Not to nitpick, but it's more of a mount-replacement or conversion than an adapter. Is there even a Leica Noctilux 50 f/1? I couldn't find a reference to one on the net, only to the M system version, which is not adaptable. Remember this mount conversion only works for R-system Leica lenses.
Is it worth buying and converting a 90/2 non-APO? I would like one as portrait lens, as a complement to the clumsy 80-200 2.8 zoom. I've found one used, and converted it would cost less than half the price of a (used) AF 85/1.4.
The Leica 50mm f/1 is for the Leica M, which has a significantly shorter mount-to-sensor distance, and thus won't work. It has to be an R lens. You could do it with the 180 f/2 however.
barry996 wrote:
could i use the adapter for leica 50/1.0 ?
No, the replacement mount is for Leica R lenses for the R and Leicaflex SLR's. The 50mm f1.0 Noctilux-M is an M mount rangefinder lens which can only be adapted to micro 4/3rds mount (IE the Panasonic G1).
JonasY wrote:
Is it worth buying and converting a 90/2 non-APO? I would like one as portrait lens, as a complement to the clumsy 80-200 2.8 zoom. I've found one used, and converted it would cost less than half the price of a (used) AF 85/1.4.
From the examples I've seen from the 90 Summicron, Hell yes. Completely worth it.
If you can find an inexpensive copy of the 80/1.4 it is definitely worth considering. You'll get shallower depth of field like your rokkor and the out of focus area in the bokeh is the best you will find in any of Leica's R line-up.
It is a hard call. I've used a borrowed 90 pre-AA ("90") and own the "80" 'lux (mint optics but user body) and "90AA" (mint all' round). The 90 is the least costly and being a Mandler lens (as is the 80, 35/2, etc) has that nice glow. It's softish WO but gets very sharp at F4-5.6.
The 80 has that glow, sweet bokeh (like the 90) and very gradual in/out of focus transitions. Gets uber-sharp 1-1.5 stops earlier than the 90 (for obvious reasons). If you don't want the extra stop (which does make low-light work much easier and gives nice skinny DoF), the 90 is hard to beat.
The 90 was made in a couple of form factors (telescoping hood vs 1pc, filter size/holder) over the years, the last being identical, in appearance to the 90AA. All variants are optically identical. The smaller 1pc-hood '90AA-clone' is a bit more costly used.
People tend to be in two camps on the 80 vs 90 - either they love the 90 and view the 80 has a costly extravagance or they love the 'lux speed and DoF capabilities and view the 90 as it's slower cousin. I'm in the 'lux camp.
Both the 80 and all but the last copy of the 90 typically have smooth but stiffer/more fine pitch focus mechanics than say the 90AA, 100 APO. Lots of large glass and hood to move around - but allows very precise placement of plane of focus. For quick 'snap shooting" the 90AA and last copy of the 90 are faster focusing.
The 90AA, as we all know, is another kettle of fish all together. Gives up a little in the bokeh department but the gains in terms of resolution, etc are gob-smacking.
My biggest issue right now is deciding on which to keep - the 80 or 90AA. Don't need two low-light lenses in that FL and have a Jonesing for a 100 APO... argh.
Bottom line - can't go wrong with any of the three. All depends on whether you need the extra stop and your budget.
I'm going the cheap route and search for a 90 2.0 :P