Jump to content
🇩🇪 Neu: Leica SL3 Reporter ×
🇺🇸🇬🇧 New: Leica SL3 Reporter ×

T-body with only M lenses?

tomasis7

Recommended Posts

tomasis7

tomasis7

Posted
Posted

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi,

 

im curious how it handles M lenses compared to typical M body? Im interested of user's experience in handling, operation.

 

Ricoh GX M-mount is another option to consider as well.Instead of buying new lenses for each system, Id like reuse M-lenses.Currently I got accustomed to 1.5x crop in Epson Rd1 sensor, so I keep using the stable of lenses.

 

I like the T camera in overall and it weighs almost half of M-body. It looks like evolution of Barnack camera. The grip thing looks comfortable.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 52
  • Created
  • Last Reply
lct

lct

Posted
Posted

I was tempted as well but the first DNG files i've developed look softer than M ones and Sean Reid seems to share the same opinion when comparing the T to the Ricoh with M lenses. The T should have a better EVF than the latter's though.

Link to post
Share on other sites
rramesh

rramesh

Posted
Posted

I am absolutely looking for a crop-sensor body for use with M lenses.

 

Question is, what's the best out there? Sony, Fuji, Ricoh or Leica?

 

I like the idea of the T as it feels great and is truly well made.

 

However, I will not wish to spend too much money on a depreciating asset, which is what most digital products are.

Link to post
Share on other sites
waloszek

waloszek

Posted
Posted

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The Ricoh GXR has already depreciated. So it might be a good start - if you can still get one... By the way, Sean Reid thinks that it's the best "non-M" solution for m-mount lenses.

Best regards, Gerd

(GXR M-mount owner: Ricoh GXR: Me and the M-Mount)

Link to post
Share on other sites
luigi bertolotti

luigi bertolotti

Posted
Posted

Though the appeal of T, for US, is surely also in the capability to mount M lenses, I'd be curios to see comparisions of 21-28-35-50 M with the corresponding focals of the std. zoom... ;) (at same apertures... the capability to have 1,4 and 2 is imho the real interest of M lenses on T)

Link to post
Share on other sites
tomasis7

tomasis7

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Well, I’ve got more than a dozen of them….:o

 

Do you happen to have Super Angulon 21mm as I would like to know compability of T body and that ancient lens :D

Link to post
Share on other sites
tomasis7

tomasis7

Posted
  • Author
Posted
The Ricoh GXR has already depreciated. So it might be a good start - if you can still get one... By the way, Sean Reid thinks that it's the best "non-M" solution for m-mount lenses.

Best regards, Gerd

(GXR M-mount owner: Ricoh GXR: Me and the M-Mount)

 

I will look at overall handling and compare both cameras. I like some things of T as big screen without buttons on rear, ability to customize layout on screen, file transfer to any device under WIFI, large battery, sturdiness. All things combined together would make closer to the experience of using a smartphone as camera. Seamless operation without taking out battery or card is what I want to have..

 

IQ of sensor is normally not on my high priority list and I'm sure T deliver enough of punch to up A2 prints.

Link to post
Share on other sites
tomasis7

tomasis7

Posted
  • Author
Posted

 

However, I will not wish to spend too much money on a depreciating asset, which is what most digital products are.

 

Luckily, M lenses dont depreciate so fast. A body for 1350£ is still reasonable if this can be used as a tool.

Link to post
Share on other sites
luigi bertolotti

luigi bertolotti

Posted
Posted
Do you happen to have Super Angulon 21mm as I would like to know compability of T body and that ancient lens :D

 

Why not ? Is uncodable, but mine works fine on my M8 (and maybe on M to... haven't yet tried), apart metering which is "vague" (as declared by Leica).

Link to post
Share on other sites
tomasis7

tomasis7

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Why not ? Is uncodable, but mine works fine on my M8 (and maybe on M to... haven't yet tried), apart metering which is "vague" (as declared by Leica).

 

I thought more of the physical size as im worried about the metal barrel sticking out of the SA lens.

Link to post
Share on other sites
luigi bertolotti

luigi bertolotti

Posted
Posted

Hum... physically, maybe some lenses can indeed give some surprise when mounted on T+adapter... the whole dimensioning / shaping is much different from M... but I think that the SA 21 f3,4 is not one of the most critical in this sense.... it seems that on the T you can mount even a Noctilux which is surely more problematic. Probably, in this context the R lenses are, in certain sense, more "safe"... you have 2 adapters stacked (T/M & M/R) and you probably override the right handgrip, having no problems even with large-diameter lenses.

Link to post
Share on other sites
tomasis7

tomasis7

Posted
  • Author
Posted
I was tempted as well but the first DNG files i've developed look softer than M ones and Sean Reid seems to share the same opinion when comparing the T to the Ricoh with M lenses. The T should have a better EVF than the latter's though.

 

Speaking of it, did Reid use final firmware on camera?

Link to post
Share on other sites
tomasis7

tomasis7

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Hum... physically, maybe some lenses can indeed give some surprise when mounted on T+adapter... the whole dimensioning / shaping is much different from M... but I think that the SA 21 f3,4 is not one of the most critical in this sense.... it seems that on the T you can mount even a Noctilux which is surely more problematic. Probably, in this context the R lenses are, in certain sense, more "safe"... you have 2 adapters stacked (T/M & M/R) and you probably override the right handgrip, having no problems even with large-diameter lenses.

 

I agree that M mount adapter may extend the lens further a bit. Heck it would be nice to use T with SA3.4 :p

Link to post
Share on other sites
Jaybob

Jaybob

Posted
Posted

A Novaflex adapted Sony NEX-6 will save you at least $1500 with absolutely no noticeable decline in image quality. AND it has a built in VF.

 

If you want to only arms length, zombie shoot, or if you want to buy a clunky add-on VF, you can buy a NEX-5 with an M adapter, and save even more.

Link to post
Share on other sites
jmahto

jmahto

Posted
Posted
A Novaflex adapted Sony NEX-6 will save you at least $1500 with absolutely no noticeable decline in image quality. AND it has a built in VF.

 

If you want to only arms length, zombie shoot, or if you want to buy a clunky add-on VF, you can buy a NEX-5 with an M adapter, and save even more.

 

I do have NEX-6 and have taken *enough* test shots with CV15, 28cron-ASPH, 50lux-ASPH. I get acceptable results only after f8 for *corner to corner sharpness". It doesn't mean that I don't use them wider but I know what I am getting. I am interested to know what Leica T does in comparison.

 

For longer lenses (I have 90mm Tele-Elamrit-M, 80-200 Vario R and 400 Telyt), NEX-6 works beautifully at all apertures.... BUT it has more shutter shock when I compare 90mm mounted on M9.

 

I am keeping an eye on how T performs for wider Ms.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Rick

Rick

Posted
Posted
I was tempted as well but the first DNG files i've developed look softer than M ones and Sean Reid seems to share the same opinion when comparing the T to the Ricoh with M lenses. The T should have a better EVF than the latter's though.

 

I thought the Ricoh module camera was discontinued?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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