saxo Posted April 29, 2017 Share #21 Posted April 29, 2017 Advertisement (gone after registration) ... I am using Photo Shop and ACR. When stacking original M-L with either original R-M or any dumb SLR-M, R lenses can be selected or in case of dumb adaptor I have an option to select M lens manually. In both cases lens data is displayed in Exif. Sorry, but you confuse me.... I'm just talking about the dumb novoflex LET/LER Adapter, this adapter allows to use the SL with R lenses. In this case, there is no lens data written in EXIF, even when you select manually the lens in the menu. IMHO there is no lens correction. If you want a lens correction you must spend 500 EUR extra to get the original Leica adapter (which is presumably manufactured by novoflex too). Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted April 29, 2017 Posted April 29, 2017 Hi saxo, Take a look here Leica R adapter -- just a tube?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
mmradman Posted April 29, 2017 Share #22 Posted April 29, 2017 Sorry, but you confuse me.... I'm just talking about the dumb novoflex LET/LER Adapter, this adapter allows to use the SL with R lenses. In this case, there is no lens data written in EXIF, even when you select manually the lens in the menu. IMHO there is no lens correction. If you want a lens correction you must spend 500 EUR extra to get the original Leica adapter (which is presumably manufactured by novoflex too). Yes we are talking dumb adaptors for attaching SLR lenses, either Leica R or other SLR makes. If camera allows you to select lens in the menu than selected lens ought to be recorded in Exif, at least that is my experience with M240/246 and SL601 and Adobe PS and ACR, I don't use Lightroom. If you can't see lens data in your Exif which post processing software do you use, maybe that is cause of your problems? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
saxo Posted April 29, 2017 Share #23 Posted April 29, 2017 (edited) ... If you can't see lens data in your Exif which post processing software do you use, maybe that is cause of your problems? I use lightroom. But already the picture viewed on the camera display shows no lens data, but only when using the dumb novoflex adapter with R-lenses. Using M lenses with the original Leica M adapter, lens data are written in EXIF, even if selected manually, when using coded lenses. And EXIF date are written for all SL-lenses of course. Edited April 29, 2017 by saxo 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mmradman Posted April 29, 2017 Share #24 Posted April 29, 2017 I use lightroom. But already the picture viewed on the camera display shows no lens data, but only when using the dumb novoflex adapter with R-lenses. Using M lenses with the original Leica M adapter, lens data are written in EXIF, even if selected manually, when using coded lenses. And EXIF date are written for all SL-lenses of course. Confusion is mutual. We should know a bit more once Helged replies to my post #20. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
saxo Posted April 30, 2017 Share #25 Posted April 30, 2017 (edited) ...... When stacking original M-L with either original R-M or any dumb SLR-M, ..... I see the point: you are stacking original Leica M-L adapter and a further adapter to use R-lenses with the Leica SL. The latter is dumb. I talk about a stand alone adapter, the novoflex LET/LER adapter as written above, and according to the thread title. But your situation is different. You stack. This may explaine why it works for you and not for me. Edited April 30, 2017 by saxo Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandokan Posted April 30, 2017 Share #26 Posted April 30, 2017 I was about to disagree with Saxo, but upon checking he is correct. With Novoflex (dumb) adaptor; even if you choose the R or M Lens in the menu, it does not import the lens profile into Lightroom. With the Leica SL to M adaptor (electronics) it auto detects coded lenses but even manually chosen lenses have their data written and imported into Lightroom. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott kirkpatrick Posted April 30, 2017 Share #27 Posted April 30, 2017 Advertisement (gone after registration) It may have been said already in this thread, but the Leica M to SL adapter reads the 6-bit codes, and the Leica R to M adapter is coded to identify itself as an R to M adapter. I have a Novoflex adapter that has been milled and painted to present the same code, and it also allows me to select an R lens and have it be recorded in the EXIF. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
saxo Posted April 30, 2017 Share #28 Posted April 30, 2017 It may have been said already in this thread, but the Leica M to SL adapter reads the 6-bit codes, and the Leica R to M adapter is coded to identify itself as an R to M adapter. I have a Novoflex adapter that has been milled and painted to present the same code, and it also allows me to select an R lens and have it be recorded in the EXIF. You stack as well. This situation is different. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mmradman Posted April 30, 2017 Share #29 Posted April 30, 2017 Everybody, please read post #11. According to Helged who is using Novoflex dumb R-SL adaptor it is possible to manually select the lens. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandokan Posted May 1, 2017 Share #30 Posted May 1, 2017 Everybody, please read post #11. According to Helged who is using Novoflex dumb R-SL adaptor it is possible to manually select the lens. Yes, we all agree with that. As i said "With Novoflex (dumb) adaptor; even if you choose the R or M Lens in the menu..." HOWEVER - this information is not imparted to Lightroom. I have not looked at the EXIF in the RAW, but I doubt it is there otherwise Lightroom would have it (?). 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramarren Posted May 3, 2017 Share #31 Posted May 3, 2017 Since with a dumb adapter you can select a lens profile ... M or R ... the fact of whether it is affecting the raw data or injecting lens correction parameters is separable from the fact of whether it is populating the EXIF data. Since the camera allows you to choose a profile, I would expect that it should do both, and that it doesn't do one or the other is a bug that should be noted and sent to Leica for eventual action. It would be good to verify precisely what is happening. Set up the camera on a tripod or other fixed support, set it to DNG only, a manual white balance, manual exposure, manual focus, and set exposure on a 'standard' scene (anything will do), set the lens profile to OFF, and make an exposure after focusing. Then set the lens profile to any profile and make another exposure with the exact same settings, without moving the camera. Now you have two raw exposures which for all intents and purposes should be identical except for the time/date stamps and the fact that one was configured with the lens profiles off and the other with the lens profiles on. You can use an EXIF editor like EXIFtool to extract all the EXIF data in the file and then do a text comparison to see exactly what changed; that's one test. You can then import both exposures into LR and compare the two images by flipping back and forth between them to see what if anything changed. If you see changes, you an use the point tone curve to highlight and exaggerate them (make the same adjustments to both) to see if the selection of a lens profile modified any raw data. (Or put the two files on a web server without modifying them (put them into a zip archive), send me a link to them, and I'll do it for you. ) It would be good to find out if there is a problem and tell Leica about it. I can't do the test myself since I have no 'dumb' converters. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cpclee Posted September 14, 2017 Share #32 Posted September 14, 2017 I'm still confused about this thread. But it does seem that if one wants proper lens profiles applied / EXIF data recorded, then stacking a Leica branded M->SL with a Leica branded R->M adapter beats the Novoflex R->SL adapter. But the stacking approach can vignette for some (wider) lenses because the diameter of the M mount is narrower. Is this an accurate summary? If I want only to use 50mm and longer, then I suppose stacking does no harm? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tritentrue Posted September 14, 2017 Share #33 Posted September 14, 2017 I use the Leica R-Adapter-M stacked with the M-Adapter-T with my R 21-35mm and at 21mm I see no sign of vignetting. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramarren Posted September 15, 2017 Share #34 Posted September 15, 2017 I'm still confused about this thread. But it does seem that if one wants proper lens profiles applied / EXIF data recorded, then stacking a Leica branded M->SL with a Leica branded R->M adapter beats the Novoflex R->SL adapter. But the stacking approach can vignette for some (wider) lenses because the diameter of the M mount is narrower. Is this an accurate summary? If I want only to use 50mm and longer, then I suppose stacking does no harm? The vignetting appears mostly with long telephoto lenses, not with wide lenses, where the exit pupil is a good ways in front of the M Adapter L. Or with extreme lens extension for high-magnification macro work. I work with the Leica Super-Elmar-R 15mm f/3.5 and Elmarit-R 19mm f/2.8 v1 on the two adapter stack. No vignetting is apparent that isn't also apparent on the Leica R bodies for which the lens was originally designed. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tritentrue Posted September 15, 2017 Share #35 Posted September 15, 2017 SL with R-Adapter-M, M-Adapter-T, 180mm f/2.8 APO-Elmarit-R, APO-Extender-R 2X stacked with APO-Extender-R 1.4X, uncropped, resized only . . . 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! 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/271825-leica-r-adapter-just-a-tube/?do=findComment&comment=3359346'>More sharing options...
cpclee Posted September 15, 2017 Share #36 Posted September 15, 2017 Thanks I'm glad that I asked. If with long lenses stacking will vignette that isn't going to work for me. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramarren Posted September 15, 2017 Share #37 Posted September 15, 2017 SL with R-Adapter-M, M-Adapter-T, 180mm f/2.8 APO-Elmarit-R, APO-Extender-R 2X stacked with APO-Extender-R 1.4X, uncropped, resized only . . . I don't get that amount of corner fall-off with the 180mm alone, but putting the extender behind it moves the exit pupil further forward of the M Adapter L. That's what causes the shading. If you're a long lens specialist, you want to have the R Adapter L rather than the two adapter stack. Similarly, I have an old, cheap Sigma 600 mirror lens in Nikon F mount that I'd enjoy using on the SL from time to time. Fitting it to a Nikon F to Leica M adapter, and fitting that on the M Adapter L causes severe, harsh vignetting of the corners. I'm just not sure that spending $250 for the Novoflex Nikon to L mount adapter is worth it for a $95 lens... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tritentrue Posted September 15, 2017 Share #38 Posted September 15, 2017 My photo above presents a worst-case scenario, and the falloff (not vignetting) can easily be corrected if I'm not cropping the shot. The stacked adapters work fine on any focal length from 21mm to 560mm for my purposes. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
relms Posted September 16, 2017 Share #39 Posted September 16, 2017 (edited) I have had both the Leica R-Adapter-L and the Novoflex R-Adapter to SL, and both are very good; however, the Novoflex provides a tighter fit between the lens and the adapter than you get with the Leica adapter. I tried two copies of the Leica adapter with R lenses, and both exhibited light leakage with 15-second or longer exposure settings. The Novoflex adapter worked perfectly with no leak using the same or longer exposures. It was obvious that the Leica adapters had some rotational slack at the adapter-to-lens joint - I could feel it, much more so than with the Novoflex adapter. The light leak was easily solved with a round black hair band around the joint, but this accessory is not needed with the Novoflex adapter. Leica, if you are aware of this issue, please tighten up! Edited September 16, 2017 by relms 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
steppenw0lf Posted September 17, 2017 Share #40 Posted September 17, 2017 (edited) I never had a problem with a original Leica adapter. So I doubt that the light leakage is related to the adapter. Anyway, if it really was, nothing easier than to return it to Leica, tell them the problem and and ask for a perfect specimen. (Leica is not so foolish to ship adapters with light leakage. Even more than once.) Leica would never rely on hair bands or similar to fix their brand-new items. Edited September 17, 2017 by steppenw0lf Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.