Using R lenses on the SL w adapter

[ropo54]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Does it make a difference?

 

Should one buy the Leica R to SL adapter?

 

Or, buy the Leica R to M adapter (if one already has the M to SL adapter)?

 

Or, buy the Novaflex R to SL adapter?

 

Thanks,

Rob

[digitalfx]

I used the R-M + M-SL adapters and they work fine and are far less expensive.

The R-SL is very nice but its way over priced imo.

[Advertisement]

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

[ropo54]

I used the R-M + M-SL adapters and they work fine and are far less expensive.

The R-SL is very nice but its way over priced imo.

 

Thanks for that information.

Rob

[ramarren]

Here's how it falls out:

 

- The Novoflex R to SL adapter does not include the electronics and interface that allows access to the SL's R lens profiles. You really do want to take advantage of these.

 

- The two-adapter stack gives you access to both M lenses and R lenses with access to all of the lens profiles. With all R lenses, you have to select the lens profile manually, every time. The two adapter stack can vignette with some long telephoto lenses and with extreme extension for high magnification macro work due to the relatively small throat diameter of the M-mount. Unless this is a significant issue for you, it works very well with all R lenses that I'm aware of.

 

- The dedicated R Adapter SL has a much larger thoat diameter than the two adapter stack, which eliminates the vignetting of the two adapter stack. With R ROM equipped lenses, the lens is automatically identified by the SL body, it's name and other specifics are communicated into the EXIF, and the lens profile for it enabled. With non-ROM equipped lenses, you have to choose the lens profile manually just as with the two-adapter stack. Leica recommends not using one- and two-cam R lenses on the R Adapter SL for the same reasons they recommend not using them on Leica R8 and R9 bodies: potential damage to the electrical contacts. I don't know how likely this is, but I don't chance such things. Three-cam, R-Only, and ROM R lenses are all compatible, to the best of my knowledge.

 

I've been using the two-adapter stack since November of 2015. It's worked very well aside from the very occasional issue with vignetting when I'm doing 2.5:1 macro work or using my Nikon F mount 600mm lens on a Rayqual F to M adapter, on the M Adapter L.

 

BTW: The two adapter stack using Leica R Adapter M and M Adapter L is $790 at B&H, where the Leica R Adapter SL is $750.

Edited March 12, 2017 by ramarren

[ferdinand]

.... Leica recommends not using one- and two-cam R lenses on the R Adapter SL for the same reasons they recommend not using them on Leica R8 and R9 bodies: potential damage to the electrical contacts. I don't know how likely this is, but I don't chance such things. Three-cam, R-Only, and ROM R lenses are all compatible, to the best of my knowledge.

 

I never understand the Leica recommendation not using the 2 Cam R lenses with the R-L adapter. There is for the adapter no mechanical difference to 3 Cam R lenses. With R8/R9 and 2 Cam lenses is not a problem to damage the electrical contacts, the problem there is that the light meter doesn't work probably with 2 Cam lenses by missing the R-Cam

 

I started with the stacking version and now I'm using the R-L adapter and it is very comfortable.

[ropo54]

For anyone in the future looking at this thread, I found this list on the Adorama site of acceptable R lenses for the SL

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!

[taosantamonica]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

BTW: The two adapter stack using Leica R Adapter M and M Adapter L is $790 at B&H, where the Leica R Adapter SL is $750.

or 790 vs 1145 if you want to use both m and r lenses on the sl. I only use r and m lenses on the sl and I had the r to m for the mp240. Stacking has not been a problem at all with the 80 lux and 100 apo r's i have. I actually like the 80 lux better than my 75 lux on the sl

Edited March 12, 2017 by taosantamonica

[ramarren]

or 790 vs 1145 if you want to use both m and r lenses on the sl. I only use r and m lenses on the sl and I had the r to m for the mp240. Stacking has not been a problem at all with the 80 lux and 100 apo r's i have. I actually like the 80 lux better than my 75 lux on the sl

 

 

Yes: It depends on what your goal is.

 

I have used M lenses on the SL, but generally only use R lenses and SL lenses ... I use M lenses on the M-D. I bought the R Adapter M for the M-P typ 240 but found I never used it; I bought the M Adapter T (now L) when the SL came out ... that's why I have the two adapter stack. 

 

Having to do it all over again, I'd buy the R Adapter L for my R specialty lenses and use SL lenses otherwise. 

[John Black]

The 105-280mm had mechanical vignetting with the M/SL + R/M combo.  The 105-280mm also had vignetting with the R/M adapter on the M-P 240 as well.  

 

The 105-280 It did not have mechanical vignetting with Novoflex R / SL adapter.

[scott kirkpatrick]

One other feature: when the R-L adapter is used with some of the R zooms, the focal length in use is reported and will affect the minimum shutter speed in A or P modes if you ask it to be 1/f or 1/2f.  This works for both the 21-35 and the 35-70 macro, which are small, relatively inexpensive and quite nice in their rendering.

 

scott

[ferdinand]

Scott, with the R-L adapter the SL works with A and M only. But it's true, using A and ISO-Auto with 1/f or 1/2f the SL works fine with minimum shutter speed

[ramarren]

Scott, with the R-L adapter the SL works with A and M only. But it's true, using A and ISO-Auto with 1/f or 1/2f the SL works fine with minimum shutter speed

 

 

I think what Scott was pointing out is that with some of the R zooms, the focal length setting is reported dynamically, making the 1/f and 1/2f threshold limits of AutoISO more useful. For all adapted lenses, only A and M exposure modes are available unless the adapter gives the SL control of the aperture setting, I imagine. (I have no such adapters.)

[digitalfx]

BTW: The two adapter stack using Leica R Adapter M and M Adapter L is $790 at B&H, where the Leica R Adapter SL is $750.

 

 

 

The OP said he already had the M-L Adapter, so its 1/2 price to add the R-M.

 

Ive never experienced vignetting with the two adapters.

[Likaleica]

Rob, I got some vignetting with the combined adapters, which I don't get with the R Adapter SL, especially with lenses 90mm and longer.

[ramarren]

The OP said he already had the M-L Adapter, so its 1/2 price to add the R-M.

Ive never experienced vignetting with the two adapters.

 

 

Nothing wrong with saving a little money if you can. But with regard to the vignetting: I have, in the two circumstances I mentioned. That's why I mentioned it. 

[scott kirkpatrick]

The source of the vignetting with stacked adapters is the M throat diameter, which is less than the R throat.  It affects lenses that sit way out from the camera.  Has been reported, as Godfrey states, with fixed telephotos longer than 300mm,  extreme macro setups, and some older telephoto zooms.  But otherwise seems not to be a problem.

 

And, sorry, P mode is not available for adapted manual lenses.  But since the SL does allow auto ISO to function in M mode, knowing the focal length is a good idea.  Not all manufacturers enable auto ISO in M.  It's a philosophical debate, but has real consequences.

 

scott

Edited March 14, 2017 by scott kirkpatrick

[pnwyankee]

I am new here, gained entry with the purchase of a Leica Q just last week and I am already looking hard at the SL

In an effort to come down a bit from the size and weight of the SL with the 24-90mm, how do you think this lens would do on the SL with the Leica R to L adaptor?

Leica Vario-Elmar-R 35-70mm/F4.0 E60 ROM 

Thanks,

Bob

[jaapv]

Great lens; If you don't want AF I think it is an excellent choice.

[helged]

Great lens; If you don't want AF I think it is an excellent choice.

 

 

+1.

 

I am new here, gained entry with the purchase of a Leica Q just last week and I am already looking hard at the SL

In an effort to come down a bit from the size and weight of the SL with the 24-90mm, how do you think this lens would do on the SL with the Leica R to L adaptor?

Leica Vario-Elmar-R 35-70mm/F4.0 E60 ROM 

Thanks,

Bob

 

Yes, the Leica 35-70 R f4, as well as it's cousin Zeiss Contax Vario-Sonnar 35-70/3.4, are great lens(es). The zooms are not at the optical perfection of the SL 24-90, but they are still very, very fine. And both lenses work beautifully on the SL. No problem at all. Certainly two smaller, lighter and (much) less expensive alternatives to the native SL zoom.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[Guest VVJ]

I am new here, gained entry with the purchase of a Leica Q just last week and I am already looking hard at the SL

In an effort to come down a bit from the size and weight of the SL with the 24-90mm, how do you think this lens would do on the SL with the Leica R to L adaptor?

Leica Vario-Elmar-R 35-70mm/F4.0 E60 ROM 

Thanks,

Bob

 

If money is no objection I would encourage you go for the 24-90mm... optically perfect, very versatile zoom reach, excellent AF, image stabilization and very well balanced on the SL.