Auto Focus M lenses

[Simone_DF]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Just now, 250swb said:

Is that all you've got? Instead of rockets and Catherine wheels just a damp squib? In any discussion of equipment there is the 'how' and 'why'. How something works and why it should or shouldn't be used. If you don't like the 'why it's a waste of time' side of the argument we'd all be interested in a proper counter argument that makes sense. Debunk what I have said if that helps.

No, I prefer to use my gear the way I like to use it. The Techart works (with limitations) within my use case and I don't consider it a waste of time, quite the opposite, therefore I read what you say about the why, but they don't apply to me.

[250swb]

28 minutes ago, Simone_DF said:

No, I prefer to use my gear the way I like to use it. The Techart works (with limitations) within my use case and I don't consider it a waste of time, quite the opposite, therefore I read what you say about the why, but they don't apply to me.

Well Ok, keep keep your reasons a secret. But discussion and sharing ideas is the normal function of a forum which makes promoting a product by saying it's great and then refusing to say why a curious thing to do.

[Advertisement]

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

[pgk]

The OP requested 'opinions'. They were supplied. Whether we agree with them or not we can at least discuss them. But given that the M lenses are highly regarded optically and mechanically, using any system which potentially compromises one and negates the other will arouse some strong opinions. An M lens on an SL or SL2 makes sense to me because the camera is designed to operate with M lenses via its adapter. An AF adapter is IMO a compromise too far as it requires partial manual focus in order to deal with FLE lenses, might find some larger M lenses too heavy and will have corner problems with some wides; which leaves it able to use a narrower set of M lenses than may be desirable. My own experience is that the equivalent AF lenses to 50/2, 35/2, 90/2.8 the used with a camera that they are designed for are now extremely good. So why compromise great lenses when much cheaper alternatives will do potentially as good a job without all the faff?

[wattsy]

The adaptor isn't something that interests me (nor does using M lenses on a Nikon camera) but there's need to patronise and belittle users for going down that route.

Edited December 2, 2020 by wattsy

[lct]

Doing retro photography is not mandatory with M lenses. My ones work fine on a Kolari mod A7s, sometimes better than on my M240. The Sony camera allows for shortening the minimum focus distance by 20cm more or less whilst keeping infinity which rejuvenates somewhat my photography. I can do that thanks to a Voigtlander adapter which is a great tool actually. AF is not my cup of tea and i cannot use the Techart adapter on my old Sony but i will certainly try it if i happen to update the camera for lack of Leica competitor. FWIW.

[Simone_DF]

54 minutes ago, pgk said:

The OP requested 'opinions'. They were supplied. Whether we agree with them or not we can at least discuss them. But given that the M lenses are highly regarded optically and mechanically, using any system which potentially compromises one and negates the other will arouse some strong opinions. An M lens on an SL or SL2 makes sense to me because the camera is designed to operate with M lenses via its adapter. An AF adapter is IMO a compromise too far as it requires partial manual focus in order to deal with FLE lenses, might find some larger M lenses too heavy and will have corner problems with some wides; which leaves it able to use a narrower set of M lenses than may be desirable. My own experience is that the equivalent AF lenses to 50/2, 35/2, 90/2.8 the used with a camera that they are designed for are now extremely good. So why compromise great lenses when much cheaper alternatives will do potentially as good a job without all the faff?

The Techart AF adapter can be set to manual mode and used like any other adapter. M wides have smeared corner on the SL2 too, see the thread about the 21 SEM in the SL forum, but this is not stopping Leica to sell its adapter.

[Simone_DF]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 hour ago, 250swb said:

Well Ok, keep keep your reasons a secret. But discussion and sharing ideas is the normal function of a forum which makes promoting a product by saying it's great and then refusing to say why a curious thing to do.

I'll give you a real life example.

Last summer I went to Italy for a short holiday with my gf. I brought only a Leica Q2 and a A7rIV equipped with the Techart adapter and an 90mm Elmarit 2.8. I could fit both cameras at the same time into a small Ona Bowery bag no problem, and that's all I needed.

What about a native Sony lenses you ask? Sure, but:

- I don't have a native 85 or above lenses for Sony

- The options available for Sony are of no interest to me. The GM is big, heavy, pricey, AF is slow. Terrific lens, but it's designed for studio portrait. The 1.8 version is a nice lens and tick many boxes, but I don't like its rendering. The Batis is overpriced and I like it's rendering even less than the Sony 1.8. The 90mm macro is big. There's no other option I know of. The Elmarit is the perfect compromise to me. It's sharp, fast enough at 2.8, it's small, and it renders beautifully. Moreover, I already had it with me, so why spend extra €€€ for lenses I don't like?

I came back with some great photos taken with both cameras, both in AF and MF modes, both wide open and stopped down.