Jump to content

Novoflex AF Nikon F Lens to Leica SL Adapter: list of compatible and tested lenses


mmradman

Recommended Posts

The Sigma Art135/1.8 is excellent and works fast and reliably ....... most of the time :rolleyes: . There is the occasional complete miss where you need to focus a second time, but when does lock on it is spot on ...... which is just as well as the DOF at f1.8 is very narrow. The algorithm appears to involve movement of the lens elements throughout the focusing range most of the time ..... the limiter switch 1.5m to infinity does appear to work, but only if full AF range selected when the camera is switched on first. The 0.8-1.5m limit setting does not appear to work. 

 

The Novoflex adapter appears to be a touch 'eccentric' in its behaviour ..... with both Canon and Nikon implementations. All appear to have issues with inexplicable and erratic 'lock ups' which is variable between adapters/lenses and sometimes even different copies of the same lens or adapter, but with the 135/1.8 this is very rare

 

The 'niggles' versus 'results' quotient with the 135/1.8 is such that I enjoy using it and the image quality is exceptional ....... subjectively this appears to be the sharpest lens I have ever attached to a Leica camera .....

 

Firmware updates are via the LEICA SL firmware ...... presumably Novoflex has some input but I can't see Leica prioritising this, so I can't see how it is going to work in practice. 

Edited by thighslapper
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

The Sigma Art135/1.8 is excellent and works fast and reliably ....... most of the time :rolleyes: . There is the occasional complete miss where you need to focus a second time, but when does locks on it is spot on ...... which is just as well as the DOF at f1.8 is very narrow.

 

The Novoflex adapter appears to be a touch 'eccentric' in its behaviour ..... with both Canon and Nikon implementations.

 

The 'niggles' versus 'results' quotient with the 135/1.8 is such that I enjoy using it and the image quality is exceptional ....... subjectively this appears to be the sharpest lens I have ever attached to a Leica camera .....

I didnt know there was the opportunity for the Novoflex Nikon adapter to be eccentric - the one I have is a simple dumb adapter. Is there one which autofocuses? As such mine works fine with the Zeiss 21mm zf and with a sigma art 1.4 35mm, though the latter has to be manually focussed and is enormous compared to an M lens. I bought it so I could use the zeiss. :-)

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to post
Share on other sites

I got the Novoflex SL/NIK adapter to use with a Nikon 300mm f/4E PF and a TC-14E III teleconverter.  Observations here are based on six days of use outdoors in bright light.

 

Using just the lens, no TC, AF hunts in  both directions about 80% of the time before locking and displaying confirmation.  AF is near-accurate close to 100% of the time, but critically accurate about 50% of the time. Using focus peaking doesn't help, as the lens generates a lot of it even when the subject is not focused with critical accuracy.  

 

Using the focus limiter makes no difference in the ability of the lens to lock focus without bidirectional hunting.  And without the focus limiter, I was unable to coax (with repeated half-presses of the shutter button) the lens to AF at its minimum focus distance of 1.4 meters.  It appears to reverse itself just inside the 3-meter mark.

 

Wake-up time of the camera is inconsistent, with the EVF sometimes taking 3-4 seconds to resume function after half-pressing the shutter button to wake the camera. It is then another second or two before the elements start to move.

 

With the TC14E III (which Novoflex did not have listed as a tested piece last time I looked), AF is slower and performance drops significantly. At times the AF confirmation will appear when the image is totally out of focus. At times the shutter button must be half-pressed two, three, or four times before even near-focus can be achieved. Bidirectional hunting takes about four seconds.  

 

Even after obtaining confirmation with what may appear to be a focused image in the EVF, further examination shows a critical accuracy rate of about 30% with the lens/TC combination.

 

When critically accurate focus is achieved, the SL produces incredibly detailed, richly saturated images with both the bare lens and the lens/TC combination. One can only hope that future firmware updates will improve autofocus performance.

 

 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

I didnt know there was the opportunity for the Novoflex Nikon adapter to be eccentric - the one I have is a simple dumb adapter. Is there one which autofocuses? As such mine works fine with the Zeiss 21mm zf and with a sigma art 1.4 35mm, though the latter has to be manually focussed and is enormous compared to an M lens. I bought it so I could use the zeiss. :-)

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

There are mechanical adapters ("dumb adapters") that work very well - the optical quality is usually very nice and the camera is fast (the lens does simply nothing like a M lens). AF is inactive.

I use Nikon and Contax lenses this way. With EOS lenses this is not so great, as they have no mechanical aperture control.

 

Then there are two "better" adapters for AF lenses from Novoflex.

One for EOS AF lenses - this is also very nice for other EOS lenses, as it allows dynamic aperture control.

The other for Nikon AF lenses (but only of the E type). (For D and G you can only use a mechanical adapter)

 

Both of these AF adapters need a warning: It is amazing that they allow AF control. But they have a limited funtionality (no tracking AF, no special programs (Canon), no IS/VR).

Also it depends on the single lens if it works or not. And how well it  works. And mostly it depends on the expectations of the users if this is acceptable or even great, or simply disappointing. Often it is not possible to simply say it works or not.  (Of course there are lenses that simply never work at all).

 

The description tritentrue gave is a very nice example. (and a very useful description).

 

 

I am not sure if this will ever be improved. I just wonder if a future SL with PDAF would maybe work better (as the lenses are built for PDAF).

Edited by steppenw0lf
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

I got the Novoflex SL/NIK adapter to use with a Nikon 300mm f/4E PF and a TC-14E III teleconverter.  Observations here are based on six days of use outdoors in bright light.

 

Using just the lens, no TC, AF hunts in  both directions about 80% of the time before locking and displaying confirmation.  AF is near-accurate close to 100% of the time, but critically accurate about 50% of the time. Using focus peaking doesn't help, as the lens generates a lot of it even when the subject is not focused with critical accuracy.  

 

Using the focus limiter makes no difference in the ability of the lens to lock focus without bidirectional hunting.  And without the focus limiter, I was unable to coax (with repeated half-presses of the shutter button) the lens to AF at its minimum focus distance of 1.4 meters.  It appears to reverse itself just inside the 3-meter mark.

 

Wake-up time of the camera is inconsistent, with the EVF sometimes taking 3-4 seconds to resume function after half-pressing the shutter button to wake the camera. It is then another second or two before the elements start to move.

 

With the TC14E III (which Novoflex did not have listed as a tested piece last time I looked), AF is slower and performance drops significantly. At times the AF confirmation will appear when the image is totally out of focus. At times the shutter button must be half-pressed two, three, or four times before even near-focus can be achieved. Bidirectional hunting takes about four seconds.  

 

Even after obtaining confirmation with what may appear to be a focused image in the EVF, further examination shows a critical accuracy rate of about 30% with the lens/TC combination.

 

When critically accurate focus is achieved, the SL produces incredibly detailed, richly saturated images with both the bare lens and the lens/TC combination. One can only hope that future firmware updates will improve autofocus performance.

 

Nikon 300mm f/4E PF: Same observations on my side. The AF cannot be compared to Nikon D500/D5, but I find the lens usable as a relatively small, light-weight 300mm alternative on the SL. The optical quality of the lens is, generally, very fine. Thumbs up from my side.

 

Nikon 300mm f/4E PF + 1.4/1.7/2.0 Nikon extenders: The AF is erratic and cannot be trusted (but manually focussing is, of course, ok).

 

Nikon 400mm f/2.8E: The AF cannot be trusted, but I use this combo - now and then - for static bird/wildlife photography.

 

The electronic SL/NIK adapter transfer correct aperture and lens information to the EXIF, no problem. 

 

The start-up time of a few seconds can be an issue. It is also a delay when photos are taken. Maximum rate of images is limited to about 3 fps (not 11 fps as the SL can deliver).

 

When the delay and/or the low image rates is an issue, I may use the manual Novoflex LET/NIK adapter. In this case the Nikon E-lenses work as any manual lens (virtually no delay when images are taken and up to 11 fps), but without having the opportunity to change the aperture. The latter is - of course - a limitation... In this case the default aperture is lens' largest aperture. If a smaller apertures is wanted, the aperture of the E-lens can be pre-set on a Nikon body, activating the the depth of field preview button when removing the lens from the Nikon body. Cumbersome, for sure, but it works.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

There are mechanical adapters ("dumb adapters") that work very well - the optical quality is usually very nice and the camera is fast (the lens does simply nothing like a M lens). AF is inactive.

I use Nikon and Contax lenses this way. With EOS lenses this is not so great, as they have no mechanical aperture control.

 

Then there are two "better" adapters for AF lenses from Novoflex.

One for EOS AF lenses - this is also very nice for other EOS lenses, as it allows dynamic aperture control.

The other for Nikon AF lenses (but only of the E type). (For D and G you can only use a mechanical adapter)

 

Both of these AF adapters need a warning: It is amazing that they allow AF control. But they have a limited funtionality (no tracking AF, no special programs (Canon), no IS/VR).

Also it depends on the single lens if it works or not. And how well it works. And mostly it depends on the expectations of the users if this is acceptable or even great, or simply disappointing. Often it is not possible to simply say it works or not. (Of course there are lenses that simply never work at all).

 

The description tritentrue gave is a very nice example. (and a very useful description).

 

 

I am not sure if this will ever be improved. I just wonder if a future SL with PDAF would maybe work better (as the lenses are built for PDAF).

Thanks. I don't really see the point of the Nikon electronic adapter then. if the AF is untrustworthy or slow, I can focus manually just fine. I'd love an electronic adapter, but it would have to be one that works!

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks. I don't really see the point of the Nikon electronic adapter then. if the AF is untrustworthy or slow, I can focus manually just fine. I'd love an electronic adapter, but it would have to be one that works!

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

 

With Nikon E-lenses (and other lenses without aperture ring), the electronic Novoflex adapter is required to change the aperture. This is, for me, the reason that I use the electronic adapter. If I am happy with a fixed aperture, I typically use the manual adapter since this speeds things up. No free lunch - at least as long as Leica don't have long(er) SL-lenses.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you - that sort of explains it, though actually the non electronic novoflex adapter has a blue ring which changes the iris on Nikon G lenses - I also own a d810 and a set of lenses. To be frank I wouldnt use it with say 70-200 vii - it's too awkward. and as I wrote above, there's no advantage to using a Sigma art 35 if you have smaller leica lenses. I would buy an electronic Nikon adapter which really worked but I don't believe there is one at the moment

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Sigma Art135/1.8 is excellent and works fast and reliably ....... most of the time :rolleyes: . There is the occasional complete miss where you need to focus a second time, but when does lock on it is spot on ...... which is just as well as the DOF at f1.8 is very narrow. The algorithm appears to involve movement of the lens elements throughout the focusing range most of the time ..... the limiter switch 1.5m to infinity does appear to work, but only if full AF range selected when the camera is switched on first. The 0.8-1.5m limit setting does not appear to work.

 

+1 - The Sigma 135 in Nikon mount is quite reliable and the focus is, most of the time, spot on.

 

Compared to the Nikkor 300mm f4 Fresnel lens, the delay between shutter activation and image capture seems shorter as well. Good.

 

All in all a fine supplement to the SL-zooms.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

After spending several hours today shooting known targets among other things with the SL and 300mm fresnel lens, manual focus only, I've come to think it's worth the functional lags.  I managed to improve upon some of the autofocus shots I previously counted among the critically-accurate in my previous outings.  Though the short focus throw of the lens mandates a bit of patience, the SL's focus peaking cues enabled sharp, detailed images even in unfavorable weather that ranged from dark overcast to steady rain.

 

My subjective view is that this lens tops my 280mm f/4 APO-Telyt-R in both color and image texture and is its equal in terms of fine detail on the SL's 24mp full-frame sensor.  And it's now making me wonder if I really need the SL 90-280mm.  An APO-Extender-SL could easily change my mind, though...

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

After spending several hours today shooting known targets among other things with the SL and 300mm fresnel lens, manual focus only, I've come to think it's worth the functional lags.  I managed to improve upon some of the autofocus shots I previously counted among the critically-accurate in my previous outings.  Though the short focus throw of the lens mandates a bit of patience, the SL's focus peaking cues enabled sharp, detailed images even in unfavorable weather that ranged from dark overcast to steady rain.

 

My subjective view is that this lens tops my 280mm f/4 APO-Telyt-R in both color and image texture and is its equal in terms of fine detail on the SL's 24mp full-frame sensor.  And it's now making me wonder if I really need the SL 90-280mm.  An APO-Extender-SL could easily change my mind, though...

 

 

Yes, the 300mm Fresnel lens is fine! It also shines with the Nikkor TC-14E III converter (with manual focus). A downside compared to the 280mm f4 APO-Telyt-R is it's somewhat nervous bokeh, and that highlights might look strange (influenced by the fresnel optics, I believe).

 

It's probably correct that details - viewed on a 24 MP sensor - are quite similar between the two lenses. With an upgraded, higher-res SL-sensor in the future, the high-resolving power of the APO-lens should better uncover the lens' potential, I would think.

 

A clear advantage of the SL 90-280mm is it's ability to zoom  ;) - making it much more usable than a fixed 300mm. At least for me. But of course, if a fixed 300mm focal length is ok, the Fresnel lens is a very attractive alternative.

 

I got the 300mm Fresnel lens as a relatively light-weight, small-size, longish-lens alternative for hiking. The lens has been much more frequently used than that; I use it on a regular basis.

 

(For those looking for a smallish shooting-machine with 450mm reach, the D500+300mm Fresnel combo is great).

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

really frustrating that the Novoflex adapter promises so much ....... and almost gets there with some lenses, but not with absolutely reliable accuracy and consistency.

 

I think it would be better described as a Nikon/Canon adapter with AF 'assistance'. 

 

I'm happy enough with the combo I have ...... but it could be so, so much better .....  :(

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Does anyone have experience using this adapter with the Nikon 105 f1.4 E type lens?  This is my primary reason for getting this adapter.

 

I agree with the reader saying the Canon version of this adapter is "eccentric" sometimes.  I got the Canon version to use with the Canon 11-24 f4 lens.  AF is "good enough" most of the time.  Though it does often freeze if I focus on something with not enough contrast (I can normally unfreeze it by manually changing the focus, of if need be, turning the camera off/on again). 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone have experience using this adapter with the Nikon 105 f1.4 E type lens?  This is my primary reason for getting this adapter.

 

I agree with the reader saying the Canon version of this adapter is "eccentric" sometimes.  I got the Canon version to use with the Canon 11-24 f4 lens.  AF is "good enough" most of the time.  Though it does often freeze if I focus on something with not enough contrast (I can normally unfreeze it by manually changing the focus, of if need be, turning the camera off/on again). 

It is a wonderful lens and works nicely on the Leica SL with the Novoflex adaptor. AF is reasonably fast and accurate.

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry I've asked questions on this thread several times but could we clear up, does this adapter work with Sigma art lenses, for example the 1.4 35?

 

Unlike the Canon adapter not many of us have the Nikon version ...... and even less have many Sigma Art Lenses. 

 

Canon compatibility is idiosyncratic .... Nikon compatibility seems to be a bit more robust but the list of lenses that work is shorter.

 

The later 'E' compatible SIgma lenses seem ok ...... but unless it is specifically labelled as Nikon E compatible I would assume the lens won't work. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Unlike the Canon adapter not many of us have the Nikon version ...... and even less have many Sigma Art Lenses. 

 

Canon compatibility is idiosyncratic .... Nikon compatibility seems to be a bit more robust but the list of lenses that work is shorter.

 

The later 'E' compatible SIgma lenses seem ok ...... but unless it is specifically labelled as Nikon E compatible I would assume the lens won't work. 

Thanks for that. The last sentence is a useful 'razor.' I recently invested in a Leica 24-90 so perhaps I should stop fretting :(

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry I've asked questions on this thread several times but could we clear up, does this adapter work with Sigma art lenses, for example the 1.4 35?

 

I use this adapter with the Sigma art 85 f1.4 (Canon mount) lens.  I would recommend testing each lens individually because the behavior is somewhat idiosyncratic.  It didn't work well enough (at least the copy of the lens I was testing with the Sigma 135 f1.4 art and 12-24 f4 art) lenses. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...