uhoh7 wrote:
1.Do you guys think this issue can be easily fixed in a re-design?
2.What I would like to see are images ruined by this problem. Links appreciated.
2. You mean a video? In a still you might see the effect of a decentered lens.
1. Sure is it solvable with a new design.
Does not have Sony a similar adapter for its SLR line? Also Sigma seems to have such an adapter.
One could compare the stability of the constructions.
What would a Leica construction weight?
Jan
I was sadly expecting the wobble issue to be widely noted by this community of TAP users. I sent a unit back to Techart that developed severe wobble after only very light use, and the heaviest lens mounted was the CY 35-70. Replacement has still not gotten to me (I sent the old one back in January), some kind of issue with it in the mail, probably not Techart's fault.
I agree with others that we are the beta testers, and I would definitely pay more for a version that 1) did develop wobble, 2) had better low light performance and 3) didn't drain the battery.
I've been shooting with my FE 16-35 lately, and the ease of use has really provided a stark contrast to TAP, highlighting just how quirky a solution TAP is (and I'm not even taking it to the lengths others are with the custom front filter). When not wobbling, to me, it still provides a compact full frame system that feels to me, easier to use than a Leica M.
But, when I miss a shot due to the quirky nature of TAP, I sometimes wonder if my A7RII should really be my landscape camera, and my walk around/travel/street camera should be an XT-2. I'd feel differently if I had a reasonably compact Zeiss Batis 35 F2 and 50 F2 but I get the sense that this may never happen. Sadly, I just didn't really bond with the rendering of FE 35 2.8 and 55 1.8. I catch myself looking at my ZM 35 1.4, and leica 50/90 and watching them morph into an XT-2, and while that is hard, it may be less hard when my current TAP begins to fail.
Jack Thompson wrote:
I was sadly expecting the wobble issue to be widely noted by this community of TAP users. I sent a unit back to Techart that developed severe wobble after only very light use, and the heaviest lens mounted was the CY 35-70. Replacement has still not gotten to me (I sent the old one back in January), some kind of issue with it in the mail, probably not Techart's fault.
I agree with others that we are the beta testers, and I would definitely pay more for a version that 1) did develop wobble, 2) had better low light performance and 3) didn't drain the battery.
I've been shooting with my FE 16-35 lately, and the ease of use has really provided a stark contrast to TAP, highlighting just how quirky a solution TAP is (and I'm not even taking it to the lengths others are with the custom front filter). When not wobbling, to me, it still provides a compact full frame system that feels to me, easier to use than a Leica M.
But, when I miss a shot due to the quirky nature of TAP, I sometimes wonder if my A7RII should really be my landscape camera, and my walk around/travel/street camera should be an XT-2. I'd feel differently if I had a reasonably compact Zeiss Batis 35 F2 and 50 F2 but I get the sense that this may never happen. Sadly, I just didn't really bond with the rendering of FE 35 2.8 and 55 1.8. I catch myself looking at my ZM 35 1.4, and leica 50/90 and watching them morph into an XT-2, and while that is hard, it may be less hard when my current TAP begins to fail. ...Show more →
This is a very fair analysis. Although I purchased a number of Leicaist XX->M adapters so I could use various vintage SLR lenses with the TAP, I eventually wound up mounting just Leica M & LTM lenses because, as you stated perfectly, even with its problems the TAP "still provides a compact full frame system that feels to me, easier to use than a Leica M". For that reason I don't begrudge a single cent of the money I've spent on two copies of the TAP.
I know exactly what you mean when you contrast the straightforward, pleasant AF experience you have with the FE 16-35 with the quirky behavior of the TAP. I've had exactly the same reaction when using my recently acquired FE 85/1.8: it's just so easy to acquire fast, accurate focus with that lens. Still, for all its faults, the TAP provides its own unique delights.
I hope and pray though that you're not thinking of replacing your ZM 35/1.4 and Leica 50mm & 90mm lenses with a Fuji XT-2. I've lost count of the number of posts I've read on various forums in which members express their regret at selling a particular Leica lens and then the money they've wasted in purchasing another copy to replace the one they sold. I believe the same argument would apply to the magic Distagon 35/1.4 ZM, which I would certainly buy if I didn't already have an RX1R II.
Fred Miranda wrote:
It's no secret that I'm a big fan of the TechArt Pro adapter.
However, as others have reported on this and other threads, there is design flaw that needs to be addressed by TechArt.
The issue is how the 'lens carrier' (the section that moves in and out) was designed. It will develop a wobble after a while because its top area it's not supported at all!
The heavier the lens, the faster it will wobble but it's an issue even if only using light lenses.
Point in case: I have tried three brand new adapters and used them solely with two lenses: Zeiss 50/1.5C and Zeiss 35/1.4. The latter is only about 380g. Within a month of usage, the wobble started to happen in all three adapters.
It's easy to test yours: Just make the adapter extend and press the top of the 'lens carrier'. If it moves inwards as you press it, your adapter has the wobble.
Is this really a problem?
Yes, it is. This wobble acts like a lens decentering because of the lack of parallelism and will make your corners look asymmetric. It will also affect the adapter's ability to focus with accuracy and speed.
It's a hardware issue and I hope Techart addresses it for a next version of this adapter....Show more →
Just to clarify, Fred. When you say to press the top of the 'lens carrier', which section of the TAP are you referring to: the outer one (red arrow) or the inner one (green arrow)?
@genji
The red arrow points to the lens carrier which extends/contracts in order to achieve focus. It will be contracted all the way in at infinity focus.
Fred Miranda wrote:
@genji@
The red arrow points to the lens carrier which extends/contracts in order to achieve focus. It will be contracted all the way in at infinity focus.
Thanks, Fred. If that's the one you have to press down on in order to check, then neither of my TAPs (currently) has the wobble.
genji wrote:
Just to clarify, Fred. When you say to press the top of the 'lens carrier', which section of the TAP are you referring to: the outer one (red arrow) or the inner one (green arrow)?
Thank you for the illustrative clarification. Based upon what I read in this forum, I was not previously pressing on the correct problematic area of the adapter to determine one way or the other.
genji wrote:
Thanks, Fred. If that's the one you have to press down on in order to check, then neither of my TAPs (currently) has the wobble.
Same here. No wobble at least with the Voigt 35 F1.2 Ver II. But I have a few other lenses that I use with an additional adapter + the TAP and will check those as well.
LBJ2 wrote:
Same here. No wobble at least with the Voigt 35 F1.2 Ver II. But I have a few other lenses that I use with an additional adapter + the TAP and will check those as well.
It does not really matter which lens is mounted since the wobble is on the adapter.
Fred Miranda wrote:
It does not really matter which lens is mounted since the wobble is on the adapter.
Ok I think I am in the clear with my TAP (serial # in the mid 6000) . Previous illustration of the point of failure was very helpful. I dont see any loose screws or loose motor housing. Just tried the Voigt 58 and Zeiss 35 f2 ZE with respective additional adpaters + TAP. Just in case I am missing something does anyone have video evidence of this effect ?
I had this wobble and I contacted techart pro and had them send me a replacement unit. This second one has the issue as well but it is not as severe. I believe it's sample variation.
The lens I used was the zm 35/1.4.
I also had techart pro send me a waybill because there is no way I'm paying $60 USD to send the defective one back to China!
Try this, put the lens on the adapter and put the adapter on the camera and sit the camera on a a table. Now focus up close so that the adapter fully extends out.
Then, gently touch the tip of your lens (the filter thread area) and see if there is any up and down (not in and out) movement in the adapter as indicated by the red arrow on the silver part.
Mines was defective enough that there was movement and even made a noise when I touched my lens.
Here's a video of mines. Sorry for the potato quality and lighting. Turn the volume up. Also note that this is when the adapter is not extended.
LBJ2 wrote:
Ok I think I am in the clear with my TAP (serial # in the mid 6000) . Previous illustration of the point of failure was very helpful. I dont see any loose screws or loose motor housing. Just tried the Voigt 58 and Zeiss 35 f2 ZE with respective additional adpaters + TAP. Just in case I am missing something does anyone have video evidence of this effect ?
dumplinknet wrote:
Try this, put the lens on the adapter and put the adapter on the camera and sit the camera on a a table. Now focus up close so that the adapter fully extends out.
Then, gently touch the tip of your lens (the filter thread area) and see if there is any up and down (not in and out) movement in the adapter as indicated by the red arrow on the silver part.
Mines was defective enough that there was movement and even made a noise when I touched my lens.
Here's a video of mines. Sorry for the potato quality and lighting. Turn the volume up. Also note that this is when the adapter is not extended.
Much appreciated! Let me take another look. I've been talking this adapter up within my circle and some have purchased upon my recommedation. Need to make sure I am not sending people in the wrong direction But good to know Techart Pro worked with you for an exchange and shipping.
dumplinknet wrote:
Try this, put the lens on the adapter and put the adapter on the camera and sit the camera on a a table. Now focus up close so that the adapter fully extends out.
Then, gently touch the tip of your lens (the filter thread area) and see if there is any up and down (not in and out) movement in the adapter as indicated by the red arrow on the silver part.
Mines was defective enough that there was movement and even made a noise when I touched my lens.
Here's a video of mines. Sorry for the potato quality and lighting. Turn the volume up. Also note that this is when the adapter is not extended.
Comparing your video to my TAP + lens I think I have gently pressed, prodded and pulled enough to determine I must be one of the lucky ones. Likwise I don't think I see any telltale corner issues in my images when using the tap with the Voigt 35 1.2 II. Again thanks for taking the time to post your video--very helpful indeed.
LBJ2 wrote:
Ok I think I am in the clear with my TAP (serial # in the mid 6000) . Previous illustration of the point of failure was very helpful. I dont see any loose screws or loose motor housing. Just tried the Voigt 58 and Zeiss 35 f2 ZE with respective additional adpaters + TAP. Just in case I am missing something does anyone have video evidence of this effect ?
In my case, one TAP's serial number is in the early 6000s and the other is in the late 7000s. I wondered whether there might be a faulty batch but I think it's far more likely a design flaw, as Fred suggested.
Mine does not wiggle as I see in the video (thanks for that video, too). But I have really only used my adapter about 5 times thus far; though, one time was walking around town for a few hours. Also, I just ordered an RX1RII, so I'll be selling my Voigtlander 35/1.2 II and TAP (and keeping my Voigtlander close focus adapter for future Mmount, potentially).
As you can see from the video, the tilt was pretty severe but for many months, it was perfect.
Unfortunately the replacement was great for a few weeks but than started to show this same wobble as well. I only used light lenses like the ZM 50/1.5C and ZM 35/1.4 on my TAP.
I really don't think the serial number matters as this is a design flaw. The top section of the adapter is not supported internally.
I guess so far I'm lucky. I had a screw loose . . . On the adapter of course. Actually they all needed tightening but I really don't detect a wobble so far.
As you can see from the video, the tilt was pretty severe but for many months, it was perfect.
Unfortunately the replacement was great for a few weeks but than started to show this same wobble as well. I only used light lenses like the ZM 50/1.5C and ZM 35/1.4 on my TAP.
I really don't think the serial number matters as this is a design flaw. The top section of the adapter is not supported internally.
Significant play. I would have noticed that right away particualrly with my heavier lens. While I've used my TAP a fair bit, I tend to use native lenses much more so perhaps I need to keep a look out as I log more time with this adapter. Thanks to all in this thread for the cautionary note!
I don't expect a response, but perhaps if they get alot of emails they will improve design.
What I am still a bit unclear about: at first no wobble, then it develops. So some part must be wearing. Which is part exactly?
Also, what specific change in design will stop that wear?
Thanks for all the info, from Fred and all. I'm holding off for the moment.
PS So in the videos, Fred's issue is very obvious. The darker video by dumplinknet, I did not find so obvious. That play did not seem so loose. Maybe the shooting.
But good to know Techart Pro worked with you for an exchange and shipping.