Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I spent my photography time last month experimenting with the fpL and M mount lenses only - to see how the full frame 61mp sensor gets on with some of my favourite rangefinder lenses.

I just edited and uploaded my blog considering the results - anyone interested can read it here: June 2021: M-Only

I also collected a larger number of photos taken with the fpL and M lenses during this project in my flickr album so anyone wanting to pixel peak and view full resolution can.

 

I tried out 16 of my favourite M-mount lenses: 21 Ultron 1.8; 28mm Summicron ASPH; 40mm Nokton f1.4; 35mm Biogon-C f2.8; 50mm Planar f2; 35mm Nokton f1.2; 50mm Summicron f2; 35mm Summicron f2 ASPH; 25mm Biogon f2.8; 50mm Sonnar-C f1.5; 35mm Ulton f1.7; 50mm Summilux ASPH; 35mm Distagon f1.4; 50mm Nokton f1.5; 50mm Heliar Classic f2; 25mm Summaron (goggles) f2.8

My conclusion in short: overall I was very impressed with how the M lenses I chose worked with the fpL. I encountered no significant problems and see real improvements compared with experiences I have had with some of them no other cameras (such as Sony a7s). It is great to have the ability to use an M lens with a small light camera that has an excellent 61mp sensor. The cropping ability is amazing. I also bought a close up adapter meaning I can get more out of my M mount lenses on the fpL.

On the other hand, I cannot deny the quirky fpL can be fiddly - and so using M mount lenses on it is not half as fast or satisfying as using them on an M camera for me.

One of the reasons I did this experiment was to see if I really need an SL, since everyone says the SL works best with M lenses. I had thought I would decide in terms of image quality - but for me I am satisfied with the image quality of the fpL using M lenses - I would not feel I need an SL for that reason alone - the difference would I expect be too marginal.

But I am trying out the SL2-S this weekend (which is the model I would buy if I bought any) and it is the speed, ease of use, and wonderful EVF that tempts me the most. So I may end up getting one, to use as much with M lenses as L lenses. I expect to use the fpL more with small Sigma L autofocus primes or, if ever I want really high resolution and not a lot of speed (eg using a tripod for some landscape) with M lenses as I please. Finally, zone focussing on the fpL was good, and fast, but if you do 100% crops on the 61mp file you will notice more out of focus areas (naturally) or missed focus than you would on a lower resolution sensor. Of course, you can decduie to use the fpL in lower resolution ode, in that case - that is one of the beauties of the camera - its versatility.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Most walkabout shots are at f5.6 as that's what I usually shoot at - but with some of the fast lenses I shot some wide open (f1.2, f1.4 etc). Sorry there is no lens data on the files - but you can usually tell by the bokeh.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Nick De Marco said:

Most walkabout shots are at f5.6 as that's what I usually shoot at - but with some of the fast lenses I shot some wide open (f1.2, f1.4 etc). Sorry there is no lens data on the files - but you can usually tell by the bokeh.

Thank you but did you use fast WA or UWA lenses actually? Just curious again as the main problem with most non Leica cameras comes from those lenses at full aperture.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Noticed anything regarding the rolling shutter effect with the fpl? 

Also i wonder if its possible to now shoot in crop mode and have the evf still see in FF so that itll mimic the peripheral vision one would see in a rangefinder. Much like Q with framelines.

Edited by cboy
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...

Hi, I did not find information on the filter-stack thickness of the fp-L anywhere, which greatly influences performance of WA/UWA M mount lenses.

One could see the fp-L as a high res low cost "second home" for M mount lenses if it really worked ... ---

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, crony said:

Hi, I did not find information on the filter-stack thickness of the fp-L anywhere, which greatly influences performance of WA/UWA M mount lenses.

One could see the fp-L as a high res low cost "second home" for M mount lenses if it really worked ... ---

Kolari Vision makes an "ultra thin" filter for this body IINW.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, lct said:

Kolari Vision makes an "ultra thin" filter for this body IINW.

Hi, then the question comes up, what does the modification do to colour rendering ... --- Years ago, I adapted M mount lenses to SONYs. I have given this up, mostly. 

(Now I only use my 12 and 15mm VOIGTLÄNDER UWAs on the A7R2, which has internal lens correction.)

I would like a compact, high res body directly from a manufacturer, without "tuning". But even the Leica SLs have difficulties with some M mount lenses, I have heard ...

Maybe, due to higher sensor performance only tightly integrated body-lens solutions work optimally.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, crony said:

Hi, then the question comes up, what does the modification do to colour rendering ... --- Years ago, I adapted M mount lenses to SONYs. I have given this up, mostly. 

(Now I only use my 12 and 15mm VOIGTLÄNDER UWAs on the A7R2, which has internal lens correction.)

I would like a compact, high res body directly from a manufacturer, without "tuning". But even the Leica SLs have difficulties with some M mount lenses, I have heard ...

Maybe, due to higher sensor performance only tightly integrated body-lens solutions work optimally.

I have a Kolari mod A7r2 too. Easy to adjust colors in PP but it is not for jpeg shooters. Only problem is soft corners with WA and UWA lenses. Stopping down by one to three stops may be required to get corners decently sharp depending on lenses. Red edges are well corrected though. I have no experience with SL bodies. They should do better i guess but soft corners have been reported here on M lenses like 21/3.4 asph and 28/2. Only solution would be a mirrorless camera dedicated to M lenses but camera makers don't seem interested for now including Leica.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, lct said:

I have a Kolari mod A7r2 too. Easy to adjust colors in PP but it is not for jpeg shooters. Only problem is soft corners with WA and UWA lenses. Stopping down by one to three stops may be required to get corners decently sharp depending on lenses. Red edges are well corrected though. I have no experience with SL bodies. They should do better i guess but soft corners have been reported here on M lenses like 21/3.4 asph and 28/2. Only solution would be a mirrorless camera dedicated to M lenses but camera makers don't seem interested for now including Leica.

Well, I suppose they know their business. - Camera makers try to be money makers, too ... ---

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.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...