Novoflex adapter for SL

[dkCambridgeshire]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Thank you scott - i will probably attempt to '6 bit' my Novoflex LEM/LER adapter with a view to using it with the M to T adapter on an SL - the code appears to be 2 black, 1 white and 3 black. 

 

Best wishes

 

dunk

[steppenw0lf]

Which are the great R lenses? Looking at the MTFs suggests that the lenses are, in general, not up to the latest standards, although the may be better than M lenses of the same vintage. 

 

Adapters usually degrade image quality, although it may be hard to tell. A pair of the, stacked, sounds precarious. 

 

 

Hello jrp,

 

I am also a bit surprised, but the combination of stacked adapters works perfectly, no complains whatsoever. (Maybe for extremely long lenses, that I do not use).

 

Regarding the quality of R-lenses it is of course mixed:

 

The primes are generally excellent, but if you expect to use any lens under any circumstances at largest aperture then that's nonsense. (That only works with the latest M summiluxes with aspherical lenses, at a price of 5K dollars and higher per lens - most R-lenses were never so expensive).

There are exceptions like the Apo Macro Elmarit 100 which is the "best" lens I ever owned. Any of the R Apos are almost perfect.

 

The zooms are naturally a different story -  the older zooms are typically a compromise and so you need to know them to make best use of them.

The very expensive zooms I have never owned so maybe that's a different story, I don't know. (meaning they are maybe close to perfection)

 

But generally, you use R lenses (like the older M lenses) with a different purpose - sometimes you even use some "errors" to "enhance the fotos" in special ways.

 

Actually, I think that MTF diagrams are generally most of the time misunderstood, and are nowadays mainly a marketing argument, that should not be used by (mathematical) laymen, sorry to be so frank.

 

Stephan

[scott kirkpatrick]

Which are the great R lenses? Looking at the MTFs suggests that the lenses are, in general, not up to the latest standards, although the may be better than M lenses of the same vintage. 

 

Adapters usually degrade image quality, although it may be hard to tell. A pair of the, stacked, sounds precarious. 

 

Roger Cicala's article shows the issues that arise with noname low price adapters, and maybe with better ones, but you should note that his measurements were done on a very highly precise optical bench, with the error threshold set extremely tight. His concern is surfaces that are not perfectly parallel.  Stacked Leica and Novoflex adapters seem to work fine.  As for R lenses ...

 

I have never owned an R body, but I am enthusiastic about R lenses on the SL.  The APO telephotos (100 to 280 mm) are probably the best primes ever made in those focal lengths.  The extreme wide angle 15 mm lenses have not really been outdone since. Guy Mancuso (at GetDPI) speaks highly of his 19 mm, although owners of the Leica M 18, 16/18/21 (WATE) and 21 SEM might disagree.  In the midrange, the R primes are similar in design philosophy to the last generation of pre-aspherical M primes, a generation which is highly regarded.  Perhaps because the R lenses had less size constraints, they are sometimes thought to be superior, but this is to be argued over a glass of your favorite beverage.  I particularly like the 80 Summilux-R.  Wide open it draws cleanly and smoothly, a few stops down it is as sharp and detailed as any other lens I own.  I think you will find that is the general pattern for the R primes designed in the 1980's.  The two macros in the R line have interesting differences.  The 100 is a fine technical instrument, with a very shallow depth of field while the 60 is sharp on center and a little softer around the edges, and being shorter takes less effort to focus close.  So you might prefer the 60 for flowers and the 100 for fine watches or semiconductor components...

 

scott

[steppenw0lf]

Hello,

 

I use the R lenses with the stacked adapters from Leica - works perfectly for me.

Now I wonder: Should I also use Canon and Nikon lenses with this combination ? Meaning using a Canon to M and Nikon to M adapter ?

Or is the recommendation to use a single adapter Nikon to T or Canon to T ? 

 

The Canon and Nikon lenses cannot be corrected by the camera anyway, so I do not lose this capability with the single adapter. On the other side, I could try to use a similar R lens for correction settings ...

 

If I bought for example new Zeiss lenses (2/135), should I buy them in Nikon mount ? Or is there a better possibility ?

 

Any recommendations, experiences ?

 

Thanks        Stephan

[ramarren]

Hello,

 

I use the R lenses with the stacked adapters from Leica - works perfectly for me.

Now I wonder: Should I also use Canon and Nikon lenses with this combination ? Meaning using a Canon to M and Nikon to M adapter ?

Or is the recommendation to use a single adapter Nikon to T or Canon to T ? 

 

The Canon and Nikon lenses cannot be corrected by the camera anyway, so I do not lose this capability with the single adapter. On the other side, I could try to use a similar R lens for correction settings ...

 

If I bought for example new Zeiss lenses (2/135), should I buy them in Nikon mount ? Or is there a better possibility ?

 

Any recommendations, experiences ?

 

Thanks        Stephan

 

 

As long as you have good quality adapters, a single adapter is fine and generally preferable to a double adapter setup. If I didn't have the SL, I prefer Nikons to Canons so I'd use Nikon lenses and adapter. (BTW, I presume you are talking about Canon FL/FD series lenses; EF lenses are a pain to use on anything other than an EOS body because of the electronically actuated iris mechanism.)

 

 

I already had most of the R lenses I'm using when I bought the SL (and three film bodies to use them on).  I bought the SL because using those lenses on other digital bodies wasn't to my liking. I had decided that if I were going to go with adapted lenses, I was going to stick with Leica R ... and added a couple more after I had the SL. The lens kit I have now is as complete as I expect I'll ever need so I haven't experimented with my Nikkors on the SL. 

[mmx_2]

Thank you scott - i will probably attempt to '6 bit' my Novoflex LEM/LER adapter with a view to using it with the M to T adapter on an SL - the code appears to be 2 black, 1 white and 3 black. 

 

Best wishes

 

dunk

Otherwise you can send it to Will manen in Holland and have him do it.

[Jeff S]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Lots of people seem interested in this topic.....except the OP.  

 

Jeff

[wildlightphoto]

The Canon and Nikon lenses cannot be corrected by the camera anyway, so I do not lose this capability with the single adapter. On the other side, I could try to use a similar R lens for correction settings ...

 

Using a lens profile for a similar R lens may be useful for telling the camera what focal length is in use for program exposure modes, but I wouldn't expect that distortion, chromatic aberration or light fall-off corrections for an R lens would be suitable for any other lens.

[Waterden]

Could anyone kindly enlighten me as to whether a firmware update has occurred which allows users of Novoflex R-L and M-L adapters to manually choose the relevant R or M lens profile? I understand that the list was initially greyed out. Then I read somewhere that this block was removed but that making the appropriate selection appeared to have no effect either on the file adjustment or in the EXIF data.

 

I am thinking of buying a Leica SL for use principally with my R lenses but feel that Leica's own R-L adapter is ungenerously priced, being 5 or 6 times that of the Novoflex.