M Glass on Mirrorless Bodies

[Bobonli]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Let's say you have some sweet M lenses and you want to pair them with a modern digital body to create video. I'm guessing this would be a mirrorless body and you'd need some adapters.

What FF body would you use? Goal is video but of course it would also be pressed into service for digital stills (I can't quite justify the $9k for the M-11 and not have video capability and I don't want to carry multiple cameras)

What adapters would you need? 

I'm guessing said adapters would still require full manual control of exposure.

I've stumble across one cinematographer making advertisements and short adventure content using Sony Alpha bodies and Summicrons.

 

Admin/Mods feel free to move this if it belongs somewhere else. This seemed like the most appropriate place.

[hepcat]

Well, I use primarily R lenses on my Panny Lumix S1 and S5 both of which are used heavily as video by others.    I primarily use a Metabones R to L adapter.  You would, of course, need an M to L adapter.  The Leica SL2 is largely a Lumix S1 in different clothes. 

[Advertisement]

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

[Simone_DF]

In regards to using M glass, every brand has pros and cons, so I would suggest you to do a research and pick the one that tick most boxes for you.

This is how I see it as of now:

Leica SL2/SL2-S:

Pros: best EVF, great colors, highest compatibility across the brands (yet not perfect with wide angles and other lenses like the 35mm Nokton), if you use the Leica L-M it also supports 6bit coding 

Cons: big, heavy, AF for video is rubbish, Good AF-S, crappy AF-C, no tilt screen, bulky

Panasonic S5II

Pros: geared toward video but great for stills, greatly improved autofocus compared to the SL2, smaller and lighter

Cons: EVF could be better, M glass compatibility is ok but not great especially with wide angles

Sony A7IV:

Pros: best AF in class, small, svelte camera, if you pair it with the Techart adapter, you can autofocus M lenses with good results, Voigtlander and Zeiss release native "M" lenses so no need for an adapter, biggest selection of lenses

Cons: lower compatibility with M glass, not good with certain wide angle lenses, I don't really like the colors, but that's personal, if you have big hands the camera can be too small

Canon:

Pros: great all around bodies, manual focus confirmation is very nice and better than peak, great AF

Cons: you are forced to use Canon lenses, as of now there's no third party autofocus lens I am aware of

Nikon:

Pros: can autofocus M lenses via Techart adapter, better M glass compatibility compared to Sony

Cons: not as geared toward video

[Darrell]

If you want to shoot video with M lenses, go with the SL2-S. The Leica M-L adapter will read the six bit codes on the Leica M lenses and the autofocus performance is not an issue as the M lenses are completely manual. 

[newtoleica]

3 hours ago, Simone_DF said:

 

Sony A7IV:

Pros: best AF in class, small, svelte camera, if you pair it with the Techart adapter, you can autofocus M lenses with good results, Voigtlander and Zeiss release native "M" lenses so no need for an adapter, biggest selection of lenses

 

ROTFLOL about this.. 'svelte' - OMG. I owned one briefly and sold it on as it had bloated in size compared to the original A7. My idea of 'svelte' is the original Olympus OM1.

The M series are OK. No bigger please, especially big grips. I want to hold the camera in the palm of my L hand and leave the R free to just press the shutter. The A7RIV is a brick...

[frame-it]

16 hours ago, Bobonli said:

Let's say you have some sweet M lenses and you want to pair them with a modern digital body to create video. I'm guessing this would be a mirrorless body and you'd need some adapters.

What FF body would you use? Goal is video but of course it would also be pressed into service for digital stills (I can't quite justify the $9k for the M-11 and not have video capability and I don't want to carry multiple cameras)

 

For Video, you might wanna de-click the m-lenses aperture control first

 

[RexGig0]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The optical low-pass filter stack (OLPF) in most non-Leica cameras is too thick for best performances with M-mount lenses. This is most apparent with wide-angle M lenses. There are entities which will modify cameras, one of which is Kolari. I have no experience with Kolari; it is simply the one I remember.
 

Nikon Z-mount cameras may be the currently-best choice, for shooters who want to unmodified non-Leica digital cameras, as a platform for M-mount lenses. I cannot, however, address which Z cameras are good for video work.

Edited to add: The newest Leica SL-series cameras, with up-to-date firmware, seem to be starting to get attention from video/cinema shooters. 

Edited to add: My personal answer would depend upon whether I thought I should add a Nikon Z camera, because I and my wife use Nikon as our shared system, or whether it would be better to add an SL-series body. 
 

 

Edited September 19 by RexGig0

[Simone_DF]

1 hour ago, newtoleica said:

ROTFLOL about this.. 'svelte' - OMG. I owned one briefly and sold it on as it had bloated in size compared to the original A7. My idea of 'svelte' is the original Olympus OM1.

The M series are OK. No bigger please, especially big grips. I want to hold the camera in the palm of my L hand and leave the R free to just press the shutter. The A7RIV is a brick...

The OP is asking for full frame. I’m aware Olympus makes smaller cameras, but they are m4/3. 
Currently the A7IV is still the smallest full frame ILCE, and by comparison the SL2 is humongous 

[Kreeshp]

2 hours ago, Simone_DF said:

Currently the A7IV is still the smallest full frame ILCE, and by comparison the SL2 is humongous

 

To be pedantic, the smallest full frame Sony ILC is the Sony ZV-E1 (released in 2023) but this camera is video-centric and lacks a mechanical shutter and an EVF, and outputs only 12 megapixels.

https://mirrorlesscomparison.com/sony-vs-sony/zv-e1-vs-a7-iv/

 

[Simone_DF]

51 minutes ago, Kreeshp said:

 

To be pedantic, the smallest full frame Sony ILC is the Sony ZV-E1 (released in 2023) but this camera is video-centric and lacks a mechanical shutter and an EVF, and outputs only 12 megapixels.

https://mirrorlesscomparison.com/sony-vs-sony/zv-e1-vs-a7-iv/

 

Yeah, but the OP has asked for a camera good for both stills and video. Perhaps the A7CII would also be a good choice, but I believe the A7IV has some good quality of life improvements, especially the EVF

[hdmesa]

20 hours ago, Bobonli said:

Let's say you have some sweet M lenses and...

But do you? If so, which ones? Wide angle M lens can have edge color shift and other performance issues on non-Leica cameras unless as was mentioned they are modified with thinner sensor cover glass.

If you don't have any M lenses yet, why go through the hassle and crazy expense compared to other choices?

[Stuart Richardson]

Simone has a good rundown. If you are concerned with video and stills, the SL2 or SL2S are by far the best if you are using a wide variety of M lenses. No other unmodified body has the same degree of performance and capability with M lenses. If you want to utilize the M lens potential, they are the best by far. You may not notice as much with video, but you will certainly notice with stills, particularly if you use any of the M lenses which do not do well on mirrorless cameras...that is not just wides, but mostly so. The 50mm 1.4 Summilux ASPH and 75mm APO Summicron are also somewhat diminished compared to their native mounts. They are still very good, but do not do as well as even the 35mm Summilux FLE. I used to use M lenses for video and stills on the A7S and A7RII, and both were significantly worse with M lenses than my Panasonic S1, which in turn is much worse than the Leica SL2. M cameras are still better than the SL2 for stills. They are the only ones with sensor glass with offset microlenses, as far as I am aware...I think the SL2 and SL2S just have a notably thin cover glass, as well as lens coding. 

If you are using six bit coded M lenses, and an SL camera, the native adapter is worth paying the extra for, as the lens information is not just for EXIF, but also for the image stabilization system. If you want it to work properly, you need to tell it the right focal length, otherwise it can soften your photos. Not having to do this every time you change lenses and not having to worry about wrong EXIF is worth the extra cost in the long run...at least to me.

Edited September 19 by Stuart Richardson

[Simone_DF]

It pretty much depends on which lenses you have. As a rule of thumb, Voigtlanders usually - but not always - work better, because they are released in multiple lens mounts and are designed from the start to work well with other brands

[Bobonli]

Thanks everyone. Fools errand on  my part it seems. I have a 35 'Cron and a 50 on the way. I was exploring options to make them do double duty.

[spydrxx]

Give them a try and see how you like the results. While others may differ, it is your personal opinion in using them which counts. Personally I'd go for R lenses instead of M for video, but that's just me.

[Bobonli]

3 hours ago, spydrxx said:

Give them a try and see how you like the results. While others may differ, it is your personal opinion in using them which counts. Personally I'd go for R lenses instead of M for video, but that's just me.

I'm not buying into another lens system to accomplish this. It was just a thought having seen something shot on M glass with a Sony Alpha body. I have 1 M body and lens (looking for a 50); a Nikon FM and a bunch of glass from the late 80's early 90s. And I'm not really that interested in the Leica S platform either. One over-priced body is enough for now. 

[TomB_tx]

9 minutes ago, Bobonli said:

I'm not buying into another lens system to accomplish this. It was just a thought having seen something shot on M glass with a Sony Alpha body. I have 1 M body and lens (looking for a 50); a Nikon FM and a bunch of glass from the late 80's early 90s. And I'm not really that interested in the Leica S platform either. One over-priced body is enough for now. 

That's why I got a Sony A7 not long after they came out - with cheap adapters I can use my old Nikon / Pentax / Canon / etc lenses quite well. I've also used some M lenses with good results. I typically leave the A7 set to aperture preferred, spot meter, 400 ISO, and leave it alone. A lot like using my old R4. The base A7 is very cheap now...

[spydrxx]

I too use the A7 with a variety of glass including Leica M. I don't do video however, I leave that for my Iphone. As far as how Leica M glass works with the A7, I'm perfectly happy with it, but I don't go into pixel peeping or really care about the technical nuances, I mostly care about ease of use, composition and the appropriate resolution for any prints I may want to make.

[Erato]

Zf or Z7 or even Z8/Z9

Edited Saturday at 05:01 AM by Erato

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[hansvons]

If you’d ask a seasoned cinematographer what they believe is important for a small video camera, they would come up with this:

It’s all about colour. Especially the skin tones. Arri Alexa nails that very well. In my testing, the SL2-S comes closest to that in its market. But you have to shoot in a log and use the correct colour-managed workflow in post.

Viewfinder. Cannot be too good.

Ergonomics must be easy accessible in video mode, including the menus.

The ability to set up exposure with fps and shutter angle.

Some heft for jitter-free hand-held operation.

Invariant sensor from ISO 400-1600. 6k/24 MP resolution for the largest meaningful pixel pitch.

Fast read-out speeds for jello-free images.

422 codec log encoded. No pixel binning in 4K FF mode.

AF is irrelevant for video in a classic filmmaking style. Others feel very different about this and I can see that. 

For me, that’s the SL2-S. I haven't used the S5II-x yet. The specs and price are impressive, but the sensor may be a bit slow in read-out speed. Panasonic always had their own idea of skin tones, best described as “vibrant”. Perhaps they improved on that. 
 

I recently had someone shooting for me on the FX6. I only liked the Sony Venice’s colours from the whole Sony bunch but the FX6 colours in 10 bit Log used in their intended Rec2020 space was much better than I expected. Maybe the latest A7 video model is in the same ballpark. 

—-

The best non-cinema lenses for video are the Leica R primes because they are relatively accurate with their distance markings, have a usable focus through in the right direction, and have tons of character that support moody filmmaking (flaring, focus roll-off, etc.), besides a good overall performance, and withstand some beating. That's why they are so sought-after.

Canon FDs come second in my opinion.
 

M primes work better than one might anticipate for video but wider, older lenses from 35mm downwards (including the 35mm ASPH Summicron) tend to vignette and smear in the corners more than their R counterpart—even on the SLs.

 

 

Edited Saturday at 09:43 AM by hansvons