bocaburger Posted January 28, 2018 Share #21 Posted January 28, 2018 Advertisement (gone after registration) Somehow I'm not sure that the Viso 020 will be anywhere as good as the OVF on the R9. For use in gigs, any delay isn't helpful and would render the Viso 020 pretty much useless. It's not, and agreed. No mirrorless camera I've tried can compare to a rangefinder or TLR when it comes to freedom from image blackout. Some are pretty close to an SLR but most are still laggier. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 28, 2018 Posted January 28, 2018 Hi bocaburger, Take a look here M10 + R 80-200 f4. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jmahto Posted January 29, 2018 Share #22 Posted January 29, 2018 It's not, and agreed. No mirrorless camera I've tried can compare to a rangefinder or TLR when it comes to freedom from image blackout. Some are pretty close to an SLR but most are still laggier. I haven't seen SL's EVF but I can tell you that it so much easier to focus my R lenses on my Canon's OVF than on my Sony/M240 EVF with all zoom/peaking. Just because image is so clear in OVF. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_tribble Posted January 29, 2018 Author Share #23 Posted January 29, 2018 It's not, and agreed. No mirrorless camera I've tried can compare to a rangefinder or TLR when it comes to freedom from image blackout. Some are pretty close to an SLR but most are still laggier. Agree - seriously, if you need a tele-photo system for covering gigs I'd get a DSLR and decent AF zoom lens. Look at what the pros use for these... There are good reasons for their choices. RF for wide and up to 50/70 is a real winner. After that, a proper optical VF and AF with fast glass take a lot of beating! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
derleicaman Posted February 1, 2018 Share #24 Posted February 1, 2018 Agree - seriously, if you need a tele-photo system for covering gigs I'd get a DSLR and decent AF zoom lens. Look at what the pros use for these... There are good reasons for their choices. RF for wide and up to 50/70 is a real winner. After that, a proper optical VF and AF with fast glass take a lot of beating! Chris, this is the same proposition for years with the M system vs. the SLR. Way back in the early 70's when I was an enthusiastic Leica M3 user, the siren song of the Leicaflex SL called with its huge advantage in reach for anything above 90 and also Macro work. I fell for it hard, with two SL's, chrome and black paint and a bunch of then for me very expensive lenses. I worked many hours at my after school job to buy this gear. I always had an M though, with an M4 Black Chrome, M5, M4-2 and P and finally one of the first Photokina M6's. I would even shoot gigs with the M6TTL with flash, but none of this required tele. After the R, I went with the Nikon system for a while, ending up with the D700. D700 and 80-400 VR was a killer combination for concert shooting. I was no longer shooting film at this point, and even took the D700 to an LHSA annual meeting Stefan Daniel was attending. I think I hurt his feelings, but as he said at the time, "We have nothing to match this, so I don't blame you!". I bit the bullet and got an M9, and since that day I never picked up the D700 again. Sold it and kept the old D300 with some lenses if I ever need the reach again. Now with the M10 and Visoflex 020, I still find it an OK alternative to a proper reflex viewing system. Its fun to play with reflex lenses with it or for critical focusing. I thought it would be the solution for my LTM Thambar, but alas that doesn't work out too well with it. It is still not the elusive R solution. I tested the SL, but now in middle age, its not for me. Too big, too heavy. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bocaburger Posted February 1, 2018 Share #25 Posted February 1, 2018 I also find it more comfortable using adapted SLR lenses on my 5D than any mirrorless EVF camera, due to the optical focusing as well as less blackout time. The tradeoff to all these adaptations is the lack of image stabilization. Sure I can hold a lens steady, did so for decades. But IS still gives you 2-3 stops on top of whatever shutter speed you can hand-hold down to. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_tribble Posted February 1, 2018 Author Share #26 Posted February 1, 2018 A certain healthy realism does no harm when making camera choices. The SL is a lovely thing (well, in some people's eyes), but I couldn't find it gave me any objective advantage over the Canon 5D III other than working moderately well with M lenses. Likewise, while the Visoflex 020 works pretty damn well - and has let me get away with using a long telephoto when nothing else was to hand, I'd not want to use it as a permanent solution when it comes to long glass. Of course, this isn't to say that the M10 doesn't work well with all sorts of lenses - and the experience of the 020 with the WATE or the 21 SEM is really positive... I just wouldn't want to be limited to the M for all photographic situations... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rsolomon Posted November 25, 2020 Share #27 Posted November 25, 2020 Advertisement (gone after registration) I'm continuing my journey and looking to go longer with my m240, I do love my current 3 lens kit: 24 Elmar, 35 cron, the 75 cron - my longest, I was thinking of jumping to the 80-200, it seems to be a good lens and at a reasonable cost. To those who commented on the 80-200, after these past two years are you still happy with it? Would you re-make your 80-200 decision based on your current insight, usage, and overall experience Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmahto Posted November 25, 2020 Share #28 Posted November 25, 2020 (edited) 3 hours ago, rsolomon said: I'm continuing my journey and looking to go longer with my m240, I do love my current 3 lens kit: 24 Elmar, 35 cron, the 75 cron - my longest, I was thinking of jumping to the 80-200, it seems to be a good lens and at a reasonable cost. To those who commented on the 80-200, after these past two years are you still happy with it? Would you re-make your 80-200 decision based on your current insight, usage, and overall experience I commented earlier about being happy with 80-200 and M240. After two years, I have moved to 180APO3.4 for long end and couple it with 90mm macro-Elmar M at low end. My reasoning is 1) light setup, 2) 180APO is tad bit sharper which helps in using it with 2XAPO, making it even longer. Having said that, I haven’t sold my 80-200 and bring it out once in a while because I love the overall rendering for entire range and bokeh towards lower end. It is just a lovely lens. If only it could be lighter. Also it doesn’t help that I am not a zoom guy. Once I shot with 80-200 for the whole day at fixed FL and only towards the end of the day I realized that I could change the focal lens. That is what happens if you shoot mostly with primes. 😁 Edited November 25, 2020 by jmahto Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rsolomon Posted November 25, 2020 Share #29 Posted November 25, 2020 Thanks , very informative! I have never shot a zoom lens except the occasional borrow or use of another’s gear. I suppose I would be most of the time at the high end. I think about a 135 and 180, but considering usage I think I can easily jump over 135, and go to 180 and also get the 2x extender. btw with the Adapter, do you lose a stop? I know the 2x does..... I think 2 stops thx Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmahto Posted November 26, 2020 Share #30 Posted November 26, 2020 (edited) 10 hours ago, rsolomon said: btw with the Adapter, do you lose a stop? I know the 2x does..... I think 2 stops Yes. You do lose 2 stops. But with 2XAPO (make sure it is APO), quality loss is minimal. 180APO+2XAPO is very compact package though. It is my most used long lens for APS sensor too. Edited November 26, 2020 by jmahto Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted November 26, 2020 Share #31 Posted November 26, 2020 If you want to rehearse shooting with a zoom lens without breaking the bank, get an Olympus OM 75-150; If you use a cheap ebay adapter you can stay under 100-150$ for a near-mint example. The lens is surprisingly good optically and the pronounced distortion - which disqualified it on film- can be perfectly corrected in postprocessing. The only drawback is that the aperture ring turns the wrong way. Should you like it, you can always switch to Leica lenses. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmahto Posted November 26, 2020 Share #32 Posted November 26, 2020 14 minutes ago, jaapv said: If you want to rehearse shooting with a zoom lens without breaking the bank, get an Olympus OM 75-150; If you use a cheap ebay adapter you can stay under 100-150$ for a near-mint example. The lens is surprisingly good optically and the pronounced distortion - which disqualified it on film- can be perfectly corrected in postprocessing. The only drawback is that the aperture ring turns the wrong way. Should you like it, you can always switch to Leica lenses. +1 I had bought this 75-150 after discussing with you and it is indeed very good, compact and light lens. The only reason I don’t use it often because I have even lighter 135mm (Minolta 135mm f4) which is also very good optically (actually slightly better than aforementioned 75-150 at 135). Having all said, Leica 80-200R is superb like a prime at 135mm. I can’t sell any of these lenses. 😁 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_tribble Posted December 2, 2020 Author Share #33 Posted December 2, 2020 (edited) Ah... I ended up getting the SL2 and the 90-280 for long lens work (though the 135 A-T is damn good on the SL2 - and IBIS really does help). These days, for me, the M10 is now doing what it does best - giving me a small, relatively light and compact platform for M lenses between 28 and 90. If I want wider, I use the SL2. If I want longer, it's the same choice. Admittedly, I have made some great shots (IMHO) with 21 and 75 / 90 / 135 lenses on M, but the M systems really sings for me between 28 and 50. Either side of that, DSLR or mirrorless just feel more logical... Edited December 2, 2020 by chris_tribble 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.