Best non-Leica camera for Leica lenses

[k-hawinkler]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm surprised to hear that the nex 6 is not as good as the 5n with M wideangles, most reports say that they perform the same, is that not so?

 

Gerry

 

 

Please, have a look here http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/2393677-post8.html

[kdriceman]

The Nex6 has essentially the same sensor as the Nex 5n which is significantly different than the Nex7. Identical results on Nex6 and Nex5n according to DXO. http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/nex-6-sensor-tested-at-dxomark-same-quality-as-the-nex-5rn/

 

It is unlikely that there would be any difference.

[kdriceman]

My Nex 7 did produce a mild red cast on the edges with my 21mm SE but not with my 35mm Summicron. Does my Nex 6? When I have used my 21 with it I didn't notice it, but I haven't really peeped the pixels. It is less noticeable than on the 7.

[k-hawinkler]

Well, there clearly is a difference http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/2329815-post1241.html between NEX-5N and 6.

[kdriceman]

Well, there clearly is a difference http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/2329815-post1241.html between NEX-5N and 6.

 

KH- It's impossible to compare these 2 images. If you look at both images side by side the Nex 6 image is clearly more saturated, its profile may be different or maybe the photographer processed them differently. It was also taken at a different shutter speed and different ISO than the Nex 5 image (1/60, ISO 160 for the Nex 6 and 1/80, ISO 100 for the Nex 5). I assume the photographer used the same aperture (but I don't know) and it was likely wide open as there is a lot of purple fringe along the branches. The saturation difference alone would make the red edge more pronounced in the Nex 6 image. Finally, these are relatively small jpeg representations of the original images - I don't even know if they were originally shot as raw.

 

If we really care about this (I don't. I like my Nex 6 for what it is and I don't expect it to handle wide M lenses as well as an M9 or M240). But if someone is trying to choose between the Nex 6 and the Nex 5n they should have accurate comparisons.

[k-hawinkler]

Well, the NEX-6 clearly shows a red cast. It's certainly an existence proof.

Maybe one could entice the NEX-5N to also do that with that lens. But in the example it doesn't.

 

The differences in the comparison picture you point out may be significant or not for the point in question.

We'll probably never know.

 

I have done lots of tests with my NEX-5N and NEX-7 on my lenses and I know which one is better with WA lenses.

[viramati]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

the only camera on the market apart from the leicas that has a sensor specifically designed to handle M lenses is the ricoh GXR M module. I used to even use the CV 12 f5.6 on it without really serious problems and you can make some in camera presets to deal with vignetting and the magenta corner problems. Yes it is somewhat old technology but it performs surprisingly well

[gyoung]

Well, the NEX-6 clearly shows a red cast. It's certainly an existence proof.

Maybe one could entice the NEX-5N to also do that with that lens. But in the example it doesn't.

 

The differences in the comparison picture you point out may be significant or not for the point in question.

We'll probably never know.

 

I have done lots of tests with my NEX-5N and NEX-7 on my lenses and I know which one is better with WA lenses.

 

There is almost universal agreement that the 5n is better than the 7 for M wideangles, but thats not the question, the 6 is supposed to have essentially the same sensor as the 5n, maybe such slight differences as evident on those two examples could be variations between individuals, but comparisons with such wide differences in contrast and saturation are pretty pointless, IMHO

 

Gerry

[kdriceman]

Well, the NEX-6 clearly shows a red cast. It's certainly an existence proof.

Maybe one could entice the NEX-5N to also do that with that lens. But in the example it doesn't.

 

The differences in the comparison picture you point out may be significant or not for the point in question.

We'll probably never know.

 

I have done lots of tests with my NEX-5N and NEX-7 on my lenses and I know which one is better with WA lenses.

 

Sure, I agree. And as I said above the 6 is better with my 21mm than my 7 was. That example doesn't really tell us anything about the comparison between the 6 and the 5n though.

 

Red edges or not, the presence of an internal viewfinder and the location of the control wheel on the 6 make it preferable - For Me - over the 7 and 5.

 

But, really we are just splitting hairs IMO. The Nex 5,6,7 are all very capable cameras with excellent sensors. But if you really want the one that works best with M lenses it is probably the GXR.

[JeTexas]

If you can live with a 2x crop factor, the Olympus cameras have the greatest compatibility as you can use things like the EVF and mic adapter with your new M.

 

After the Olympus, I'd suggest the Sony NEX-6. I still ended up buying an M9, though as the NEX-6 just couldn't fill the void while I waited.

[sydkugelmass]

My experience is completely positive with the GXR and the X-Pro 1. GXR handles very well even with ZM Biogon 21mm/f4,5 and CV UW Heliar 12mm/f5,6.

 

The X-Pro1 gives stunning results with the Summilux 35mm/f1,4 Asph. 11874. among the others.

[gyoung]

If you can live with a 2x crop factor, the Olympus cameras have the greatest compatibility as you can use things like the EVF and mic adapter with your new M. snip,,,,,,,

 

Apart from the crop factor, my experience with a Panasonic G1 was that the sensor was no good with anything less than 50mm, fuzzy corners with 35 Summicron asph and Skopar and it got worse as the focal length decreased. I have seen nothing to suggest that any other m4/3 sensor is better.

 

I enjoyed using and equivalent of 100mm f/1.4 though, and also the 135/2.8 made a marvellous lens for sport with a FOV equivalent to 270mm

 

Gerry

[k-hawinkler]

Apart from the crop factor, my experience with a Panasonic G1 was that the sensor was no good with anything less than 50mm, fuzzy corners with 35 Summicron asph and Skopar and it got worse as the focal length decreased. I have seen nothing to suggest that any other m4/3 sensor is better.

 

I enjoyed using and equivalent of 100mm f/1.4 though, and also the 135/2.8 made a marvellous lens for sport with a FOV equivalent to 270mm

 

Gerry

 

 

Have you looked at the OM-D E-M5?

[gyoung]

I haven't, the crop factor makes it a non starter for me, even if the sensor will work with short focal length lenses (and I have seen nothing to suggest it will) the shortest I have is a 15mm, which becomes an equivalent of 30mm, so you need something wider, and there is nothing I know of that is up to Leica/Voigtlander standards.

 

A1,5 x factor means 15 becomes 22.5 which is wide enough for anything I intend to use such a camera for, the real high quality stuff I intend to carry on doing with M6ttl/M3 on a Provia sensor

 

Gerry

[k-hawinkler]

So your argument is now lack of appropriate WA lenses and not IQ of sensor.

Is that correct?

[gyoung]

Its a question really of finding something that will provide me with a light and portable addition to the Ms for snapshot work, but which is capable of enough quality to do an A3 print if required.

The experience with the G1 taught me that the native lenses provided for these (I had the zooms and a 20mm) provide reasonable quality (partly through software manipulation) but are not impressive in build quality etc.

So I would prefer something which will use my Leica and Voigtlander lenses as effectively as possible, IQ of the sensor is good enoough with any of these cameras with tele centric lens designs, but the relevant issue is ability to produce sharp corners with lenses with short back-focus. The GXR seems best, but I don't like the evf and handling, and this applies to the Nex 5n as well whereas the Nex 6 evf seems good and, probably by chance, the sensor in both 5n and 6 seems reported to work with the lenses I have.

The G1 was 'replaced' with a Nikon D7000, which does many things very well (including using my 90 and 135 Leica lens with detacheable heads for Visoflex) , and I have a good selection of Nikon lenses from film cameras, but I am not carting that about as well as the Ms when travelling.

 

Gerry

 

Gerry

[BrendanD]

OMD EM5?

 

My main criteria are:

1) Image quality - using Leica lenses

Very good - have been using the novoflex adapter

 

2) Ergonomics

- Wheel to change shutter speed, ISO and EV

YES

- Ease of engaging the peak focusing and focus magnification

YES to Mag, but no peaking. I haven't found it necessary

 

3) Low light performance

Excellent. better than my M9... and it has very good IS

 

4) Sensor size - don't mind a 1.5 crop factor but 2x is a bit much

You have the WATE...

 

My lenses are:

- Wate 16-18-21

- Summilux 35

- Noctilux 0.95 50

- Summicron 90

- APO 135 3.4

 

I have made a big investment in great Leica glass and am looking forward to a great venue for photography - I just need a camera. I can stick with the Nex 5n, which has great image quality, but really find the ergonomics clumsy.

The OMD handles very nicely.

 

Any ideas or advice?

[250swb]

OMD EM5?

 

The OMD, or any m4/3 camera, is the only other digital camera available that already has a Leica lens available made specifically for it, the Panasonic/ Leica 25mm Summilux. Has Sony, or Fuji? It is in every way as fine a lens as the equivalent 50mm Summilux.

 

However given that Olympus lenses, and particularly the M4/3 primes, are second only to Leica and perhaps even surpass them it could well be that an OMD would show that Leica 35mm lenses are in fact nothing special, especially compared with lenses designed with the camera in mind. As this thread has clearly shown there is nothing available that truly fits the brief then buying a complimentary system that prides itself on lens quality (as with Olympus) rather than making a bodge of it would seem to make more sense.

 

Steve

[gyoung]

Thats what I thought when I bought the Panasonic G1, with adapters to use my Leica M & L39 (16 in all) and Nikon (14) lenses. The only wide primes at the time were the Olympus 17, and the Panasonic 20mm, which I bought and performed well

 

Please see the Photozone tests, the 12mm/2 seems good but is expensive (2.8 would be enough for me and cheaper), the 14mm Panasonic is poor, and so is the Olympus 17mm, I would be sure that the equivalent leica lenses (Elmarit 28 and Summaron 35) would perform very much better, my Summicron 35s and Voigtlander 28 certainly do.

Even the Panasonic Leica badged 25mm is good, but not outstanding in the corners. My Nikon film era primes also perform better than the m4/3 lenses, which were not pleasant to use for non 'snapshot' use, no focus scales let alone DoF and the fly by wire manual focus drove me to distraction, you cant beat a proper helical focussing mount, IMHO!

The idea of a separate system seemed a good one at the time, but in the end I had 3 systems to use, hopeless trying to decide what to take, so I sold it and bought a Nikon body which works well enough with all my Nikon lenses, and am now looking for something small I can slip in the corner of my bag of Ms and lenses, which still provide the ultimate both in pleasure of use and ultimate quality when the slides are scanned.

 

Gerry

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[250swb]

I think you are living in an era that is long gone Gerry. The G1 (which I did own so I know the difference) is a vast distance apart from the current range of camera's like the OMD or EP-5. I also own the current PanLeica 25mm Summilux DG m4/3 lens as well as a current 50mm M Summilux, and I don't see soft corners on the former any more than I do on the later, at any aperture. It really is time to stop comparing things that are years apart, digital moves much quicker than that and is a pointless as comparing an M8 with a new M.

 

Steve