Leica M system beyond 135mm

[wolan]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi,

I was having a look at the Leica stores here in Switzerland. I cannot find a telephoto lens for the M system that goes beyond 135mm.

On my Nikon Z I use a lot lenses around 200mm, especially the Nikon micro 200mm f4, which I could adapt on the M system

However, as I understand it there are no longer lenses because focusing with such focal lengths would be problematic on rangefinder camera.

Is that correct? Are you using 200mm lenses on your M10? Do you manage to get sharp pictures considering the m10s come without vibration reduction system?

 

Thank you

[jaapv]

When I still had the 240 (with EVF) I had it as my main camera for wildlife up to 800 mm. It takes training and skill, but it can be done., Equally I used the M8, M9 and MM1 similarly with the Visoflex3 up to 400 mm, but that is a bit more laborious.

 

https://the.me/henri-in-africa-the-leica-monochrom-as-a-travel-camera/

[Advertisement]

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

[250swb]

With the M10 you need a Nikon adapter (it only acts as a spacer) and either use the LV screen to focus or the Typ 020 Visoflex. Use the lens with a tripod to support the body, not the other way around. You'll need to open the aperture up each time you focus and then stop down again to shooting aperture for critical work. But if you have a Nikon Z7 why bother with all that anyway?

[adan]

It is correct that rangefinder cameras as such are limited to about a 135 lens. A limitation of the the RF's precision, and the viewing area (which becomes a very tiny peephole with longer lenses).

Therefore Leica and others making lenses to fit Leica M cameras for regular use do not make lenses longer than 135mm, these days.

However, there have been many long lenses made for the Leica rangefinders in the past - they depended on an accessory that more or less (pi mal daumen) converted the RF camera to an SLR viewing system (mirror and groundglass and prism). It was called the Visoflex, and lenses were made from 180mm to 560mm to fit it (as well as shorter lenses down to 50-65mm for makro-only pictures).

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-wiki.en/index.php/Visoflex

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-wiki.en/index.php/Visoflex_Lenses_x_Focal_Length

The arrival of the new digital "Viso" electronic viewfinders has revived that capability. But no modern lenses are made that depend on such viewing - because there are many Leica cameras that cannot work with electronic viewing (66 years of film cameras, and 6 years of digital cameras). For the time being, Leica is not making lenses in M mount that cannot be used on every Leica M camera ever made (dating back to the 1954 M3). They believe in backwards-compatability.

If you adapt an M240/262/246/M10 with the Viso EVF and the appropriate lens adapter tube, many historic long lenses can be used with those cameras. Including those for the Leica-R SLR system (1964-2007) and the original Visoflex converter mentioned above. The R lenses reach all the way to 800mm (although the 800s are rare).

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-wiki.en/index.php/R_Lenses_x_Focal_Length

And, as 250swb says, you can also use many other brands of lenses, with appropriate mount adapters: Nikon, Canon FD, Contax/Yashica and so on. They do need to be lenses old enough to still allow manual focus and aperture control, without electronic contacts.

 

[mujk]

I just purchased an adapter to mount old Canon FD lenses on the M10, particularly the FDn 200/4. After a brief test I found that this combination works similarly to the same lens on other mirrorless cameras. Focussing is not particularly easy even at full aperture and camera shake starts to become an issue at this focal length, if not using a tripod. Any unsharpness is easy to spot at 24MP. More training required...

[Printmaker]

I tried using a 180 Elmarit R lens on my M10/EVF and found it to be too slow to focus accurately in fast moving situations. And adding a 2X tele extender only made using this combo harder. I ended up switching to a 135 tele-elmar and the camera's rangefinder. I just needed to get closer. My focus success rate when shooting wildlife in South Africa was around 50-75% using this combo. Wonderfully compact & light weight though.

I'm waiting to see if Leica develops a 180 ,or 280, or a 70-200/2.8 for the SL2. The 90-280 is a bit pricey for an occasional use lens. 

https://tomniblick.photoshelter.com/portfolio/G00009EbeW3q7djQ

Edited April 1, 2020 by Printmaker
typo

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

You need to use one of the old "Trombone"  Telyts or even better a Noflexar-T in Pigriff. The last will out-focus any AF system.

[Printmaker]

5 hours ago, jaapv said:

You need to use one of the old "Trombone"  Telyts or even better a Noflexar-T in Pigriff. The last will out-focus any AF system.

I tried an old 560 Telyt first and ended up with the lens not covering the full image circle. Not sure why other than the R to M adaptor was the issue. After a few days of trying to make this lens work, I exchanged it for a 180 R and a 2X. Also I was not comfortable taking a lens that looked like a rifle into Kruger.

test560.jpg.8be80fa7f5522e58ac1fac7dd953d7b0.jpg.webloc

[jaapv]

 Never had a problem there and I was in quite a few National Parks with those, and yes, the adapter is the culprit. Did you use the old Leicina adapter? That one vignettes strongly on long lenses. 

[UliWer]

I know this is anathema for most traditonal photographers, though my advice is: stop worrying about mm of focal length. The newer models of a digital M - even with modest 24 MP sensors - allow a lot of cropping. If one uses a "normal" M lens, e.g. of 90 or even 135mm and crop the files to the field of view of a 180mm or more than 200mm lens you may achieve results which are at least as good as using a default long lens. Since shorter lenses (in general) allow larger openings, you have the advantage of shorter exposure times, which gives you more safety against shaking.  Of course one looses depth of focus by cropping, so a 1:2/90 cropped to the field of view of 180mm  will "only" have the depth of focus of a 1:4-lens - but do you really want to use a 1:2/180mm on an M???

You may find a comparison between the results with an "original" long focal length and croppings of M-lenses here:

The four examples in #6-9 show the results with the M10 of the 1:3.4/180mm Apo-Telyt-R, and croppings of the 1:3.4/135mm Apo-Telyt-M and the 1:2/90 Summicron Apo.Asph - at f/2 and f/3.4.  I didn't tell which example was made with which lens- so one may find out the differences if there are any. Btw: the 180mm Apo-Telyt-R is still regarded as one of the best lenses in its class.

 

 

[Ko.Fe.]

36 minutes ago, UliWer said:

I know this is anathema for most traditonal photographers, though my advice is: stop worrying about mm of focal length. The newer models of a digital M - even with modest 24 MP sensors - allow a lot of cropping. If one uses a "normal" M lens, e.g. of 90 or even 135mm and crop the files to the field of view of a 180mm or more than 200mm lens you may achieve results which are at least as good as using a default long lens. Since shorter lenses (in general) allow larger openings, you have the advantage of shorter exposure times, which gives you more safety against shaking.  Of course one looses depth of focus by cropping, so a 1:2/90 cropped to the field of view of 180mm  will "only" have the depth of focus of a 1:4-lens - but do you really want to use a 1:2/180mm on an M???

You may find a comparison between the results with an "original" long focal length and croppings of M-lenses here:

The four examples in #6-9 show the results with the M10 of the 1:3.4/180mm Apo-Telyt-R, and croppings of the 1:3.4/135mm Apo-Telyt-M and the 1:2/90 Summicron Apo.Asph - at f/2 and f/3.4.  I didn't tell which example was made with which lens- so one may find out the differences if there are any. Btw: the 180mm Apo-Telyt-R is still regarded as one of the best lenses in its class.

 

 

 

Personally, I don't need to crop or use anything longer than 50. I use M it was made for. Getting close within the action. To tell the story as insider, not as outside surveillance agent. 

 

 

[UliWer]

vor 9 Minuten schrieb Ko.Fe.:

Personally, I don't...

That‘s ok, though this wasn‘t the thread‘s topic.

[mujk]

I think the question is quite relevant. Even if you normally use your M10 with wide to normal lenses, there might be an occasional need for a longer focal length. You might not want to carry your DSLR or mirrorless with a long lens alongside the M10 just in case, so an adapted longer lens might be a good alternative. However, this is not the use case the Leica M was originally made for and, according to my experience, not a particularly easy or fast way to use a longer lens, but could be an alternative if  the need is very occasional and you don't need to catch rapidly moving subjects. I would say that if you expect to need a focal length longer than 135mm for more than 30% of your shots, bring another camera better suited for this purpose.

[Printmaker]

On 4/1/2020 at 10:01 AM, jaapv said:

 Never had a problem there and I was in quite a few National Parks with those, and yes, the adapter is the culprit. Did you use the old Leicina adapter? That one vignettes strongly on long lenses. 

No, I used the latest R to M adaptor from Leica.

Next trip I'll probably just buy an Olympus and their 300 mm lens. It would work well in combo with my wife's 40-150 on her OMD EM1. I'll still take my M10 with 35 & 135 though... and maybe the 21mm.

Of course the next trip may be postponed until Mother Nature is done pruning our tree. Hopefully our branches will remain intact.

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!