Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       end
  

M-mount lenses on Canon R bodies

  
 
johnvanr
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · M-mount lenses on Canon R bodies


Was wondering if anybody has experience with this combo. Last time someone asked seems to have been two years ago.

I actually just did a couple of quick shots with my R6 and the VL 21mm f/3.5, VL 40 f/1.4 and Zeiss Biogon, all lenses I planned to sell. There was some smearing in the corners and fringing with the 21mm but I didn't see much of a problem with the other lenses. Mind you, these were just some quick shots.

I generally don't care much for corners and when I do care, I can still take my RF glass or EF-mount Zeiss and Voigtlander lenses. This would be for strolling around a city and doing street stuff and the like.

Anybody tried this combo? Conclusions?

Edited on Jun 30, 2022 at 08:01 PM · View previous versions



Jun 30, 2022 at 04:50 PM
jcolwell
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · M-mount lenses on Canon R bodies


Not yet, but it's good to hear about your preliminary results. I occasionally use some LTM lenses on my M5 and M6, but they're not the same at 1.6x CF. I expect my CV 15/4.5 might suffer 'edge effects' on a modern FF R-series camera, but the CV 25/4 could be OK. I really look forward to using my old Canon S LTM lenses on a modern FF camera; 35/2, 50/1.4 II, and 100/3.5 III. They should be excellent (and they're stupidly small). Anyway, I'll watch this thread with great interest.


Jun 30, 2022 at 05:04 PM
johnvanr
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · M-mount lenses on Canon R bodies


Found this: https://www.leicalensesfornormalpeople.com/2021/09/04/using-leica-and-other-rangefinder-lenses-on-a-canon-r5/


Jun 30, 2022 at 09:49 PM
jcolwell
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · M-mount lenses on Canon R bodies


That is encouraging (especialy the linked-table of sensor-stack thicknesses). Based on prior experience of others, with DSLR and DSLM, the R5 is a step in the right direction (LTM/LM-wise), c/w other Canon DSLM. Hopefully, the sometime-to-arrive Canon 100MP DSLM doesn't have an AA filter at all, i.e. thinner stack, not an AA cancellation layer. OTOH, taking typical, small-camera street and life photos at 100MP per shot will be a problem - one that I can live with.


Jul 02, 2022 at 05:09 AM
rscheffler
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · M-mount lenses on Canon R bodies


jcolwell wrote:
Not yet, but it's good to hear about your preliminary results. I occasionally use some LTM lenses on my M5 and M6, but they're not the same at 1.6x CF. I expect my CV 15/4.5 might suffer 'edge effects' on a modern FF R-series camera, but the CV 25/4 could be OK. I really look forward to using my old Canon S LTM lenses on a modern FF camera; 35/2, 50/1.4 II, and 100/3.5 III. They should be excellent (and they're stupidly small). Anyway, I'll watch this thread with great interest.


As an aside, I tested a bunch of my M and LTM mount lenses on the M6II and none of them were sharper across the frame than the 'cheap' Canon EF-M primes. My $3K Leica 21/3.4 didn't hold up into the corners as well as the Canon 22/2. But on Leica FF it's very sharp, so I would expect this to be a problem of too thick sensor cover glass. The Canon 32/1.4 was sharper than my Leica 50/1.4 ASPH on the M6II, but the Leica had better control over colour fringing/blooming in high contrast transitions. But it sounds like the more recent Canon FF mirrorless have fairly thin cover glass, which is promising.

I have the Canon 35/2 and 50/1.4 LTM lenses, too, but only use them on the Leica (don't yet have a Canon FF mirrorless). I agree, stopped down they're really good across the frame. Being older designs though, I wonder if at least the 35/2 might result in some color shift with certain sensor types due to the sort exit pupil distance. This could also be the case with your Voigtlander 25/4. The 15/4.5, if it's the latest version, should do OK, because even the M mount version is as good on a Sony sensor as it is on a Leica. The problem with the 15 was copy variation (there was a pretty long thread about it on the Alt board a few years back), where a lot of copies didn't hold up well into the extreme corners. The previous design, whether in LTM or M mount (optics are the same), definitely can cause edge color shift, depending on the sensor design (BSI being preferable).

Eventually I'll go Canon FF mirrorless and I'll test everything M and LTM mount I have on it. Might start with the R7 though, but that too would be interesting to use with the small rangefinder lenses to better match the size of the camera. Given it's pretty much the same sensor as the M6II/90D, I doubt the rangefinder glass will perform better, but perhaps across-frame sharpness will be if it has a thinner cover glass than the M6II. It could also be that 32MP APS-C more easily reveals minor deficiencies that wouldn't be noticeable at half the resolution.



Jul 02, 2022 at 05:29 PM
Scott Stoness
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · M-mount lenses on Canon R bodies


voigtlander 15 M has considerable colour cast on r5 - I gave up on fixing it. Too much work. Would be good for b/w.




Jul 02, 2022 at 09:22 PM
rscheffler
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · M-mount lenses on Canon R bodies


Scott Stoness wrote:
voigtlander 15 M has considerable colour cast on r5 - I gave up on fixing it. Too much work. Would be good for b/w.



Which version of the 15?



Jul 02, 2022 at 09:23 PM
chicago8c
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · M-mount lenses on Canon R bodies


Some samples of an M-Rokkor 40/2 on an EOS RP (I have some Canon LTM 50/1.8 shots I'll dig up too). This is on a Haoge close-focus adapter, so includes some closer-than-MFD shots:

September72021Exports-1-2 by chicago8c, on Flickr

July22021Exports-18 by chicago8c, on Flickr

July22021Exports-17 by chicago8c, on Flickr

July22021Exports-15 by chicago8c, on Flickr

Things definitely get wild wide-open:
May92022Exports-3 by chicago8c, on Flickr

Edited on Jul 03, 2022 at 08:12 PM · View previous versions



Jul 02, 2022 at 10:04 PM
chicago8c
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · M-mount lenses on Canon R bodies


Canon 50 1.8 LTM (the older/heavier chrome version) on an LTM->M close focus adapter, also on RP:

July152021Exports-15 by chicago8c, on Flickr

July152021Exports-11 by chicago8c, on Flickr

July152021Exports-12 by chicago8c, on Flickr

April152021Exports-18 by chicago8c, on Flickr



Jul 03, 2022 at 08:10 PM
johnvanr
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · M-mount lenses on Canon R bodies


I did some more shooting with my M-mount lenses on the R5. Nothing special, just seeing if I got the color fringing and getting a feel for the sharpness.

I have three M lenses: Voigtlander 21/3.5, 40/1.4 and Zeiss 2/2.8. The VL21 gave me issues wide open, but that may have been my fault as well. The rest were sharp. I didn't see any color fringing and just a bit of vignetting, nothing that would keep me from using those lenses unless things were critical.

Still will do more shooting with this under more different circumstances, but some issues irrespective from the results are creeping up which make me doubt the combo:

- as the link I shared points out, the R5/6 allow you to zoom in when manually focusing, but don't go back to the normal view when you touch the shutter button, meaning you're constantly pressing that zoom button. That's annoying and takes some of the pleasure of using these lenses away.
- I like these lenses for their small footprint and for the fact that you don't have an enormous piece of glass staring at someone's face; that's still true, but the bodies are of course enormous compared to the lenses. And you can't switch to smaller Canon FF bodies, because apparently the sensor stack thickness is too much on those for good performance; if I just want the experience of shooting manual, I can use my manual EF mount Voigtlander and Zeiss lenses on my R5/6.

Honestly, if I could sell these lenses for good prices, I'd sell them and buy them back later if anybody ever comes out with a smaller FF body with a good EVF that takes M-mount lenses. For now, I keep trying this combo a bit more, but purely from a shooting experience viewpoint, I doubt it's going to be a go-to kit for me.



Jul 06, 2022 at 09:13 AM
 


Search in Used Dept. 

rscheffler
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · M-mount lenses on Canon R bodies


johnvanr wrote:
I have three M lenses: Voigtlander 21/3.5, 40/1.4 and Zeiss 2/2.8.


Just want to clarify which Zeiss you have: 21, 25 or 28?



Jul 06, 2022 at 01:38 PM
jpto
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · M-mount lenses on Canon R bodies


From my experiences using anything wider than 50MM isn't going to perform as well on the R5. I've tried all of my M Leica lenses 28MM/35MM/50MM. The 28 and 35 look noticeably worse on the R5.


Jul 06, 2022 at 02:34 PM
johnvanr
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · M-mount lenses on Canon R bodies


rscheffler wrote:
Just want to clarify which Zeiss you have: 21, 25 or 28?


Sorry, missed the dropped number: I have the 28mm.



Jul 06, 2022 at 03:18 PM
johnvanr
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · M-mount lenses on Canon R bodies


jpto wrote:
From my experiences using anything wider than 50MM isn't going to perform as well on the R5. I've tried all of my M Leica lenses 28MM/35MM/50MM. The 28 and 35 look noticeably worse on the R5.


I can't compare directly with shooting on a M as I don't have one. All I can say is that so far the shots I've made look perfectly fine for regular use (with states exceptions) on my iMac 5k monitor. If I were to use this kit for critical landscape or something like that, that would probably be a mistake, but for the kind of stuff I'd use a Leica for, so far so good, at least IQ wise.

I admit, though, I'm far from a pixel peeper. I don't get people who peer into corners of images. Images are meant to lead the viewer's eye to what the photographer wants to highlight (in my humble opinion) and that's never in a corner.



Jul 06, 2022 at 04:06 PM
jpto
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · M-mount lenses on Canon R bodies


johnvanr wrote:
I can't compare directly with shooting on a M as I don't have one. All I can say is that so far the shots I've made look perfectly fine for regular use (with states exceptions) on my iMac 5k monitor. If I were to use this kit for critical landscape or something like that, that would probably be a mistake, but for the kind of stuff I'd use a Leica for, so far so good, at least IQ wise.

I admit, though, I'm far from a pixel peeper. I don't get people who peer into corners of images. Images are meant
...Show more

Totally in agreement about pixel peeping and corners.

The digital M bodies do bake image corrections into their files if the lenses are coded/set manually in the body. I find this makes a difference on my wide lenses in overall image quality, not so much on 50mm plus.



Jul 07, 2022 at 07:15 AM
Scott Stoness
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · M-mount lenses on Canon R bodies


rscheffler wrote:
Which version of the 15?


My apologies - it took me a while to get back to this.

I have v2 of 15/ voight M mount

see below:
computer is pink
All window casings are same colour
Challenging sky with sun on left behind the house

Colours look okay in 2nd but the sky is still a little side to side dark in some spot but should be light left to dark right with constant gradient

This would be fine in some pictures - without much purple and away from the sun.

Where I live has 8 months of snow and its likely to show.




This is the original at 5' depth f8 with auto fix lens profile from Lightroom sharpened






Same picture using voight 15 v2 profile and turning vig down a smidge and purple off you decide and similar sharpening






2nd try with significantly less vignetting applied



Edited on Jul 18, 2022 at 09:55 PM · View previous versions



Jul 09, 2022 at 03:42 PM
gerov
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · M-mount lenses on Canon R bodies


I used my Zeiss 18 f/4 on the R5 with an Urth Leica M --> RF adapter and was happy with the results after cleaning up the corner vingetting. Pictures are of my house, so I'm not posting, but I'll try to take others.


Jul 09, 2022 at 08:21 PM
highdesertmesa
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · M-mount lenses on Canon R bodies


The single most important thing when adapting M lenses to other mirrorless platforms is having a perfect length adapter – one that allows the M lenses to hit infinity exactly at the hard stop. If you do that, either by luck of your particular adapter or by shimming, then you can get performance on the level of the Leica SL cameras with M lenses (which is excellent, but not quite at the level of a native M body).

The easiest way to get a perfect length adapter is to use a macro helicoid adapter. What you do is mount the M lens, turn its focusing ring so that it hits the infinity hard stop, and set the aperture to wide open. Now use maximum magnification in the EVF and focus using ONLY the helicoid ring until infinity is perfectly sharp (don't use the house across the street as infinity, that is NOT infinity – use something a mile or two away). Now – leave the helicoid ring right where it is and don't move it again. This has just "shimmed" your adapter perfectly to the tolerance of a Leica SL camera with a Leica M-Adapter L. If you do need to use the macro helicoid to focus closer than the M lens normally focuses, just repeat the above steps to get the adapter to the right length again before shooting at non-macro distances.

A perfect length adapter will make a huge difference in sharpness away from the center of the frame, especially for lenses with a floating element design. It will make more difference than the thickness of the camera's cover glass or the microlens design. Those things are important, but they pale in comparison to using an adapter that's the right length.



Jul 10, 2022 at 11:02 PM
jpeter
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #19 · p.1 #19 · M-mount lenses on Canon R bodies


I was thinking of getting a helicoid adapter. Which one do you like ? I do have an M adapter that has the correct distance flange. I am using VL 75f1.5 and VL 35f1.7 both working excellent in the corners.

JP



Jul 11, 2022 at 10:15 AM
highdesertmesa
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #20 · p.1 #20 · M-mount lenses on Canon R bodies


jpeter wrote:
I was thinking of getting a helicoid adapter. Which one do you like ? I do have an M adapter that has the correct distance flange. I am using VL 75f1.5 and VL 35f1.7 both working excellent in the corners.

JP


The Kipon macro adapter I used worked well. The cheaper brands sometimes have lubrication on the helicoid that leaks out onto the lens side of the mount.



Jul 11, 2022 at 11:33 AM
1
       2       end






FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username      Reset password