your lenses is coded (filled black marks on the mount) so the m9 reads that code and knows which color corrections to apply. i'm not sure what lens it is coded as though, probably 21 elmarit pre asph?. correction probably won't be perfect at infinity since it is correcting for a different lens.
the rangefinder coupling is the black painted metal tube just inside the mount flanges (looks to be part of the helicoid on this conversion). there is a piece on a rangefinder camera that will slide into the notch in the bayonet mount of the lens and rest against this metal tube. as you turn the focus ring on the lens it should move the tube forward or backwards thus pressing the rangefinder coupling on the camera into the camera or allowing it to come further out. here is a link to a gif of somebody pushing on camera coupling in and out as the lens would if it were mounted.
JimBuchanan wrote:
Remember, the M rangefinder helicals vary by pitch to work with the rangefinder. I have one of these with a Nikon Millennium 50, I am anxious to try out on the full frame Sony...
yeah, the pitch variance was why i wanted to see how they actually implemented it. i'll be excited to hear how millennium works, that's supposed to be a pretty awesome lens.
Sebboh, Jim thank you both for the enlightenment. I have to say that after those few shots I took with the M9, I felt the lure of this way of shooting and even considered getting a used M8. But then, is it that different from, say, using a split digital screen on the new X100s?
And getting back to the core of this thread, if the A7/A7R prove allergic to M wides, and the new GXR-M (APS-C or FF) for which this G21 was groomed doesn't come to life, one may be tempted to trade it for one of Zeiss SLR great wides. It all started after I saw some spectacular photos of another converted G21 (Japanese Exposures?) on a GXR-M. Oh, well ...
somebody besides me needs to get off the dime and tweet to:
@stevehuffphotos
and ask him to do something helpful. He just thinks I'm a cranky pot, I'm sure.
My feeling is that the GXR is dead both as a product and as a concept. I own a 12.3MP GXR/M and plan to keep it (M glass works great on it, but so do adapted SLR lenses) but I'm not waiting around for Ricoh to produce a full frame M wide angle lens friendly camera. What's more, I don't think anyone else will go there except Leica.
Zeiss announced they are making new manual focus lenses for full frame mirrorless cameras (starting with Sony FE bodies like A7, A7r) in order to fully capitalize on new designs operating on large image sensors. While these won't be rangefinder lenses, my expectation is that these will be seen as the new descendants of great RF glass. Guess we'll find out late in 2014.
With the Zeiss announcement in mind, and remembering talk that even Leica is updating their own RF lens designs to be more digital friendly, are not these important lens makers telling us they don't expect any quantum change in sensor tech is on the horizon and therefore expectations must to change: getting uniformly great performance across a lens line up will require makers of lenses for narrow back focal length mirrorless cameras to update their designs.
That's my operating guess and I'm adjusting how I spend accordingly.
uhoh7 wrote:
somebody besides me needs to get off the dime and tweet to:
@stevehuffphotos
and ask him to do something helpful. He just thinks I'm a cranky pot, I'm sure.
But you *are* a cranky pot!
When only the very best in cranky pots are required, we know we can depend on uhoh07!
When only the very best in cranky pots are required, we know we can depend on uhoh07!
haha, I just tweeted
@PhilMolyneux
Sony President & COO who is there herding the lobotomized cats.
Told him boards on fire demanding Huff provide WA RF corners.
he prolly thinks that's some sort of sex act.
u think that will effect my pre-order?
btw im @uhoh007 case u wanna see me torture various victims, hehe
sebboh wrote:
it's curvature. check the lamp post and buildings in the background. you can even see focal "plane" zoom back through the grass. i'm guessing its due to the cover glass based astigmatism.
Probably at least partially true, but don't forget that lenses with the exit pupil far back will also generally give an increased DOF towards the corners because the pupil isn't round from that angle, but instead lens shaped. This also causes natural vignetting.
Verdict : The G28 is not really usable on the A7R.
I just looked at the Samyang 85/1.4 sample photos. At wide open there is no purple fringe on the corner image, but strangely the pp showed up at f2.8-f4 and getting worst at f11. What cause it?
sebboh wrote:
your lenses is coded (filled black marks on the mount) so the m9 reads that code and knows which color corrections to apply. i'm not sure what lens it is coded as though, probably 21 elmarit pre asph?
A lot of great knowledge on optics on this board. Can you guys tell me if there generally would be no concern with SLR wides? I'm thinking specifically about the OM 24/2.8.
Also, how about RF's in the 35mm range (thinking pre-ASPH Summilux).
I'm not sure about you guys, but I'm loosing hope of using RF lenses on these cameras.
I decided to wait until end of 2014, and see what Zeiss is planning to introduce for this mount. By then, I should be able to get the A8R with the 58mp sensor that automatically adjusts the angle of the microlenses according to the lens you're using
That 35/1.8 would be great, especially if they do a 85/1.8 too. But it'll need a new body for me, something quiet. Otherwise the advantage over an SLR is too small for me.
edwardkaraa wrote:
I'm not sure about you guys, but I'm loosing hope of using RF lenses on these cameras.
I decided to wait until end of 2014, and see what Zeiss is planning to introduce for this mount. By then, I should be able to get the A8R with the 58mp sensor that automatically adjusts the angle of the microlenses according to the lens you're using
What an idea!. I want also a manual control of the angle by means of a joystick toggle on the camera.
But, before commiting to that A8R, we'll need to wait until the end of 2015 to read the complete and final Steve Huff's "not-review".
