liveview from the tripod, the 2-points support makes a difference with the D800/extender-combo. Yet, nothing to get crazy about.

 

 

You may wish to look at this from Really Right Stuff, it is an adjustable solution:

 

Lens Support Pkg, dual Quick-Release - CB-YS-QR-Pkg - Kit Configuration Page

 

I have this system, but have replaced the rear camera or lens mount with a ProMediaGear Back to Back clamp. I have to start using this when it is appropriate. I can use this directly on my Makins M20 Ball Head with the Arca Swiss type QR clamp or with my RRS Full Gimbal head.

 

Rich

[robsteve]

I used it with the 5DI&II and the 2x APO-Ext-R, and currently with the D800 with 1,4x APO Ext-R. Esp. the latter combo is as heavy as the R8/DMR, and with higher res.

 

 

You may not have had a DMR and R9, but they are as heavy as a Canon 1D or probably Nikon D3/4. I have the D800E and even with the battery grip full of aa batteries, it is still lighter than a DMR.

 

Anyway, the RRS plate B76e fits the 105-280mm and the little L on the end of it engages solidly with the aluminum of the mount. In my case, I put a strip of black tape on the RRS plate where it touches the metal of the mount to avoid scratches. This is probably the same plate Doug is using with his 280mm f4.

 

I have done some odd combinations to get the 400mm f2.8 and 2x steady to shoot a Lunar eclipse. In that case I used a Wimberly head and then a separate manfrotto magic arm to the base of the DMR, with the other end attached to a Manfrotto super clamp to a tripod leg. Only good for things that don't move quickly, like the moon

[naturephoto1]

You may not have had a DMR and R9, but they are as heavy as a Canon 1D or probably Nikon D3/4. I have the D800E and even with the battery grip full of aa batteries, it is still lighter than a DMR.

 

Anyway, the RRS plate B76e fits the 105-280mm and the little L on the end of it engages solidly with the aluminum of the mount. In my case, I put a strip of black tape on the RRS plate where it touches the metal of the mount to avoid scratches. This is probably the same plate Doug is using with his 280mm f4.

 

I have done some odd combinations to get the 400mm f2.8 and 2x steady to shoot a Lunar eclipse. In that case I used a Wimberly head and then a separate manfrotto magic arm to the base of the DMR, with the other end attached to a Manfrotto super clamp to a tripod leg. Only good for things that don't move quickly, like the moon

 

Rob,

 

The RRS L97L is now the plate that RRS sells for the f4 (and f2.8) 280 Apo Telyt lenses:

 

http://reallyrightstuff.com/ProductDesc.aspx?code=L97L&type=0&eq=B97L-009&desc=L97L%3a-For-Leica-R-280mm%2ff4APO

 

http://reallyrightstuff.com/mmRRSNET/Images/gallery/L97L.png

 

I have them mounted directly to both lenses without any tape. I have not noted any movement or rotation once they are tightly mounted to the lenses.

 

Rich

[robsteve]

Rob,

 

The RRS L97L is now the plate that RRS sells for the f4 (and f2.8) 280 Apo Telyt lenses:

 

http://reallyrightstuff.com/ProductDesc.aspx?code=L97L&type=0&eq=B97L-009&desc=L97L%3a-For-Leica-R-280mm%2ff4APO

 

http://reallyrightstuff.com/mmRRSNET/Images/gallery/L97L.png

 

I have them mounted directly to both lenses without any tape. I have not noted any movement or rotation once they are tightly mounted to the lenses.

 

Rich

 

Rich:

 

I think the only difference between the L97L (83mm) and the B76 (53mm) is the length and perhaps the longer L97L allows you to attach secondary accessories to it, such as their flash brackets. The shorter one is a better fit to the length of the platform on the lens mount if you do not need to use the RRS flash brackets.

 

If you look at my avatar, when I mounted a flash on my large 400mm, I just mounted it to the lens handle rather than use a flash bracket.

[naturephoto1]

Rich:

 

I think the only difference between the L97L (83mm) and the B76 (53mm) is the length and perhaps the longer L97L allows you to attach secondary accessories to it, such as their flash brackets. The shorter one is a better fit to the length of the platform on the lens mount if you do not need to use the RRS flash brackets.

 

If you look at my avatar, when I mounted a flash on my large 400mm, I just mounted it to the lens handle rather than use a flash bracket.

 

Rob,

 

Thank you. I used to use a shorter platform plate for the f2.8 280mm Apo lens.. Yes the longer plate the allows the addition of adding either the RRS or Wimberly Flash bracket systems. But, I have also found it useful for sliding the lens forward or backward (and having more area to grip in the clamp) in the Arca Swiss Type QR clamps to better balance which ever camera and/or accessories (like extenders) are used.

 

Rich

[michali]

Mike,

 

Your findings and thoughts would be of great interest for me too!

 

Hm, the flange focal distance of Sony Alpha (DSLR/SLT) is 44.5 mm, no?

Leica-R is 47.0 mm. So you reduced the extender’s female flange by some 2.5 mm (depending on the net flange distance of the Sony female mount & extender -combo, I guess)?

As the flange focal distance of Nikon F is 46.5 mm, it would require an about 0.5 mm surgery (again, depending on the net distance), no?

 

Sadly, the layouts of the Nikon F female mounts I have here differ from that of Leica-R.

I did a quick comparison here between the mount of the D800, the female mount of the Nikon 1,4x TC14E II converter, and the Leica-R 10-holes design (105-280 and AME100). Even the two Nikon mounts (D800 vs. Nikon converter) have different layouts. The Nikon mount is also slightly smaller than that of Leica-R.

 

Cheers

Manfred

 

Manfred- I've had a look at a Nikon mount, you're correct, purely from the layout of the mount, I'm afraid it looks like it won't work.

[algrove]

Has anyone ever tried an Leica R to Hasselblad V adapter? How has it worked out for you quality wise?

 

I have never heard of an M to V adapter. Anyone know of one?

[wildlightphoto]

I have never heard of an M to V adapter. Anyone know of one?

 

I'll bet Novoflex is working on one. Meanwhile a V lens to R body plus R lens to M body adapters will work.

[michali]

Has anyone ever tried an Leica R to Hasselblad V adapter? How has it worked out for you quality wise?

 

I recently purchased a Hasselblad V to Sony Alpha adaptor, it works well and my Carl Zeiss Hasselblad lenses perform beautifully on the Sony as well!

 

I should look around and see if there is an R to Hasselblad V adaptor, it would be interesting to see how the R lenses perform on the Hassleblad 503CW & CFV50.

[algrove]

I'll bet Novoflex is working on one. Meanwhile a V lens to R body plus R lens to M body adapters will work.

 

I had thought of that too, but wondered if there was a way to eliminate one adapter. I see there is a V to R available. I will try it to see how it works. Problem is the only way I can use my R lenses is with a Ricoh GXR+M mount.

[algrove]

Well, yes, my setup can only be rotated (quickly) as a whole.

 

Btw, for those of you, who don't need to rotate the AME100 but rather maximum stability, there is a much more solid alternative to the fiddly STA-1 tripod collar, I think: I put a CNC-machined concave Teflon basis under the AME100, featuring exactly the same radius as the focus ring of the AME100. The Teflon basis and the camera are attached to the same rail (see pics; unfortunately, the setup is for the 5DII, which I don’t have any more. I still have to make a spacer under the Teflon basis in order to compensate for the higher D800. For now, you have to imagine a camera mounted behind the lens ).

Obviously, it works only in landscape orientation (or rotated, via the head, +-30°).

 

Manfred

 

Manfred- Which QR plate are we looking at in the photos? Thanks.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[algrove]

Well, Santa arrived with a 105-280 for me. After I got over the shock of how darn heavy it is, I began to realize why so many talked about stabilizing it for shooting.

 

Now I would need like 15 bean bags in the wild in a vehicle and for a tripod I think the Tour d'Eiffel would do just fine. In all seriousness I do believe Phocus's setup seems a very good approach for tripod use and I will try an RRS long tripod support setup soon.

[naturephoto1]

Well, Santa arrived with a 105-280 for me. After I got over the shock of how darn heavy it is, I began to realize why so many talked about stabilizing it for shooting.

 

Now I would need like 15 bean bags in the wild in a vehicle and for a tripod I think the Tour d'Eiffel would do just fine. In all seriousness I do believe Phocus's setup seems a very good approach for tripod use and I will try an RRS long tripod support setup soon.

 

You may wish to consider the usage of a back to back clamp from RRS or ProMediaGear in place of the standard mounting system for the RRS long lens system. I suggest that because it will offer additional flexibility when using the camera with an L bracket with a longer lens lacking a tripod collar.

 

Rich