Leica M to L vs Kippon M to L for Leica SL.

[oudjunk]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I use the kippon M to L on my Leica SL for using my M lenses. I'm wondering if i change to use leica M to L adapter, my picture would be better or not. Has anyone used both of these adapters for compare? 

Thanks,

Chalat. 

[CharlesL]

The purpose of the adapter is to place the lens at the correct distance from the sensor. That is all that matters for image quality. (Adapters with a helicoid or glass in them try to do more, but they are not at issue here.) I have not used these two adapters, although I used a cheap generic M-to-TL adapter from China briefly - with stellar results.

If the adapter is designed and milled correctly for distance, it works - period. There used to be occasional problems with the cheap ones five years ago, but today almost all of them are properly made.

[Advertisement]

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

[oudjunk]

1 hour ago, CharlesL said:

The purpose of the adapter is to place the lens at the correct distance from the sensor. That is all that matters for image quality. (Adapters with a helicoid or glass in them try to do more, but they are not at issue here.) I have not used these two adapters, although I used a cheap generic M-to-TL adapter from China briefly - with stellar results.

If the adapter is designed and milled correctly for distance, it works - period. There used to be occasional problems with the cheap ones five years ago, but today almost all of them are properly made.

I'm wondering about that because leica adapter has something for read 6 bit (I think if i remember the right thing) and I'm not sure if the adapter can read the 6 bit what the improvement except add the information about lens to exif. 

[helged]

The Leica M-Adapter L (or previously Leica M-Adapter T) does transfer the 6-bit code from M-lenses to Leica SL, see the manual available from Leica: "The Leica M adapter L has interfaces on both sides for the relevant camera system. If the Leica M lens used has 6-bit coding, it transmits lens data to the camera." This means that you get the lens info in the EXIF, that the minimum shutter speed set to 1/f or 1/2f will work (if activated on the SL), and that lens correction can be applied automatically in Lightroom etc. But I don't think the SL will process the images (taken with M-lenses). If you use some M-lenses on the SL, I would think that the Leica M-Adapter L is the way to go. It certainly is for me.

 

[Ivar B]

14 minutes ago, helged said:

The Leica M-Adapter L (or previously Leica M-Adapter T) does transfer the 6-bit code from M-lenses to Leica SL, see the manual available from Leica: "The Leica M adapter L has interfaces on both sides for the relevant camera system. If the Leica M lens used has 6-bit coding, it transmits lens data to the camera." This means that you get the lens info in the EXIF, that the minimum shutter speed set to 1/f or 1/2f will work (if activated on the SL), and that lens correction can be applied automatically in Lightroom etc. But I don't think the SL will process the images (taken with M-lenses). If you use some M-lenses on the SL, I would think that the Leica M-Adapter L is the way to go. It certainly is for me.

 

I agree fully with this assessment, of course. I have used a few different adapters and in my experience you at least partly get what you pay for. The dirt cheap Chinese adapters are not bad, but there is ofte some play in the mount and they are probably not milled with the highest precision. Novoflex adapters, being several times as expensive, are better made. If this will have any impact on the result, is another question of course. 

[antigallican]

of course, quite a few of us have uncoded lenses. I use a Zeiss 25, Summaron 35, Summicron 50 and f/2.8 Tele-Elmarit-M 90mm, all with no coding. The SL seems very good at guessing the lens attached to it.

[Brian C in Az]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I purchased the Novaflex adapter ($150) and had to return it. The fit was not perfect and there was movement between the lens and adapter. No light leakage, but the small movement would eventually cause excessive wear at the joint. That wear can result in more expensive repairs for the lens than the amount of money saved by buying the cheaper adapter. As much as I dislike being overcharged by Leica for an adapter, I have to consider the long term benefit of a properly fitting adapter vs the short term financial impact.

[robgo2]

5 hours ago, antigallican said:

of course, quite a few of us have uncoded lenses. I use a Zeiss 25, Summaron 35, Summicron 50 and f/2.8 Tele-Elmarit-M 90mm, all with no coding. The SL seems very good at guessing the lens attached to it.

And of course, you can add a 6-bit code to non-M lenses, assuming that you can first figure out which M lens profile works best.

[robgo2]

12 hours ago, helged said:

The Leica M-Adapter L (or previously Leica M-Adapter T) does transfer the 6-bit code from M-lenses to Leica SL, see the manual available from Leica: "The Leica M adapter L has interfaces on both sides for the relevant camera system. If the Leica M lens used has 6-bit coding, it transmits lens data to the camera." This means that you get the lens info in the EXIF, that the minimum shutter speed set to 1/f or 1/2f will work (if activated on the SL), and that lens correction can be applied automatically in Lightroom etc. But I don't think the SL will process the images (taken with M-lenses). If you use some M-lenses on the SL, I would think that the Leica M-Adapter L is the way to go. It certainly is for me.

 

6-bit coding is a significant advantage, IMO, and is the reason that I only purchase encoded lenses. The Leica adapter, in addition to being able to transmit the code, is extremely well made and fits the lens mount better than any third party adapter that I have ever tried.

[CharlesL]

I've used around a dozen adapters on various lenses (not all M- or LTM-mount) in the last four or five years. They have worked just fine, and I've seen no damage to lens or camera mount. And during that time period, has anyone read a report of lens or camera damage for which an adapter is to blame? So if the Leica adapter "fits better," that is an expensive feeling rather than a practical consideration. Of course, if you want the good feeling, by all means pay for it.

[helged]

28 minutes ago, CharlesL said:

I've used around a dozen adapters on various lenses (not all M- or LTM-mount) in the last four or five years. They have worked just fine, and I've seen no damage to lens or camera mount. And during that time period, has anyone read a report of lens or camera damage for which an adapter is to blame? So if the Leica adapter "fits better," that is an expensive feeling rather than a practical consideration. Of course, if you want the good feeling, by all means pay for it.

Adapters can be tricky - at least for situations requireing 100 percent centring of the lens. This is at least my experience with e.g. the Sigma 14mm f1.8 Art lens for astrophotography, tested on Leica SL and Nikon D5, with three copies of the lens and three copies of Nikon F-to-Leica L Novoflex adapters (two manual, one electronic).

 

[BernardC]

21 hours ago, CharlesL said:

So if the Leica adapter "fits better," that is an expensive feeling rather than a practical consideration.

In my experience, the "expensive" adapters feel just like mounting the same lens on a real M (or whatever the original camera mount was). Cheaper adapters make lens mounting more complicated and slower. Not a big deal if you rarely change lenses, but worth it when you do it often, or in a time-sensitive manner (covering an event).

[Brian C in Az]

On 11/28/2018 at 12:37 PM, CharlesL said:

I've used around a dozen adapters on various lenses (not all M- or LTM-mount) in the last four or five years. They have worked just fine, and I've seen no damage to lens or camera mount. 

Common sense tells us that if the mount is loose and the lens isn't secure, there will be wear; that's just simple science. Considering the cost of the lenses, especially the ones that are out of production, it is good sense to take the best care possible of them. Loose and sloppy adapters can damage a meticulously machined mount.

[Manual_Focus]

I have not purchased or used the Leica M to L adapter so I cannot comment what information is transferred to the DNG file, but I have 2 Novoflex adapters, one for M mount and one for F mount and both work wonderfully well.  No slop in the mounts.

But here is a new owner of the SL2S question?  Once I enter manually a lens FL to the lens profile to get IBIS do I have to reenter it again each time I use it after changing lens or is it a one time thing?