Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
tomasis7

T-body with only M lenses?

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Yes.

 

Seems on odd to review the T with a camera that is discontinued. How would the information from such a review be used in a practical way? Oh, I forgot, it is a camera review.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Speaking of it, did Reid use final firmware on camera?

 

No. It's not expensive to try him out for a year and then you can get the words straight from the horses mouth.

 

Also agree it was strange to use a discontinued camera to compare with the T. And he also often uses too many non-Leica lenses for comparison purposes and many of those are way down the list to many Leica owners. Guess it's what he has in his cupboard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No. It's not expensive to try him out for a year and then you can get the words straight from the horses mouth.

 

Also agree it was strange to use a discontinued camera to compare with the T. And he also often uses too many non-Leica lenses for comparison purposes and many of those are way down the list to many Leica owners. Guess it's what he has in his cupboard.

 

Ah, the greengrocer - reviewing M mount options using Cosina Voigtlander lenses

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ah, the greengrocer - reviewing M mount options using Cosina Voigtlander lenses

 

Yeah, I'm not trying to sound like sour grapes here, but why pick non-Leica lenses to compare how well the T works with our M lenses. My subscription has expired so I won't renew for this review because the lenses he used are way down the list of the lenses I'd be interested in on the T... which I don't believe I'll buy... even though I believe the T is brilliant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably sensor and image processor will develop excellent quality, incl. correction profiles. But one can't ignore that the sensor crops the angle of view. If you want a 35mm equivalent for the APS-C sensor you still have to buy the T 23/2 lens.

 

And in principle a Sony or Fuji mirrorless body with third-party image processing software can do the same for cheaper, but with focus peaking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No. It's not expensive to try him out for a year and then you can get the words straight from the horses mouth.

 

Also agree it was strange to use a discontinued camera to compare with the T. And he also often uses too many non-Leica lenses for comparison purposes and many of those are way down the list to many Leica owners. Guess it's what he has in his cupboard.

 

Sounds like I'll wait for Putz review.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

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.

 

I've used the NEX series, adapted to M lenses, since it's inception, in all kinds of real world situations.

 

I can understand the 15 giving you problems. I also understand the perceived tele performance. I have an adapted Elmarit 90 permanently attached a NEX-6 body.

 

I'm not sure what your expectations are (greater than one to one in Lightroom, because even that's TOO close), however, I highly doubt you're having "acceptable results" problems with the 2 aspherical lenses unless you're at f8. Those are two of the sharpest 35mm lenses ever created, and you're only dealing with the center portion of them. I have not experienced any sharpness issues that I could trace to any lens. Cheap adapters, sure. My own shortcomings as a the person controlling the camera, sure. Never the lens. Not to derail the thread, but I'd love to see these test shots.

 

If you're experiencing "shutter shock" with a NEX-6, you should incorporate it's electronic first curtain shutter.

Edited by Jaybob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have not experienced any sharpness issues that I could trace to any lens...

 

Meaning before before I settled (quite happily, I might add) on my current lens lineup, I have "NEX adapted" without issue the following moderate wides/and normal lenses, including the 28 Elmarit, 28 2.8 Rokkor, the 35 Summicron and LTM Summaron 3.5, a whole bunch of different 50s from Elmar, Summitar, several different Summicron, AND the 25 2.8 Zeiss,

 

It makes zero sense to me that any 28 or 50 (especially the 2 models you mentioned...) would be giving you sharpness issues on a Sony NEX or any other camera that you could fit them to.

Edited by Jaybob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've used the NEX series, adapted to M lenses, since it's inception, in all kinds of real world situations.

 

I can understand the 15 giving you problems. I also understand the perceived tele performance. I have an adapted Elmarit 90 permanently attached a NEX-6 body.

 

I'm not sure what your expectations are (greater than one to one in Lightroom, because even that's TOO close), however, I highly doubt you're having "acceptable results" problems with the 2 aspherical lenses unless you're at f8. Those are two of the sharpest 35mm lenses ever created, and you're only dealing with the center portion of them. I have not experienced any sharpness issues that I could trace to any lens. Cheap adapters, sure. My own shortcomings as a the person controlling the camera, sure. Never the lens. Not to derail the thread, but I'd love to see these test shots.

 

If you're experiencing "shutter shock" with a NEX-6, you should incorporate it's electronic first curtain shutter.

 

You can look at the raw files of M9 and NEX6 shots with 28mm cron ASPH @f5.6 here:

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/exlrp8pg2tkl0o6/xvV52LEzq5

 

The left and right side from NEX6 sensor is a mush. I can't use 28mm cron on NEX6 if I am shooting landscape and hope to print big.

 

Of course the longer lenses are superb. I do use electronic first curtain all the time. It is still clunky (in comparison) and I have to be careful. On a plus side you have 10fps which I can use for spray and pray.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I can use for spray and pray.

 

thats why Leica released new one for dripper and you get one drop

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I’m not planning to buy any T lens….

 

Hi Jaap,

 

If you are not planning to take advantage of AF lenses then are you going simply for a lighter body for M lens?

 

I am curious because for me the main advantage of T+23mm is getting my own picture taken in a dim restaurant by others.

 

With my M9 its not possible because i) others can't focus, ii) can't handhold steady for slow shutter speed and iii) not interested in handling an old "film" camera. I hope the stylish Leica T will change that.

Edited by jmahto

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's hard to confirm what you're saying from the examples you've uploaded. There's no detail in the sky, and at the bottom of the frame the grass is, well grass.

 

The corners and bottom on both cameras are mush, but I'm pretty sure that's a a depth of field issue especially if the buildings on the horizon are what you set the lens to focus on. If the lens is set to focus on infinity, or even hyper-focally, and the f stop is set to f4.8, or 5.6 no lens on earth would render everything at the front of the frame tack sharp.

 

It's not the lens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's hard to confirm what you're saying from the examples you've uploaded. There's no detail in the sky, and at the bottom of the frame the grass is, well grass.

 

The corners and bottom on both cameras are mush, but I'm pretty sure that's a a depth of field issue especially if the buildings on the horizon are what you set the lens to focus on. If the lens is set to focus on infinity, or even hyper-focally, and the f stop is set to f4.8, or 5.6 no lens on earth would render everything at the front of the frame tack sharp.

 

It's not the lens.

 

Look at the details on trees along the horizontal line. The one in NEX6 start getting mushy as you go towards left or right from the center. M9, in comparison keeps it sharp. For me there is visible difference at 1:1 view.

 

(Update: I did notice that when you compare the un-sharpened image then the difference is subtle. But after you sharpen both the same amount then the one from M9 appears much sharper with more detail. I do accept that it may be my bias that's why your feedback is useful to me).

 

Of course the close by flowers won't be sharp since the lens is focused to infinity.

 

I know its not the lens. I love this lens on M9 and its my primary lens. I am blaming NEX6 sensor that can't handle it.

Edited by jmahto

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Look at the details on trees along the horizontal line. The one in NEX6 start getting mushy as you go towards left or right from the center. M9, in comparison keeps it sharp. For me there is visible difference at 1:1 view.

 

(Update: I did notice that when you compare the un-sharpened image then the difference is subtle. But after you sharpen both the same amount then the one from M9 appears much sharper with more detail. I do accept that it may be my bias that's why your feedback is useful to me).

 

Of course the close by flowers won't be sharp since the lens is focused to infinity.

 

I know its not the lens. I love this lens on M9 and its my primary lens. I am blaming NEX6 sensor that can't handle it.

 

Please look at the 1:1 crops (first is M9). As I said, the un-sharpened ones have subtle differences but after sharpening is applied, M9's improves.

 

I should add that at f8 the NEX6 improves further.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do I see a difference? I don't think I see $3000 worth of difference, (M9 to NEX 6) retail, especially when you can use the CMOS NEX and still get killer RAW files with great color at 800 or 1600 at f2 or f1.4.

 

I do know I'd never actually shoot that landscape at 1000th at 5.6 with a 28mm lens, with the focus set on infinity, so the example is awkward.

 

I would like to see your test hyperfocally done, or done with something with less depth, and a more uniform subject matter, especially if you're talking about shooting the lens at f5.6 or f4, or wider.

 

I'm still not sure what to make of about your comments about the 50 ASPH giving you sharpness problems.

 

I think a better question to ask is the T going to provide $1200 worth of APS-C sized difference? $1200 plus a $300 T to M adapter and a $300 VF, and what ever the T-mount AF Summicron costs.

Edited by Jaybob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Applying sharpening to either image sort of defeats the purpose of a sharpness test.

 

I zeroed them out in LR, applied no lens corrections, no contrast or brightness adjustment, no noise reduction or sharpening and they both looked like they could use some help the farther away from the absolute center of the circle you traveled. I'm not a scientist, so I don't know how much of that is lens, sensor, flatness of the M to NEX adapter, or where the lens is focused.

 

I personally don't use a 28mm on my NEX anymore, I wasn't feeling it as a focal length, 35 is as wide as I go.

Edited by Jaybob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Do I see a difference? I don't think I see $3000 worth of difference, (M9 to NEX 6) retail, especially when you can use the CMOS NEX and still get killer RAW files with great color at 800 or 1600 at f2 or f1.4.

 

The price question can't be answered objectively (and for different individuals its different). As for me, I do shoot with NEX-6 and I like it (for what it is). I do know what its limitations are for me (and my shooting applications) and its ok with me.

 

Now, let me throw in AF in the mix. When I shoot with cheap 16-50zoom then the image degrades further, and I can only use it for casual shooting where I don't get too fussy (still get good pics though). If I want better AF lens then I need to buy big prime zeiss for $1000.

 

This is where Leica comparison comes (for me). I hope T+23mm lens gives me same compact system with great image quality in AF. Whether the $2500 difference is worth it or not... that is another question.

Edited by jmahto

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Applying sharpening to either image sort of defeats the purpose of the test.

 

I zeroed them out in LR, applied no lens corrections, no contrast or brightness adjustment, no noise reduction or sharpening and they both looked like they could use some help the farther away from the absolute center of the circle you traveled.

 

Yes, I agree. I mentioned that in my update to my earlier post.

 

But the processed pic comparison is useful to me because I could improve M9's but could not improve NEX6s. Of course $3000 difference is there but I am also shooting with $3000 lens on both (which is lopsided for NEX6 in price comparison).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah, I'm not trying to sound like sour grapes here, but why pick non-Leica lenses to compare how well the T works with our M lenses. My subscription has expired so I won't renew for this review because the lenses he used are way down the list of the lenses I'd be interested in on the T... which I don't believe I'll buy... even though I believe the T is brilliant.

 

I have to say the camera is appealing.

 

Having used M lenses on a NEX-5n and A7r, I do accept the advice (oft repeated here) that it is best to use lenses with the sensor designed for them. While my previous exercise was interesting, it was often just too much of a pain to be worth it.

 

It will be very interesting to see how the T camera performs with M lenses, especially those which were problematic with other cameras like the A7. Of my lenses, really only the Distagon 15/2.8 and (surprisingly) the Summicron 28 ASPH. I'm rather hopping these lenses will play well with the T sensor (they did with the NEX-5n).

 

So, think about it - small package which reads all your M lenses, and has a good midrange zoom, making the most of the AF when you want it.

 

Cheers

John

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we're on the same side here.

 

I have carefully chosen to use an adapted NEX-6 over the M9 because it works better for me and the way I shoot, mostly between 100 and 1600 iso. My clients dont look at ARW files at 1 to 1. I do process my files using the lens corrections in LR, and I do color balance for consistency. I don't use the E-mount AF lenses, or use strobes with the NEX. I let Nikon carry that bag.

 

In all honesty, I'm shooting more than half of the wedding day using film now. The deeper into summer I get, the less digital I will shoot. TMax 100, TMax 400, a smattering of 160 and 400 Kodak color neg, M6 for the 35, M3 for the 50 and the 90, and the F5 for 17-35 50 macro, 70-200, 105, and 300. My partner takes care of all the "real" shooting, and I just do what I want.

 

I don't share your enthusiasm for the T announcement. Three years ago, maybe. I already have that camera, and I can get a new one (NEX-6) for less than 500 dollars. Now, a full frame CL with the "M" CMOS sensor, no video, and the same lens mount, and a price point just a few clicks south of the M-E, that I coulda got behind.

Edited by Jaybob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...