The Sony A7 thread [Merged]

[k-hawinkler]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Thank you trylab. Much appreciated.

[Ario Arioldi]

Just want to add:

 

Voigtlander ............ 41.68 mm ( 36.44 mm with metal "circuit board" inside)

 

 

[ATTACH]413052[/ATTACH]

Did you permanently remove that inner metal ring to avoid vignetting with long lenses?

[trylab]

I permanently remove the inner ring, there was vingnetting with my Elmarit 90

[k-hawinkler]

I permanently remove the inner ring, there was vingnetting with my Elmarit 90

 

Thanks and I assume that corrected the vignetting problem for your 90 mm lens?

Have you tried any other lens?

[3D-Kraft.com]

Just want to add:

 

Voigtlander ............ 41.68 mm ( 36.44 mm with metal "circuit board" inside)

 

I would be afraid that the blank metal surface inside will promote reflections and as a result reduce contrast.

[k-hawinkler]

I would be afraid that the blank metal surface inside will promote reflections and as a result reduce contrast.

 

Good point. That needs to be painted matte black.

Anybody have a recommenation for how best to do that?

I have some adapters that would benefit from such a treatment.

Thanks.

[trylab]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Thanks and I assume that corrected the vignetting problem for your 90 mm lens?

 

Well... , better but not good enough, and the funny thing; it is a hint of vingnetting on all my lenses including 21 and 50 summilux and CV 35, 1.2 II M.

 

btw; Rayqual adapter R to E works perfect on Vario Elmar 80-200/4 and

Voigtlander F (Nikon) to E adapter works perfect on Nikon AF Micro Nikkor 60mm

 

Photo: Leica Elmarit 90 with and without the inner ring:

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!

[k-hawinkler]

Thanks.

Do you think that is due to the adapter or a property of the lenses?

BTW which aperture did you use in your 2 posted images?

Do you see an improvement with vignetting when stopping down?

[trylab]

Stopping down, vingnetting are gone. So it's not an huge problem, if any.

I like to think it is a adapter problem, but a small one.

Voigtlander 15/4.5 mm works well on the M9P, with very mild colorshift, but on A7r not so mild. All my other lenses does it good, and 21 summilux is my favorite for the moment.

 

Example in use from yesterday, visiting Nikel, North West Russia,

First photo Summilux 21, next Summilux 50 (from inside a moving car), both f.1.4, 1600 ISO, 1/160:

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!

[k-hawinkler]

Stopping down, vingnetting are gone. So it's not an huge problem, if any.

I like to think it is a adapter problem, but a small one.

Voigtlander 15/4.5 mm works well on the M9P, with very mild colorshift, but on A7r not so mild. All my other lenses does it good, and 21 summilux is my favorite for the moment.

 

Example in use from yesterday, visiting Nikel, North West Russia,

First photo Summilux 21, next Summilux 50 (from inside a moving car), both f.1.4, 1600 ISO, 1/160:

[ATTACH]413132[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH]413133[/ATTACH]

 

Quote: "Stopping down, vingnetting are gone."

 

That would indicate to me it's a property of your 21 and 50 mm Summilux.

In my limited experience if it were the adapter some vignetting were to remain when stopping down.

 

Also you may apply the flat field correction to correct your images.

[JimKasson]

That needs to be painted matte black.

Anybody have a recommenation for how best to do that?

 

Take a look at this thread:

 

Black lacquer for lens barrels [Archive] - Large Format Photography Forum

 

The Kodak Brushing Lacquer isn't made any more, sad to say.

 

Jim

[JimKasson]

Speaking of adapters, I have two Novoflex adapters, and they're both about half a millimeter short. Anybody else seeing this? Throw a short M lens on your a7R using an adapter, carefully focus on something a long way away, and see what the distance scale marking says.

 

Lens adapter tolerance | The Last Word

 

Jim

[k-hawinkler]

Speaking of adapters, I have two Novoflex adapters, and they're both about half a millimeter short. Anybody else seeing this? Throw a short M lens on your a7R using an adapter, carefully focus on something a long way away, and see what the distance scale marking says.

 

Lens adapter tolerance | The Last Word

 

Jim

 

 

Many thanks Jim.

My Novoflex NEX/LEM adapter varies in thickness between 9.71 and 9.75 mm.

I guess that takes into account varies tolerances so that one can always reach infinity.

 

That's probably okay except maybe for FLE lenses.

If that's a problem the adapter can always be shimmed to the correct thickness IMHO

[charles-k]

Jim,

Very interesting. This prompted for me to check my adapters!

 

Having the variability in test results with the A7r, I just performed some micro caliper measurements on three adapters I have:

 

2 Novaflex M to E mount

1 Metabones from Sony: M to E mount

 

The 2 Novaflex adapters have a flange thickness that are 9.71mm to 9.73mm.

The 1 Metabones adapter from Sony, has a flange thickness of 9.91mm.

 

The difference of 0.2mm in optical flange tolerance is very large, and may the reason why there are some variability in test results.

 

The Metabones adapter, supplied and spec'd by Sony, does not have any drift beyond infinity, and matches really well, with virtually no play in the lens mount. The two Novaflex adapters fall short of infinity, and there is some torsional play in the older lenses.

 

I might send my Novaflex adapters to Camera Clinic, in Melbourne, and see if the tolerances can be tightened to where infinity matches and there is no play in the M lenses.

I suspect Sony supplying these adapter indirectly, may have provided the specs for the Metabone adapters. All my M lenses are very accurately calibrated, and fitting them with the Metabones adapter, the infinity aligns accurately. I suspect the flange width of 9.91mm would be accurate dimension that works. I now know the 9.71/9.73mm does not work well, and it appears this is dimension used for the Novaflex adapters. I will have these both sent away and shimmed:)

 

I do wonder what difference the 0.2mm would have in moving the rear element away from sensor, and lessening the angle of incidence.

[JimKasson]

I do wonder what difference the 0.2mm would have in moving the rear element away from sensor, and lessening the angle of incidence.

 

Once you've focused the lens with LV so the image is sharp, the rear element will be the same distance from the sensor no matter what the thickness of the adapter. Otherwise, the image wouldn't be sharp.

 

Jim

[k-hawinkler]

Once you've focused the lens with LV so the image is sharp, the rear element will be the same distance from the sensor no matter what the thickness of the adapter. Otherwise, the image wouldn't be sharp.

 

Jim

 

Thanks Jim. Does that apply also to FLE lenses?

[charles-k]

Once you've focused the lens with LV so the image is sharp, the rear element will be the same distance from the sensor no matter what the thickness of the adapter. Otherwise, the image wouldn't be sharp.

Jim

 

Very correct!

[JimKasson]

Does that apply also to FLE lenses?

 

Good catch. Not strictly. In the case of a lens that does not move its rear element when focused. It doesn't apply at all.

 

Jim

[k-hawinkler]

Just for the record.

My two Metabones adapters are at 9.84 mm (red) and 9.87 mm (black).

My two Fotodiox ones measure 9.74 mm.

 

My Hawk's Factory adapters with the helicoid measure at min 9.60 mm and at max 14.50 mm.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[k-hawinkler]

Good catch. Not strictly. In the case of a lens that does not move its rear element when focused. It doesn't apply at all.

 

Jim

 

 

Many thanks Jim.

 

So, which Leica M lenses have an FLE?

I am aware of the 50 mm and 35 mm ones.

How about the 75 APO Summicron?

 

Not having the correct thickness, what are the consequences for FLE lenses?