Leica R-Adapter L Now Available

[Leicaiste]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The way I have understood how a ROM lens works; is the ROM in the lens tells the R camera what aperture the lens is set at

It is the R cam which does that on the R3 to R9.

 

ROM gives more information but not that one.

 

That is why the SL will still have to guess the aperture even with ROM lenses.

[thebarnman]

It is the R cam which does that on the R3 to R9.

 

ROM gives more information but not that one.

 

That is why the SL will still have to guess the aperture even with ROM lenses.

 

 

Thanks for the clarification. 

 

I bet the SL does a great job of figuring out the aperture settings of R ROM lenses attached to it; unless of course we start hearing complaints from those who use R ROM lenses on their SL bodies.       

 

If there's to be any concern at all...it would be what fraction of adjustment; of one stop; for a given f-stop; the exposure meter on the SL would have to compensate.  The answer would either be none (depending on the R ROM lens,) or a tiny bit of a fraction of a given f-stop (in time exposure compensation.)

 

I'm not even sure if the difference (of lets say 1/4 of one stop) would be noticeable, and even less (to no difference at all) if the compensation called for 1/8th of one stop correction or less.   Even if there is a visible difference of what a exposure looks like being 1/4 of one stop off; if the light meter in the SL can detect the difference (of 1/4 of one stop,) and compensate for it; I don't see any reason for anyone to have any concern using R ROM lenses with the SL system thinking there's going to be incorrect exposure issues. 

 

The varying light levels (brightness) on most computer screens; smart phones, and other display devices; is much greater, and that's the medium most people will view such images. 

[LD_50]

Thanks for the clarification. 

 

I bet the SL does a great job of figuring out the aperture settings of R ROM lenses attached to it; unless of course we start hearing complaints from those who use R ROM lenses on their SL bodies.       

 

If there's to be any concern at all...it would be what fraction of adjustment; of one stop; for a given f-stop; the exposure meter on the SL would have to compensate.  The answer would either be none (depending on the R ROM lens,) or a tiny bit of a fraction of a given f-stop (in time exposure compensation.)

 

I'm not even sure if the difference (of lets say 1/4 of one stop) would be noticeable, and even less (to no difference at all) if the compensation called for 1/8th of one stop correction or less.   Even if there is a visible difference of what a exposure looks like being 1/4 of one stop off; if the light meter in the SL can detect the difference (of 1/4 of one stop,) and compensate for it; I don't see any reason for anyone to have any concern using R ROM lenses with the SL system thinking there's going to be incorrect exposure issues. 

 

The varying light levels (brightness) on most computer screens; smart phones, and other display devices; is much greater, and that's the medium most people will view such images.

 

The guessed aperture value is not at all relevant to the exposure. You can cover the sensor used for the aperture reading and nothing changes in the exposure parameters (in Aperture priority with Auto-ISO the shutter speed and ISO will not change. With fixed ISO the shutter speed won't change. In Manual mode the meter reading does not change.)

[LocalHero1953]

Guessing the aperture is the same as the M has used for years, and as the SL has used with non-SL lenses since it came out. It can typically be around 0.5-1 stop out. Annoying, but not mission critical - it makes no difference to the shot, just the EXIF.

[scott kirkpatrick]

The aperture is guessed by comparing the exposure reading inside the camera with the reading from a fixed angle of view window outside the camera (the "blue spot" on an M, the tiny rectangular window on an SL).  With spot metering inside, and a wide angle lens, the errors can be large.  With longer focal lengths, and center-weighted (traditional) metering, the differences are usually within a stop.  In low light, the reading that shows up in the EXIF is often just the firmware's statement of the lens maximum opening, and that is sometimes entered in error, showing up as1.0, for example.  Fixing that sort of data is low priority, and has been attended to only when a model is several years old in the past.

 

scott

[Sandokan]

Does this adaptor transmit a ROM lens information (focal length and camera's estimated aperture used) to the EXIF?

 

The Leica R-M + M-SL adapter, I do not think it does but I know for sure that with Novoflex adaptors (R-SL, plus others) where I manually choose the R lens (or equivalent), the EXIF just says "Unknown Lens". Reminds me of the DMR which had the same issue with EXIF and lens data (ROM lenses). Anyone else confirm this?

[masjah]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm interested in the possible use of the 28/2.8 PC shift lens on the SL. The lens has a vestigial fixed cam simply to zero the metering appropriately for stop down metering on the R system, and works on the SL, SL2 and R film cameras including the R8 and R9. Therefore the cam does not interfere with or damage the R8/R9 camera ROM contact receptors. I don't see therefore why it should cause any damage to the similar receptors on the new R to SL adapter, but I would like confirmation of this! Certainly I also know that the lens can be used on the M240 via the R - M adapter, so the "two stacked adapter" solution presumably would also work.

 

Please note that I'm only talking of physical compatibility here. I appreciate that this lens is not on the M240 camera R lens list, nor on the R supported SL list, and that it would be (a) impossible to communicate any data and ( meaningless to do so, since any in camera corrections would be totally dependent on the precise shift being employed.

 

Has anyone yet tried it?

[kikouyou]

I tried the 28mmPC on the SL with the 2 Leica adaptors stacked. It works without any issue and the lens can be chosen from the list of R lenses.

[masjah]

I tried the 28mmPC on the SL with the 2 Leica adaptors stacked. It works without any issue and the lens can be chosen from the list of R lenses.

 

Thank you kikouyou - that's good to know. (It's not included in the R-lens list menu on the M240.) I would hope that its inclusion on the SL R-lens menu list would imply that it's physically OK to use this lens with the recently available "single" adapter.

[kikouyou]

I cannot comment on that as i do not have the R to L adaptor. I have been using this lens on the M240 without problem and it was also on the list of R lenses on the 240

[masjah]

I cannot comment on that as i do not have the R to L adaptor. I have been using this lens on the M240 without problem and it was also on the list of R lenses on the 240

That is odd. It's not in my M240 list! There is a 28/2.8 on my list, but it's the standard non shift lens. The PC lens has code 11812 whereas the one in my menu is 11259/11333.

[kikouyou]

Oops you are correct, That is exactly what I can see on the M, my memory is failing me

So I double checked on the SL and there is the same menu as the M plus a TS28 f/2.8 R 11812 which is the proper one even if they call it TS

[masjah]

Oops you are correct, That is exactly what I can see on the M, my memory is failing me

So I double checked on the SL and there is the same menu as the M plus a TS28 f/2.8 R 11812 which is the proper one even if they call it TS

Fine! That's still good news so far as the PC lens on the SL is concerned. Many thanks for looking.

[helged]

Can't see that this issue - http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/262711-leica-r-adapter-l-now-available/?p=3082438 - has been addressed (yet), but please chime in if there is anyone out there...

[AlanYWM]

Does this adaptor transmit a ROM lens information (focal length and camera's estimated aperture used) to the EXIF?

 

The Leica R-M + M-SL adapter, I do not think it does but I know for sure that with Novoflex adaptors (R-SL, plus others) where I manually choose the R lens (or equivalent), the EXIF just says "Unknown Lens". Reminds me of the DMR which had the same issue with EXIF and lens data (ROM lenses). Anyone else confirm this?[4/quote]

 

The R to L adapter does provide information such as focal length and the lens identification. I think this information is useful for len correction within the SL. It can do this because unlike the R to M adapter, the R to L adapter has electronic connectors to communicate with the R lenses with ROM.

[thebarnman]

So the only information missing from the R to L adapter would be the aperture setting.  As said above, the worst it would be off is by one stop?  Well then; with histograms...a quick test shot would be able to tell you if your at least capturing all the information.  And if not; a quick shutter adjustment should do the trick...at least on images considered critical, or very important.

[scott kirkpatrick]

The aperture setting is estimated inside the camera by comparing an eternal light level reading with the exposure seen inside the camera (however you set it up).  It helps the camera to know what lens is installed, since that tells it the maximum aperture available.  But the value that the camera comes up with can be very far off, especially with very short or very long focal lengths.  Anyway, this is relevant for your Exif, but irrelevant for the camera's choice of exposure (shutter speed or ISO selection), which only depends on the internal measurement.

 

scott

[thebarnman]

Hi Scott,

 

According to AlanYMW, "The R to L adapter does provide information such as focal length and the lens identification."  If that's the case (besides correct Exif information being far off  as you mention...) it seems the actual exposure would be very accurate based from (as you said) the eternal light level reading with the exposure seen inside the camera. 

 

I'm not familiar with the SL, however it would seem something would have to be compromised (automatically by the camera) to get proper exposure when the SL "sees" the amount of light traveling through the lens; in order to get a correct exposure.

[scott kirkpatrick]

All the Ms since the M7 (perhaps a bit earlier) had internal metering.  That's all you need to advise (with match needles or whatever) or to automatically set the exposure.  That works well if you avoid severe backlighting.  

 

But if you need to guess what aperture the lens is set at, in order to write it to the EXIF or display it for review on the LCD, the M8 and subsequent digital Ms, as well as the SL, add an external light level sensor and compare.  That has always been a SWAG.  I haven't heard that the R to L adapter passes aperture settings to the SL.  Since the R film cameras didn't need that information, I find it unlikely that the R lenses provide the information at their ROM interface.  The focal length information on Vario-lenses is provided because the R8 and R9 flashes needed to zoom the angle at which their light spreads out to match the focal length in use.

 

scott 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[thebarnman]

I haven't heard that the R to L adapter passes aperture settings to the SL.  Since the R film cameras didn't need that information, I find it unlikely that the R lenses provide the information at their ROM interface.

 

scott 

 

I don't think the R to L adapter passes aperture settings to the SL.  According to  AlanYMW; it's the focal length and the lens identification that gets passed.

 

On the other hand; I don't know what happens when a R lens is stopped down when connected to a R to L adapter.  On a R body; a R lens's aperture blades stay open regardless of the aperture setting on the R lens...that is till the shutter is pressed.  I can only guess a R lens on a R to L adapter continuously activates the aperture blades (since that is a mechanical action) so the correct amount of light travels to the SL sensor when the shutter is pressed.