p.8 #1 · A thinner sensor stack may be possible after all!
Gents,
Sorry for the delay. I had to send my A7 back to KolariVision for a focus tweak - it was one of the early protos - and should have it back this weekend if the east coast storms have not overly delayed transit. Hope to shoot and post some samples on Sunday.
p.8 #2 · A thinner sensor stack may be possible after all!
@Michael
could you elaborate on the focus issues? I'd better check mine, though I rarely use AF, I do want my LAEA4 to hit with 70400G if possible.
LightShow wrote:
If the sem 21 works much better, I can see its price jump.
I look forward to your results. Do you have a CV15?
Unfortunately, though a fan of the lens on the nex-5, I never did get one.
The M9 does not seem to love it, at least that's what I hear. But the new version may be a new story
The relevant lenses I own:
ZM18
SEM21
28cron
ZM35/2
If the SEM 21 really gets good, then I would expect the other three in this list would also.
Lenses I don't expect to fully recover, but will try:
CV 21/4
CV 35/2.5
It's going to be very interesting to see the CV 35/1.4, which has a funny romance with the thick CG, but still is not as we would hope, and the usable 40cron could get alot better too. I also have them.
Another one will be the Canon LTM 50/1.4, which the M9 really loves, but the A7 series much less so.
p.8 #3 · A thinner sensor stack may be possible after all!
naturephoto1 wrote:
... I know that Derek has suggested that the modification should have little or no affect on the performance of the R lenses since they were designed for film, but I would want confirmation of this....
More likeley the thinner sensor stack effect is minimized because the Leica R lenses are designed for a SLR camera. And because they are relativley slow.
Jan 29, 2015 at 03:20 AM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.8 #4 · A thinner sensor stack may be possible after all!
ZoneV wrote:
More likeley the thinner sensor stack effect is minimized because the Leica R lenses are designed for a SLR camera. And because they are relativley slow.
And were designed for film not the thicker cover glass of most digital cameras.
Jan 29, 2015 at 06:58 AM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.8 #5 · A thinner sensor stack may be possible after all!
uhoh7 wrote:
@Michael
could you elaborate on the focus issues? I'd better check mine, though I rarely use AF, I do want my LAEA4 to hit with 70400G if possible.
Unfortunately, though a fan of the lens on the nex-5, I never did get one.
The M9 does not seem to love it, at least that's what I hear. But the new version may be a new story
The relevant lenses I own:
ZM18
SEM21
28cron
ZM35/2
If the SEM 21 really gets good, then I would expect the other three in this list would also.
Lenses I don't expect to fully recover, but will try:
CV 21/4
CV 35/2.5
It's going to be very interesting to see the CV 35/1.4, which has a funny romance with the thick CG, but still is not as we would hope, and the usable 40cron could get alot better too. I also have them.
Another one will be the Canon LTM 50/1.4, which the M9 really loves, but the A7 series much less so.
I will be really interesting to see how your lenses perform. I expect colour shift to remain on the ZM 18, but the 21 SEM and the 28 cron to do well. I expect the ZM 35 to be close to the Loxia 35 on an unmodified camera. I am looking forward to seeing your results.
p.8 #6 · A thinner sensor stack may be possible after all!
Steve Spencer wrote:
I will be really interesting to see how your lenses perform. I expect colour shift to remain on the ZM 18, but the 21 SEM and the 28 cron to do well. I expect the ZM 35 to be close to the Loxia 35 on an unmodified camera. I am looking forward to seeing your results.
Hi Steve,
I am not nearly as sure as you are about the M 28mm Summicron or for that matter, the M 28mm Elmarit. lens either. As I recall they were dismal for their performance on the stock A7/A7r cameras. We will have to wait for Charlie and others to check in on this with their modified A7/A7r cameras.
Rich
Jan 29, 2015 at 10:19 AM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.8 #7 · A thinner sensor stack may be possible after all!
naturephoto1 wrote:
Hi Steve,
I am not nearly as sure as you are about the M 28mm Summicron or for that matter, the M 28mm Elmarit. lens either. As I recall they were dismal for their performance on the stock A7/A7r cameras. We will have to wait for Charlie and others to check in on this with their modified A7/A7r cameras.
Rich
Hi Rich,
I am not at all optimistic about the 28mm Elmarit. It has an exit pupil of about 29mm at the lens rental database, which is only 1mm more than the ZM 21 f/4.5 which apparently isn't very good on the modified camera (and has a lot of colour issues even on the Leica M digital cameras). I am more optimistic about the 28 cron, however. It is quite a bit longer than the 28 elmarit (30mm vs. 41mm) and that might suggest it has a longer exit pupil (I hope so). The ZM 35 f/2 has just a 34mm exit pupil and I have hope for that as well. From the limited data it looks like a lens needs to have a 40 to 45mm exit pupil to do fairly well on the unmodified camera (e.g., the 35 lux FLE has 40.5mm exit pupil, the Voigtlander 35 f/1.2 has a 44.5mm exit pupil). I am thinking that for an f/2 lens something like 35mm or so exit pupil will be needed and probably a bit more length if it is an f/1.4 lens, and that is for decent performance. Top performance will still require a cover stack the thickness the lens was designed for.
p.8 #8 · A thinner sensor stack may be possible after all!
Steve Spencer wrote:
And were designed for film not the thicker cover glass of most digital cameras.
Lens designed for film = 0mm glass stack.
Sony FE lens designed for digital sensor ~1.85mm glass stack thickness
The modified A7x is somewhere between - and so the results on this modified cameras are not clearly better with a lens that is designed for film than with a lens designed for digital. The influence of rangefinder or SLR design are much more clear.
Based upon the BG 39 glass and the stated spectrum as original I guess the BG 39 will be about 1mm thick - what would be in the mid between film and A7 optimized lens.
p.8 #9 · A thinner sensor stack may be possible after all!
ZoneV wrote:
Lens designed for film = 0mm glass stack.
Sony FE lens designed for digital sensor ~1.85mm glass stack thickness
The modified A7x is somewhere between - and so the results on this modified cameras are not clearly better with a lens that is designed for film than with a lens designed for digital. The influence of rangefinder or SLR design are much more clear.
but the modified camera clearly should be better with a lens designed for film (such as leica R lenses) than the unmodified camera with the same lens designed for film, which is what steve and i were saying.
p.8 #10 · A thinner sensor stack may be possible after all!
Michael
could you elaborate on the focus issues? I'd better check mine, though I rarely use AF, I do want my LAEA4 to hit with 70400G if possible.
My focus issue was just the need to fine-tune the infinity focus, which is something that was refined during the productization by KolariVision. I'm not one who can comment on auto-focus since I don't own any native lenses for the A7.
p.8 #11 · A thinner sensor stack may be possible after all!
Steve Spencer wrote:
Hi Rich,
I am not at all optimistic about the 28mm Elmarit. It has an exit pupil of about 29mm at the lens rental database, which is only 1mm more than the ZM 21 f/4.5 which apparently isn't very good on the modified camera (and has a lot of colour issues even on the Leica M digital cameras). I am more optimistic about the 28 cron, however. It is quite a bit longer than the 28 elmarit (30mm vs. 41mm) and that might suggest it has a longer exit pupil (I hope so). The ZM 35 f/2 has just a 34mm exit pupil and I have hope for that as well. From the limited data it looks like a lens needs to have a 40 to 45mm exit pupil to do fairly well on the unmodified camera (e.g., the 35 lux FLE has 40.5mm exit pupil, the Voigtlander 35 f/1.2 has a 44.5mm exit pupil). I am thinking that for an f/2 lens something like 35mm or so exit pupil will be needed and probably a bit more length if it is an f/1.4 lens, and that is for decent performance. Top performance will still require a cover stack the thickness the lens was designed for....Show more →
Good points, but which elmarit? There are 5!
I'm pretty sure you mean the tiny ASPH, and I agree with your assessment, but the best one for image quality is the 4, and the 3, which I have, is a big lens. Both of those may see huge improvement.
i wonder how my latest sexy baby will do: by unoh7, she is fast, fast, fast, and very skinny too!
p.8 #12 · A thinner sensor stack may be possible after all!
naturephoto1 wrote:
Hi Steve,
I am not nearly as sure as you are about the M 28mm Summicron or for that matter, the M 28mm Elmarit. lens either. As I recall they were dismal for their performance on the stock A7/A7r cameras. We will have to wait for Charlie and others to check in on this with their modified A7/A7r cameras.
Rich
Hi Rich/Steve/Charlie
Lloyd has tested the 28 Elmarit Asph with the A7rM versus the stock version. The test results for the 28 Elmarit are excellent, in that by f/8 the elmarit delivers a high grade image and further improves by f/11. From the test results there is no way I would use the Elmarit on the A7r stock. On reviewing the results, IMO I would in many instances use f/2.8 and 4 for street photography with no issues. The 28 Elmarit is a wonderful light lens and I really think if you have the lens, it will be very usable with the A7r M.
I would not purchase the lens myself again, and I feel the 28 Cron Asph will perform even better with longer exit pupil distance. Maybe 28 Elmari V3
Charlie, the 28 Elmarit v3 should be very good, as it is a Mandler designed lens. I suspect this lens would really shine
p.8 #13 · A thinner sensor stack may be possible after all!
sebboh wrote:
but the modified camera clearly should be better with a lens designed for film (such as leica R lenses) than the unmodified camera with the same lens designed for film, which is what steve and i were saying.
Probably not nearly as pronounced as with the rangefinder lenses, though, I'm guessing. Beyond the much longer flange distance which makes ray angle less critical, SLR lenses (including ones you wouldn't expect like the Nikon 50/1.2) sometimes have pretty long exit pupil distances which Roger's past articles on the subject suggest make them less susceptible
p.8 #14 · A thinner sensor stack may be possible after all!
charles.K wrote:
Hi Rich/Steve/Charlie
Lloyd has tested the 28 Elmarit Asph with the A7rM versus the stock version. The test results for the 28 Elmarit are excellent, in that by f/8 the elmarit delivers a high grade image and further improves by f/11. From the test results there is no way I would use the Elmarit on the A7r stock. On reviewing the results, IMO I would in many instances use f/2.8 and 4 for street photography with no issues. The 28 Elmarit is a wonderful light lens and I really think if you have the lens, it will be very usable with the A7r M.
I would not purchase the lens myself again, and I feel the 28 Cron Asph will perform even better with longer exit pupil distance. Maybe 28 Elmari V3
Charlie,28 Elmarit v3 would be amazing, as it is a Mandler designed lens. I suspect this lens would really shine
The v3 is pretty great on the existing filter stack (a7/II anyway), so I imagine you're absolutely correct.
Jan 29, 2015 at 09:59 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.8 #15 · A thinner sensor stack may be possible after all!
charles.K wrote:
Hi Rich/Steve/Charlie
Lloyd has tested the 28 Elmarit Asph with the A7rM versus the stock version. The test results for the 28 Elmarit are excellent, in that by f/8 the elmarit delivers a high grade image and further improves by f/11. From the test results there is no way I would use the Elmarit on the A7r stock. On reviewing the results, IMO I would in many instances use f/2.8 and 4 for street photography with no issues. The 28 Elmarit is a wonderful light lens and I really think if you have the lens, it will be very usable with the A7r M.
I would not purchase the lens myself again, and I feel the 28 Cron Asph will perform even better with longer exit pupil distance. Maybe 28 Elmari V3
Charlie,28 Elmarit v3 would be amazing, as it is a Mandler designed lens. I suspect this lens would really shine
That is very interesting to know Charles. With the modified camera it would be interesting to compare the 28 elmarit ASPH to the R 28 elmarit v II. The MTFs are higher over most of the frame for the ASPH, but if their is one deterioration in performance still the SLR lens still might perform better. The non-ASPH even in version IV isn't quite up to the performance of the R v. II but its MTF isn't far off, which isn't too surprising given that the R lens came out a year after the M version IV. It is noticeably smaller than the R lens and noticeably cheaper as well. If it does well on the modified camera I can see some people picking it. We are all eager for your results when you get your camera, and then we can see more how the summicron ASPH does.
p.8 #16 · A thinner sensor stack may be possible after all!
Steve Spencer wrote:
That is very interesting to know Charles. With the modified camera it would be interesting to compare the 28 elmarit ASPH to the R 28 elmarit v II. The MTFs are higher over most of the frame for the ASPH, but if their is one deterioration in performance still the SLR lens still might perform better. The non-ASPH even in version IV isn't quite up to the performance of the R v. II but its MTF isn't far off, which isn't too surprising given that the R lens came out a year after the M version IV. It is noticeably smaller than the R lens and noticeably cheaper as well. If it does well on the modified camera I can see some people picking it. We are all eager for your results when you get your camera, and then we can see more how the summicron ASPH does....Show more →
Hi Steve,
Yes the comparison between the 28 Elmarit M vIII compared to the 28 Elmarit R VII would be interesting. If you already have this lens I think it will work great.
I think I am getting tired of trying sooo many lenses! In truth this was the reason why I purchased the WATE and sold a number of other M lenses. I am still very happy with this decision as I know this lens will work. There are few other lenses I bought and then resold as I did not like them. The reality is when I travel, I only need a few lenses that work well.
I really do think the 28 Elmarit V3 will be great. The subtlety with the Mandler lenses always amazes me. I find I am awed by many new excellent lenses, sharp yet boring after a period of time. With the 50 Noct f/1.0 and 75 Lux there is always a magic to the images. The 50 Cron DR (Not Mandler but similar in style) is sharp, lesser contrast but it beautifully renders B&W on all the A7's.
I did have the R 28 Elmarit IV for a while, but I was not taken by it. With the A7rM this might change how the lens performs! Most likely the 28mm FL is not my favourite
p.8 #17 · A thinner sensor stack may be possible after all!
freaklikeme wrote:
The v3 is pretty great on the existing filter stack (a7/II anyway), so I imagine you're absolutely correct.
I can't agree. I don't doubt it can make some fun images closer in, but at infinity, with distant objects things are pretty disappointing on the edges. DSC01880 by unoh7, on Flickr
if you open the full compare this f/8 image edge trees on first ridge with houses in center frame. To be fair, even on M9 this lens needs to stop way down for great edges. The 28 cron kills it in that way.
I thought, with A7r I might escape this with SLR glass, but my FD 35/2 SSC thorium, at f/8 showed me all sorts of strangeness. DSC04369 by unoh7, on Flickr
I sent the A7r back after this, and the lens was alot better on the A7, but 28s RF or SLR just did not shine for long landscapes.
p.8 #18 · A thinner sensor stack may be possible after all!
uhoh7 wrote:
I can't agree. I don't doubt it can make some fun images closer in, but at infinity, with distant objects things are pretty disappointing on the edges. https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2810/11213475035_e075814773_b.jpg DSC01880 by unoh7, on Flickr
if you open the full compare this f/8 image edge trees on first ridge with houses in center frame. To be fair, even on M9 this lens needs to stop way down for great edges. The 28 cron kills it in that way.
charlie – i think i may have mentioned this to you before, but it looks like your 28 elmarit vIII is decentered. the left side of the image looks much worse than the right side of the image at the same distance.
p.8 #19 · A thinner sensor stack may be possible after all!
sebboh wrote:
charlie – i think i may have mentioned this to you before, but it looks like your 28 elmarit vIII is decentered. the left side of the image looks much worse than the right side of the image at the same distance.
or maybe the A7r
But it's a good point,
However impossible to judge in that image as the ridge in question is not duplicated on the right, instead you have the much closer lift, which tells nothing.
In fact, the right may be worse! DSC01893 by unoh7, on Flickr
Oh wait both sides suck: DSC01385-2 by unoh7, A7 (not R) Elmarit v3 f/11
follow trees on distant ridges.
Hard to tell at 28 since angle of light source varies side to side, but I reviewed some more, and am thinking maybe you are right. Those Canadians!!!
Good lesson for me, I am going to be testing closely on new glass from here on out.
p.8 #20 · A thinner sensor stack may be possible after all!
uhoh7 wrote:
or maybe the A7r
But it's a good point,
However impossible to judge in that image as the ridge in question is not duplicated on the right, instead you have the much closer lift, which tells nothing.
Hard to tell at 28 since angle of light source varies side to side, but I reviewed some more, and am thinking maybe you are right. Those Canadians!!!
Good lesson for me, I am going to be testing closely on new glass from here on out....Show more →
the left side still looks noticeably worse, but this time you made the lenses general performance look worse by placing the horizon closer to the lenses midzone dip (especially at the edges).
are you focus the center at infinity are are focusing off center?
edit: also, if you really want to test a lens for decentering turn the camera at an angle to get corner to corner horizon.
