edwardkaraa wrote:
Thanks Rich. Certainly the Phigment has the best functionality and I will seriously consider it. I would be very interested to know if it has the same precision and uniform flatness as the Novoflex or Voigtlander.
Edward,
Unfortunately I do not have the LM to NEX adapters from either Novoflex or Voigtlander for comparison. However, comparing the Phigment LM to NEX adapter with my Novoflex Leica R to NEX, Leica R to Fuji X, and my Leica R to M4/3 adapters I would say that it is very close and quite probably equal. The Phigment adapter is also surprisingly heavy.
edwardkaraa wrote:
So, I know it must have been discussed before, but what is the best M/E adapter mechanically? I would imagine something like the Novoflex or Voigtlander?
The first thing I look for is the M bayonet retaining mechanism. Most lesser models have super thin slits that are widened to provide pressure on the lens bayonet ears. They require one to frequently use a screwdriver to widen the slit to increase the tension.
The Metabones and I believe the 2 mentioned above, have a arc shaped steel "ear" or retaining lever to provide the tension. This arrangement seems to be more robust and not require any adjustments.
The last time I looked at the Voigtlander, I thought it appeared larger in diameter than the Metabones, which would give less room for middle finger on the NEX 6/7. The Metabones has a rather large lens release tab, which I have ground down to a very shallow tab. The a7r may have more room between the lens mount and grip, so this may not be a factor.
Lastly, the Metabones was about .004" too thin and a properly adjusted M lens would focus past infinity. The 3 adapters mentioned have screws on the mount face that can be removed to shim the adapter to give exact infinity hard stop focus. I don't have any of the Novo or Voig adapters yet, so I don't know how they are as far as infinity.
Hi. Regarding the M to E adapters, I am interested in those with a helicoid. Do anyone know how well they perform?
I am thinking of getting a cheap M to E helicoid in eBay, thinking that as there's a helicoid, there will be less a issue about focusing pass infinity which makes the markings on the lens inaccurate, because I can use the helicoid to recalibrate it again.
And of course the main reason of using helicoid is the poor close focusing distance of 0.7/0.5m.
Thanks!
The ebay helicoid M to E adapter i've tried has a bit of slop in the helicoid itself. It is perfect usable for macro work, but if i was shooting landscape, i'd probably throw on solid adapter instead to avoid any performance degradation from misalignment .
Has anyone taken measurements of the thickness of the eBay adapters with a micrometer? Tempted to buy one just to test my adapters.
Hi, everyone. I have a question regarding the Contax RF Mount.
I am comparing the Contax C/Y 50/1.4 to the Contax RF 50/1.5. Do you think if the Contax RF 50/1.5 would work on the A7(R)? And do you have any suggestions on Contax RF mount to Sony E mount adapter? I can only find a few one on eBay and one said that it is for the outer bayonet only, which is quite confusing.
Many thanks!
kolen wrote:
Hi, everyone. I have a question regarding the Contax RF Mount.
I am comparing the Contax C/Y 50/1.4 to the Contax RF 50/1.5. Do you think if the Contax RF 50/1.5 would work on the A7(R)? And do you have any suggestions on Contax RF mount to Sony E mount adapter? I can only find a few one on eBay and one said that it is for the outer bayonet only, which is quite confusing.
Many thanks!
Hi,
uhoh7 wrote:
I was always surprised the zm25 was just "OK" on nexes--really not a stand out like the SEMs.
You look at the 24 elmarit next to the SE, which is also tall, and you start to hope.....
isn't the sem 24, like, one of the "great ones"?
Despite being in the same category, these lenses have different strengths and weaknesses. Of course, the Elmar 24 is the king of 24s, but at a maximum aperture of f/3.8, it better be. For me this 2/3 f/stop really is a deal breaker. f/2.8 is already what I consider on the slow side.
As for the Elmarit, it is an older design and I believe the ZM is clearly better.
Btw, the ZM was superb on the GXR-M.
As for my comment that the ZM is more sensor friendly, on my M9 which I consider the most friendly sensor for wides and ultra wides, when I select the Elmarit profile for the ZM, it is over corrected, which leads me to believe the ZM must have less vignetting and color shift, as it doesn't require as much correction.
Now will it behave similarly on the A7R? My guess is as good as yours.
kolen wrote:
Hi. Regarding the M to E adapters, I am interested in those with a helicoid. Do anyone know how well they perform?
I am thinking of getting a cheap M to E helicoid in eBay, thinking that as there's a helicoid, there will be less a issue about focusing pass infinity which makes the markings on the lens inaccurate, because I can use the helicoid to recalibrate it again.
And of course the main reason of using helicoid is the poor close focusing distance of 0.7/0.5m.
Thanks!
I have 2 M to E adapters Hawks helicoid and Novoflex. The Hawks does not reach infinity unfortunately so I got the Novoflex. Both look and feel well made, the Hawks sits in a drawer somewhere unless I learn of an easy way to correct it!
Edgars Kalnins wrote:
I have 2 M to E adapters Hawks helicoid and Novoflex. The Hawks does not reach infinity unfortunately so I got the Novoflex. Both look and feel well made, the Hawks sits in a drawer somewhere unless I learn of an easy way to correct it!
What about the Novoflex, Edgars? Care to write us a mini-review?
The various Novoflex adapters are precisely made.
I have way too many adapters of various origins.
The Novoflex adapters are the only ones good enough to pull this off.
Mount Leica APO-R 280/4 on tripod, attach NEX-5N or NEX-7 with Novoflex adapter, focus wide open.
Replace camera and adapter with Leica M9 and another Novoflex adapter.
I find the lens is still in focus. None of my other purely mechanical adapters come close.
Not bad, not bad at all.
For handheld photography I prefer the Phigment adapter as it switches on magnification when it senses the lens is being focused.
LightShow wrote:
I asked about the auto mag. It can be turned off in the adapter FW.
That's correct.
There are also a few other options, like including the focal length in the Exif for coded lenses.
One can also enter the focal length for uncoded lenses.
What's interesting is that he clearly states that the A7 is the one to get for RF lenses below 35mm. At this point I guess he is the only one that have compared the two cams.
If this is correct it means that the offset microlenses are something needed to take care of the massive number of pixels in the A7r, not to cater for RF WA's (which may have been a vain hope from the start). Gives some hope for e.g. the G28 that seem to be bad on the A7r (Phillip Reeves shots).
LightShow wrote:
I asked about the auto mag. It can be turned off in the adapter FW.
I've also added auto-mag inhibit/enable on half shutter press. This will be in an upcoming firmware release.
4 configurable modes:
-no auto magnify
-always magnify when focus change
-magnify when focus change if shutter half pressed
-magnify when focus change if shutter is not half pressed
wfrank wrote:
What's interesting is that he clearly states that the A7 is the one to get for RF lenses below 35mm. At this point I guess he is the only one that have compared the two cams.
If this is correct it means that the offset microlenses are something needed to take care of the massive number of pixels in the A7r, not to cater for RF WA's (which may have been a vain hope from the start). Gives some hope for e.g. the G28 that seem to be bad on the A7r (Phillip Reeves shots).
I think he's basing that on the color shift. A7 does have less color shift because of the larger pixels.
Taylor Sherman wrote:
I think he's basing that on the color shift. A7 does have less color shift because of the larger pixels.
Right, that could be correct and I've also seen the posts in this thread speculating to differentiate the problems. On the other hand I've rarely seen one problem without the other in real use with NEX.
It was first version.