Third party telephoto on M240

[Likaleica]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I was very disappointed with my Nikkor 80-200 f/2.8. These were just a couple of test shots.

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!

[farnz]

I was very disappointed with my Nikkor 80-200 f/2.8. These were just a couple of test shots.

Have you got a hood or a deep filter on the front that's causing the vignetting?

 

Pete.

[Advertisement]

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

[Likaleica]

The hood was on, but it has never caused vignetting with the Nikon camera. Think it might with the Leica?

[CheshireCat]

The hood was on, but it has never caused vignetting with the Nikon camera. Think it might with the Leica?

 

Seems a problem with the adaptor.

[jaapv]

It is certainly with the adapter. The vignetting is exactly the same as the old Leicina adapter produces on some long lenses.

[250swb]

 

135mm Nikkor f/2.8 SQ on Leica M

 

As sharp as my 135mm Tele Elmar, but a beast to hand hold on the M unlike it's better handling on a Nikon F. This photo was made using a tripod. The upside was it cost £65 on Ebay (immaculate condition) plus a Chinese adapter for £5. The lesson, there is no free lunch, but sometimes there is a cheaper lunch.

 

Steve

[henning]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have a couple of longer lenses I use on various cameras. One is the 280/4 Apo-Telyt, which is of course excellent on any camera but stupidly expensive now. It's also heavy, like most Leica R lenses. However, when I was looking for a high quality and fairly compact 180-200mm lens for use on both the M240 and m43 cameras, I managed to get a 180/4 Apo-Lanthar that Cosina made. It is usually seen in a Nikon mount, but for my purposes the original mount is irrelevant and I found one in an M42 mount.

 

When adapted to Leica M it is all of 98mm long from front of lens to mounting flange. This is a fair bit less than that of the Apo-Telyt 180/3.4, the only other lens that comes close to the performance of the Apo-Lanthar. At long distances the Apo-Lanthat and Apo-telyt seem pretty much equivalent, but the Apo-Lanthar pulls ahead significantly as you focus closer, and can it ever focus close - 1.2m without IF, so it still is actually 180mm when focussed at 1.2m

 

A very practical lens, and outstanding optically.

 

I tried a variety of other lenses, and most were found rather wanting. The 180 f/4 Elmar is not a lot larger than the Apo-Lanthar, but is unfortunately quite poor optically, as are the various 180/2.8 Nikkors and non-Apo Leicas. The 80-200/4 Leica is somewhat better, but neither in the same class nor particularly compact. I have a micro-Nikkor f/4 manual focus that I bought new when it first came out, and while it performs about as well as the 80-200 Leica it is hardly compact but focusses extremely close.

 

Henning

[Likaleica]

It is certainly with the adapter. The vignetting is exactly the same as the old Leicina adapter produces on some long lenses.

 

I hope not, because it is the Novoflex.

Edited December 8, 2014 by Likaleica

[Likaleica]

 

135mm Nikkor f/2.8 SQ on Leica M

 

As sharp as my 135mm Tele Elmar, but a beast to hand hold on the M unlike it's better handling on a Nikon F. This photo was made using a tripod. The upside was it cost £65 on Ebay (immaculate condition) plus a Chinese adapter for £5. The lesson, there is no free lunch, but sometimes there is a cheaper lunch.

 

Steve

 

Outstanding photograph!

[Likaleica]

I must have had my gizmo hooked up wrong the first go round. Tried the Novoflex and Nikkor this morning and it behaved much better.

[bocaburger]

I just ordered the Leica adapter today, found it for $285 and free shipping, the best price I've seen on it so far. I have a Novoflex (coded) I got used for $150 but I really want the tripod collar to use with my 70-210R. I may sell the Novoflex, or perhaps keep it mounted on my 400/6.8 which has its own tripod collar.

[wlaidlaw]

I have the 300/f4 Contax Tele Tessar. It is an OK lens and is certainly better than either the series 2 or 3 Telyt 280 Visoflex lenses I had. However it is an old design dating back to the 1960's Contarex and things have moved on a lot since then. You can extend it with both the Mutar II plus Mutar I 2X extenders to arrive at a 1200mm lens but this really is quite soft. The Contax 100-300 Vario Sonnar, albeit a half stop slower, is a substantially better performer than the Tele Tessars and was one of the final Zeiss-Contax manual focus designs, dating from the mid 1990's. The Novoflex LEM-CONT adapter is a beautifully made piece of kit.

 

The problem is that all manual focus telephotos are now getting old compared with modern auto focus designs other than the eye-wateringly expensive APO Leica R lenses. These bear comparison with any auto focus telephoto lenses.

 

I find it quite difficult to focus long tele's with the M240 unless on a tripod. If I want a long telephoto for general use, particularly for moving subjects, I tend to opt for my auto focus Olympus EP-5 with a modern 75-300mm M-Zuiko Digital (150-600mm EFOV).

 

Wilson

[John Black]

I have spent much time trying to find a 180mm-200mm SLR prime to use with the Leica M-240. My experience is similar to some of the other posts here -

 

(a) Composition and focus is difficult - zooming into 5x or 10x is a very small portion of the overall image, so the focus point has to be perfectly centered in the frame. If shooting a landscape at F8 and focus can be close to infinity, this is not much of a problem. If aiming for a portrait and wanting to use F2.8 - life gets difficult. If the subject is off-center - best of luck.

 

( Shaky EVF view - handheld use is challenging. The most comfortable way I've found is to use a tripod with the EVF, and then having the EVF angled upwards around 45º. With the tripod raised to around eye level and the EVF angled upwards, it is pretty comfortable position. Handheld shooting has proven difficult and not enjoyable (from my perspective).

 

© Shutter lag - this is very noticeable with the EVF, a little less so with live view. With Live View I'm generally taking landscape pictures, so the shutter lag is less of an issue. With the EVF, I'm generally trying to take pictures of something - an object, an animal, a person, etc. The shutter lag is challenging because if hoping to get a precise moment (like an expression), then about 1 second of anticipation is needed. Also, if shooting handheld, I tend to move the camera because normally the shot process is near instantaneous. Whereas with LV/EVF on the M-240 it's click, pause for a moment, wait for shutter sounds, etc. It's a different rhythm or cadence of shooting.

 

(d) Bag weight - most of these older SLR primes are in the 1.5 to 2.0 pound range. That's not very heavy, but adding a 2 pound lens to bag that typically houses 3-4 small M lenses, the additional carry weight of the 200mm prime is quite noticeable (plus the weight of the adapter). I doubt this is deal-breaker for most people, but it is something to consider when deciding on bag size and carry weight.

 

(e) Lens performance - this is a very subjective area and a thumbs up or thumbs down is wholly dependent on one's expectations. I've tried the Canon 135mm F2 FD (last version), Canon 200mm F2.8 FD IF (last version), Leica 180mm F2.8 Elmarit-R (e67), Olympus 100mm F4 Zuiko and some Contax primes with the 2X Mutar. It terms of getting bokeh and reach, all lenses succeeded to varying degrees. Chromatic aberrations were an issue on most lenses. Many of these lenses were 20 years old and the optical performance (while respectable) does not match the caliber of my other gear. Not a deal breaker per-se, but given the added level of effort, the capture quality was not reciprocative of the effort needed (my opinion).

 

For now my solution is a Leica 135mm F3.4 APO. With its high resolution, a moderate crop to around 12 MP is an easier way to mimic 200mm reach and have a respectable file. Though, the bokeh isn't there like it would be a 200mm F2.8 lens shot at F2.8.

[Likaleica]

I've gone back to test my Nikkor 70-200 f/2/8 and 200-400 f/4 lenses again with better results. Particularly, the 200-400. Here is a shot off my porch just to test resolution on the chicken wire, grey tones, etc. This was shot wide open. Adding the 2x apo extender resulted in significant loss of sharpness and contrast.

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!

[jaapv]

It may well be that a Nikon extender works better.

Edited December 15, 2014 by jaapv

[bocaburger]

I figured he was using a Nikon F-Leica M adapter, so I was puzzled as to how a Leica teleconverter wouldn't even fit.

[Likaleica]

Really doable. Anxious to use this combination with wildlife.

[Daniel Beacock]

Hi, I had the 1.2/85L for many years and sold it some years ago. Now I'm missing this nice lens. How does it work on the M240 ?

 

Sorry, only just seen this. I think it works great and I'm really enjoying it. Here's some shots from a walk on London's South Bank last Sunday.

 

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!

[Berlinman]

Thanks, very nice pics. I got a 75lux and wait that it comes back from the Leica service.. Hpoe that it will have a similar look. But if I can catch a 85L some day, I will do :-)

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[jaques]

there are many old vintage SLR lenses that will fit the bill. Get an MD Rokkor 135mm and a few 2x, 3x teleconverters. Minolta lenses are very cheap nowadays as they haven't translated into digital mounts like pentax, nikon, etc.