Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Sony Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1      
2
       end
  

Archive 2014 · Latest feedback on M lenses for Sony A7/A7r

  
 
Ajay C
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #1 · p.2 #1 · Latest feedback on M lenses for Sony A7/A7r


I tried Leica 24/1.4, 28/2, 35/1.4 FLE, 50/1.4 ASPH with the A7r with two different adapters - Novoflex M-E, Metabones. 35mm and 50mm are barely acceptable to me. Sent back the A7r. To be fair, 24/1.4's output was quite spectacular, which I believe is due to the tele centric design of the Summilux. Back to using the M9 inspite of the obsolesce staring in the M9's face


Feb 10, 2014 at 10:26 PM
charles.K
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #2 · p.2 #2 · Latest feedback on M lenses for Sony A7/A7r


I have two M240 as my base system, and A7r as a backup.

I have the following lenses that accumulated over the last 4 years. The 21 SEM, 24 Lux, 28 Cron Asph, 35 Lux FLE, 50 Cron Rigid DR, 50 Nocti f/1.0, 50 Lux Asph, 75 Cron Asph, 75 Lux and 90 Cron Asph. I also have the Novoflex M-E adapter as well as the Metabones.

The lenses that work brilliantly are the 24 Lux, 50 Cron Rigid DR, 50 Nocti f/1.0, 75 Cron AA, 75 Lux and 90 Cron AA. Also to note that the Novoflex M-E is by far the best adapter. The Metabones adapters are too finely tolerance'd and appear to have an issue focusing at infinity.

I do not have time to be second guessing lenses that "might work" on the A7r. I have the FE 55 and 35, which are amazing in their own right. So for now, I keep a select few M lenses that work really well, the 24 Lux, 50 Cron Rigid DR and 75 Lux/90 Cron AA. I don't need anything else for now



Feb 10, 2014 at 10:46 PM
ocean2059
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #3 · p.2 #3 · Latest feedback on M lenses for Sony A7/A7r


I used WATE, Summicron 75 ASPH, Summicron 90 ASPH, and Telyt 135 APO on A7r with good results. But what I really want from A7r is to be able to use the Leica R lenses. All of my R lenses work very nicely with any issues.


Feb 10, 2014 at 11:11 PM
Gary Clennan
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #4 · p.2 #4 · Latest feedback on M lenses for Sony A7/A7r


ocean2059 - do the R lenses work equally well with the A7 and A7r?


Feb 10, 2014 at 11:12 PM
ocean2059
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #5 · p.2 #5 · Latest feedback on M lenses for Sony A7/A7r


Gary, I only have the A7r and all my R lenses work beautifully, including 19/2.8 V2, 35-70/4, 35/2, 50/2, 60/2,8, 90/2,8, 100/2,8 APO, 180/3,4 APO, and 400/6,8. As for my M lenses, I prefer to use them on M bodies.


Feb 10, 2014 at 11:22 PM
edwardkaraa
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #6 · p.2 #6 · Latest feedback on M lenses for Sony A7/A7r


charles.K wrote:
I do not have time to be second guessing lenses that "might work" on the A7r. I have the FE 55 and 35, which are amazing in their own right. So for now, I keep a select few M lenses that work really well, the 24 Lux, 50 Cron Rigid DR and 75 Lux/90 Cron AA. I don't need anything else for now


Exactly my thinking Charles. There are a few "happy accidents" but I am happy to use the FE 55 and 35 rather than my ZM lenses of similar FL.



Feb 10, 2014 at 11:49 PM
RustyBug
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #7 · p.2 #7 · Latest feedback on M lenses for Sony A7/A7r


R lenses are about 19mm farther (47mm vs. 27.95mm) from the film plane (based on comparative registration distances, actual optics will vary), so the angle of incidence is vastly different from the M's where the angle to the microlens in the corners are too steep to properly refract and retain alignment for most of the WA/UWA M's.

Canon EF is @ 42mm, Adaptall's are @ 50.7mm and M645 is @ 63.3mm. The point being that R's are set back farther, while the M's are set very close. This has a significant impact on the trig angles/vector forces for a given FL @ the microlens. Little reason that I can think of why all R's wouldn't work admirably on the A7/A7R.

http://www.graphics.cornell.edu/~westin/misc/mounts-by-register.html



Feb 11, 2014 at 12:11 AM
charles.K
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #8 · p.2 #8 · Latest feedback on M lenses for Sony A7/A7r


ocean2059 wrote:
Gary, I only have the A7r and all my R lenses work beautifully, including 19/2.8 V2, 35-70/4, 35/2, 50/2, 60/2,8, 90/2,8, 100/2,8 APO, 180/3,4 APO, and 400/6,8. As for my M lenses, I prefer to use them on M bodies.


The R series seem to work really well!! I am keeping eye out for a 28mm f/2.8 R E55 V2 lens. This would fill in gaps, and work well on the M240 too The other point to note about the R series is that the MFD is 0.3m, which much better than the usual 0.5 or 1.0m with the M mount.



Feb 11, 2014 at 12:55 AM
JaKo
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #9 · p.2 #9 · Latest feedback on M lenses for Sony A7/A7r


rscheffler wrote:
I did an infinity comparison between the a7R and M9 with over 20 rangefinder lenses and posted it on my site: http://www.ronscheffler.com/techtalk/?p=251

Lenses included:

CV12, CV15, ZM18, 21 Lux, ZM21/2.8, 21 SEM, ZM25, 28 Cron, CV35/1.2 II, Canon 35/2 LTM, ZM35/2, ZM35/2.8, FE35/2.8, CV40/1.4, 50 Lux ASPH, Canon 50/1.4 LTM, CV50/1.5 LTM, ZM50/1.5, ZM50/2, FE55/1.8, CV75/1.8, ZM85/4, 90 Summarit.

There are links to high-rez files for each lens on each camera from wide open through f/11. Because I was primarily interested in how the degree of edge performance differed on the Sony from the M9, I resized the a7R files to M9 dimensions.

Generally,
...Show more

Ron, thank you for your extensive write up on rangefinder lenses on Sony & Leica M9 cameras.
According to your review "Some lenses tested on the M9 were not 6-bit coded. If correction was not applied (and therefore embedded in the DNGs), it’s sometimes indicated in the watermark." which implies that number of test images taken with Leica lenses on M9 were in-camera corrected then based on lens' profiles further corrected in LR (lens profiles) where on other hand the same lenses were totally uncorrected when used on Sony A7R and further Sony settings had all lens correction disabled and Sony images were down-sampled to Leica M9 resolution. Is this correct or I misread some parts of your review?



Feb 11, 2014 at 01:56 AM
wolfloid
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #10 · p.2 #10 · Latest feedback on M lenses for Sony A7/A7r


Thanks again Edward, that's very useful. Thanks to Ron as well, I'll spend some time studying your results tomorrow evening.

Given that I have, and love the Summicron 50 and CV (Nokton) 50/1.5, any more detailed feedback on those?

Oh, I also have the 35 lux asph (not the very latest one), so any detailed feedback on that would also be very welcome.

I'm tempted, but reading so much mixed feedback on the ergonomics, slow auto focus and slow start up times of these Sonys combined with the reservations on their use with m lenses, I'm still hesitant.



Feb 11, 2014 at 03:29 AM
cellison
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #11 · p.2 #11 · Latest feedback on M lenses for Sony A7/A7r


I did a quick test between the Zeiss ZF.2 35mm (right image) and the Zeiss ZM 35mm (left image) on my A7r mounted on a tripod. Understandably the ZF.2 wins overall and especially in the corners but as you can see in the 4th image there's not that much difference when you're not at the extreme edge of the frame. In the end I decided that the ZM wins on the A7r for a few reasons… a) MUCH smaller b) less distortion c) once downsized it's pretty much a non issue.

http://cl.ly/image/3p432o3M3N08/35zm_vs_zf_full.jpg


http://cl.ly/image/1B1D2j3w0C23/35zm_vs_zf_bl.jpg


http://cl.ly/image/0p0f250J3c3D/35zm_vs_zf_tr.jpg


http://cl.ly/image/2q3N3O3F2S46/35zm_vs_zf_rs.jpg


Cheers,
Chris



Feb 11, 2014 at 11:24 AM
Luvwine
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #12 · p.2 #12 · Latest feedback on M lenses for Sony A7/A7r


Selecting the right M lenses leads to happiness using the Sony A7r in conjunction with the native mount lenses. One does need to be careful and in certain cases, how suitable the lens is depends upon the use to which you wish to put it. For example, I would not recommend buying a Summilux 50 for landscape use. While stopped down to F8 or so, it is perfectly useable, it is not nearly as good for that purpose as is the native mount FE 55, which is much better away from center at infinity. However, if your usage is for portraiture and especially in low light where center sharpness is key but corner sharpness not so much, then the Lux 50 is first rate with amazing bokeh and great center sharpness and is a pleasure to use for manual focusing. The main issues appear to be wide angle, but by all accounts the Lux 24 1.4 is great as is the WATE (16-21). At 35mm, the CV 35 1.2 is as good or better in most respects than the native mount 35 2.8, albeit heavier. It is also great to use manual focusing--much nicer than the focus by wire of the native mount lenses. Telephoto from 75-135, there are no issues, great build quality, manual focusing, and image quality all top notch. To me, the only reasons to get native mount lenses over Leica M lenses that work well is for autofocus and price reasons. These are valid reasons, but there is no need to fear using a 90mm Leica for example. Sure, a great 85mm portrait lens is coming, but I cannot imagine it will be optically superior to any significant degree to a Leica 90/2 Apo as I don't see how it could be!


Feb 11, 2014 at 11:50 AM
Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #13 · p.2 #13 · Latest feedback on M lenses for Sony A7/A7r


There are a lot of M lenses that seem to work quite well. As I have followed the samples they seem to include at least:

WATE 16-21mm f/4
21 Summilux
35 Summilux Asph (I think both version work well but I have seen more sample of the FLE version)
40 cron (it seems to work as well as on a Leica camera but the corners are a little soft)
50 Summarit
50 cron Rigid
50 cron (last non-AA version; the AA-version probably works well but I haven't seen any samples)
50 lux ASPH (excellent for portraits; ok but not stellar for landscapes stopped down to f/8 or more).
50 Noctilux (has all the typical look from what I have seen)
75 Summarit
75 cron AA
75 lux
90 Elmarit last version
90 summarit
90 cron last non-AA
90 cron AA
135 elmar APO

I think that these haven't been adopted widely for a couple of reasons:

1) The one's 35mm and wider are very expensive and are not all that better (on the A7(r) or smaller than the Oly OMs (even with adapters) which are much much cheaper.

2) The 50ish options are overshadowed by the excellent FE mount Zeiss 55 f/1.8 which is either a lot cheaper or a lot better or both than most of the options.

3) The M teles aren't that small and often are more expensive than even the R versions that are very similar or identical optically. There are also a lot of good medium SLR teles that aren't much if any bigger.

At this point it doesn't look like Leica M lenses will be used very widely even by people here not he Alt forum on the new Sony cameras.



Feb 11, 2014 at 01:18 PM
Luvwine
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #14 · p.2 #14 · Latest feedback on M lenses for Sony A7/A7r


Good comments but don't forget to factor in the size of the adapter to the equation. The M adapter is much smaller than most other adapters. It is hard, if not impossible, to find better optical performance than several of the M lenses (WATE, CV 35 1.2, 75 and 90 Cron apo come to mind) without going with lenses that are significantly larger, heavier, and/or or slower. Price is certainly a limiting factor, no question. I went from carrying a Canon 17/4 T/S, Zeiss ZE 35/2, ZE 50/2 MP, and ZE 100/2 MP with my 5DM2 to the A7r, Leica WATE, Sony FE 35/2.8, FE 55 1.8, Leica 90/2 APO and find the image quality better, size much smaller, and weight much smaller. Keeping those lenses with a Metabones adapter on the A7r would only have exacerbated the size differences.

You may be right that many will not adapt these lenses for the reasons you state, but there are clear advantages at present to considering some of them in one's lineup.



Feb 11, 2014 at 02:25 PM
Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #15 · p.2 #15 · Latest feedback on M lenses for Sony A7/A7r


Luvwine wrote:
Good comments but don't forget to factor in the size of the adapter to the equation. The M adapter is much smaller than most other adapters. It is hard, if not impossible, to find better optical performance than several of the M lenses (WATE, CV 35 1.2, 75 and 90 Cron apo come to mind) without going with lenses that are significantly larger, heavier, and/or or slower. Price is certainly a limiting factor, no question. I went from carrying a Canon 17/4 T/S, Zeiss ZE 35/2, ZE 50/2 MP, and ZE 100/2 MP with my 5DM2 to the A7r, Leica
...Show more

I do think what you have done makes a lot of sense, and I think you have put together an excellent kit. It also makes sense to me why you have kept the 50 lux Asph. On the other hand, I can certainly see why someone would switch out the Leica WATE for an Olympus OM 18mm f/3.5, and switch out the Leica M 90 AA for the Leica R 90 AA (with a mount conversion instead of an adapter) and have a very similar kit in terms of size and weight with no M lenses and about $3,500 in their pocket. Yeah, the WATE is a bit better and more flexible that the Oly, but it doubles the price of the kit. And the Leica M 90 AA would weigh a little less than the Leica R 90AA, but they would have the same length and very similar performance (the R may have a small advantage in having a shorter MFD).

It think if you have M lenses, it does make sense to use them on the A7(r) in many cases, but there are only a small number of M lenses for which there is a compelling case to buy them for the A7(r). Buy the way I think the CV 35 f/1.2 v.II is one of those lenses. It seems to work great on the Sony cameras and offers a faster and smaller lens than anything else available and has a relatively modest price. The native Sony/Zeiss is certainly a very different lens.



Feb 11, 2014 at 02:57 PM
Jeff Kott
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #16 · p.2 #16 · Latest feedback on M lenses for Sony A7/A7r


wolfloid wrote:
Given that I have, and love the Summicron 50 and CV (Nokton) 50/1.5, any more detailed feedback on those?


My latest version 50 Cron M is my most used lens on my A7r and I think the performance - including corner sharpness- is fantastic!!!!



Feb 11, 2014 at 03:07 PM
Luvwine
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #17 · p.2 #17 · Latest feedback on M lenses for Sony A7/A7r


Agreed on the CV 35 1.2. I own that one along with the FE 35 and use them depending upon what I am shooting. Hiking for landscapes, I use the FE 35 due to size advantage and sharpness at infinity at F2.8-4, for low light, portraiture, etc. I use the CV. The CV is probably the better all-rounder, but at a weight penalty to the FE and with no auto focus.

Also, minimum focus distance is not much of a handicap--especially if one uses the Hawks adapter version 3 (helicoid) or the CV close focus adapter (I have one of each).

Still, cannot argue price advantages to going other routes. That is something everyone has to decide for him or herself. I have been fortunate to get some good pricing on some of the kit I have.



Feb 11, 2014 at 03:31 PM
rscheffler
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #18 · p.2 #18 · Latest feedback on M lenses for Sony A7/A7r



JaKo wrote:
Ron, thank you for your extensive write up on rangefinder lenses on Sony & Leica M9 cameras.
According to your review "Some lenses tested on the M9 were not 6-bit coded. If correction was not applied (and therefore embedded in the DNGs), it’s sometimes indicated in the watermark." which implies that number of test images taken with Leica lenses on M9 were in-camera corrected then based on lens' profiles further corrected in LR (lens profiles) where on other hand the same lenses were totally uncorrected when used on Sony A7R and further Sony settings had all lens correction disabled and Sony
...Show more

If the lens was coded, then the M9 did it's usual in-camera baked-into-the-DNG color shift and vignetting optimization. I didn't apply any additional corrections in Lightroom, such as lens profiles or CA correction.

I turned off lens corrections on the a7R to be sure it wasn't baking something into the RAW files. But I think the only lenses it might affect were the native FE mount, and then maybe only for SOOC Jpegs.

In some respects it's a bit of an unfair stance to take, but my logic was that with adapted lenses, the Sony won't provide any internal corrections anyway and wanted to be sure I could see 'worst case' examples of color shift. Edge smearing wouldn't be affected by in-camera color shift or vignetting correction (other than possibly making it more obvious).

The downsizing of the a7R files to M9 dimensions was to give me an idea of how the lenses will look on the a7R once the resolution difference is eliminated. I.e., does the additional resolution make the edge smearing look worse than it really is? Considering that edge smearing in the downsized images is worse with the a7R, I don't believe it's simply a matter of the greater resolution exaggerating what would already be there in an M9 image. The same lens on each camera often looked considerably different.

I hope answers your question?

cellison wrote:
I did a quick test between the Zeiss ZF.2 35mm (right image) and the Zeiss ZM 35mm (left image) on my A7r mounted on a tripod. Understandably the ZF.2 wins overall and especially in the corners but as you can see in the 4th image there's not that much difference when you're not at the extreme edge of the frame. In the end I decided that the ZM wins on the A7r for a few reasons… a) MUCH smaller b) less distortion c) once downsized it's pretty much a non issue.

Cheers,
Chris


I agree that we each need to weigh a number of variables in our decision making. My observations were primarily for infinity scenes where the edge smearing will be the worst. A risk is my conclusions will be extrapolated by others to mean that a given lens will be unusable in any situation. As you and others have pointed out, the style of photos one does will greatly influence one's perception of how well a lens performs on the these Sony cameras.




Feb 11, 2014 at 03:50 PM
1      
2
       end




FM Forums | Sony Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1      
2
       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.