Fred Miranda wrote:
The main issue is the amplified field curvature introduced by the thicker sensor in M lenses, as they were originally designed for a much thinner stack. The solution is to stop the lens down for a broad depth of field or to modify the Sony camera by reducing the sensor stack. With these mods, AF will still work, there may be challenges with auto WB and the WB presets, requiring custom WB for accurate colors.
Another alternative is to use the full-frame Sony in crop mode, which also helps alleviate the curvature issues to some extent.
Does Nikon Z also have this issue, or it has a thinner cover glass than Sony?
foto16 wrote:
Does Nikon Z also have this issue, or it has a thinner cover glass than Sony?
Yes, there's a similar issue compared to Sony, contrary to misinformation posted online. It might have a slightly thinner stack than the Sony's sensor stack, but it's not enough to make any noticeable difference.
In my experiments, I found that only the Leica SL sensor stack works well with M-lenses (although still not optimal). This is true unless you're using modified sensors or, of course, M bodies.
My LM-EA9 is still working fine, but sadly I have received too many reports of this adapter failing lately.
And these have been confirmed sales through the official channels.
What is even worse: it seems the customer support is pretty much non-existent at this point.
I therefore added several warnings to my review and until something about this situation changes I have to advise against buying one.
It’s not just a black eye for the product but the company. I purchased one with very light use it broke. I won’t be using their products in the future.
BastianK wrote:
My LM-EA9 is still working fine, but sadly I have received too many reports of this adapter failing lately.
And these have been confirmed sales through the official channels.
What is even worse: it seems the customer support is pretty much non-existent at this point.
I therefore added several warnings to my review and until something about this situation changes I have to advise against buying one.
It appears that transitioning from one large motor to four smaller ones seemed like a good idea and was impressive in the marketing materials. We all thought...They fixed the wobble!...However, it also meant a fourfold increase in the chance of malfunction. Mine was functioning properly until it suddenly stopped working one day during normal operation. I tried everything to revive it, but unfortunately, it was to no avail.
For people that have used this adapter on modern bodies and the RX1 series, esp the RX1Rii: how does the autofocus compare?
I was thinking of pairing this adapter with a Voigtlander 35/1.5 or 40/1.2 on an A7Cx to make my own RX1R3. It’ll obviously be bigger, but at least it will try eyeAF on shutter, something the RX1 series won’t do
akashyap wrote:
For people that have used this adapter on modern bodies and the RX1 series, esp the RX1Rii: how does the autofocus compare?
I was thinking of pairing this adapter with a Voigtlander 35/1.5 or 40/1.2 on an A7Cx to make my own RX1R3. It’ll obviously be bigger, but at least it will try eyeAF on shutter, something the RX1 series won’t do
The LM-EA9 adapter is good at focusing in the center of the frame, but it has trouble focusing in the mid-zone and corners, depending on the lens. This becomes more apparent when tracking a subject. In these cases, the RX1 II performs better.
I bought another EA9 adapter after my previous one stopped working. So far, this new one is working fine.
mine works really well with the 28mm Ultron II and the 50 1.5. Struggles a little with the 75 1.9. I have to get it close and then it will rack, but if focus is too far off it gets flummoxed. Eye AF works well. I don't know what the RX series weighs, but this plus CV lenses adds some weight.
So, I thought my LM-EA9 wasn't working, turns out it just didn't work on my a7RmkIII.
But, I just tried it on my a7rV and a7cR and it's working really well. Like, my 50/1.2 Noctilux is working pretty darn good in AF-S and I'm getting nice eye/face and body tracking in AF-C. This is the best it's worked since I bought it new quite a while ago and what I was hoping for when I bought it. Not OEM fast, but AF that locks on fairly quickly with minimum prefocus.
Anyways, thought I'd check in as my last update was probably something like "why did I buy these paperweights"
Edit:
Just tried all my lenses, even my 75 is nailing focus quickly...cool!
I guess it just didn't like the old body.
akashyap wrote:
I was thinking of pairing this adapter with a Voigtlander 35/1.5 or 40/1.2 on an A7Cx to make my own RX1R3. It’ll obviously be bigger, but at least it will try eyeAF on shutter, something the RX1 series won’t do
Why use such fast M glass when the thick sensor coverings on the Sony give mediocre results in the corner and midfield until at least f/5.6? Voigtlander 35mm f/1.5
If you're trying to match an RX1R3 why not use something designed for Sony (with a slower aperture). It would probably be smaller, lighter, sharper and faster focusing than the M glass attached to the Techart?
akashyap wrote:
For people that have used this adapter on modern bodies and the RX1 series, esp the RX1Rii: how does the autofocus compare?
I was thinking of pairing this adapter with a Voigtlander 35/1.5 or 40/1.2 on an A7Cx to make my own RX1R3. It’ll obviously be bigger, but at least it will try eyeAF on shutter, something the RX1 series won’t do
Here's my a7cR with my pre-asph 35 Summilux which is about the same size as the CV 35. The combo actually works pretty good. While I do agree with OscarF that there are better combo's with faster more accurate AF. What you are thinking is feasible and works fairly well.
OscarF wrote:
Why use such fast M glass when the thick sensor coverings on the Sony give mediocre results in the corner and midfield until at least f/5.6? Voigtlander 35mm f/1.5
If you're trying to match an RX1R3 why not use something designed for Sony (with a slower aperture). It would probably be smaller, lighter, sharper and faster focusing than the M glass attached to the Techart?
Fair point! The only lightweight native E mount lenses that I like in that range for rendering are probably the Sigma 35/2 or Sigma 45/2.8 and I should give them a shot.
Otherwise, I don't mind sacrificing corner to corner sharpness for some weight savings, bokeh, and image quality from M lenses. I also hope to have an ultra thin sensor mod and Leica M camera in the future. I should probably look for the lenses are less affected by the thick sensor glass like the 35/1.2 or 40/1.2.
Hi
I bought the LM-EA9 recently for my a7s, and find that AF is very slow, after much hunting. The lenses used are a Biogon 28mm f2.8 and a 50mm Summicron. I tried all versions of adapter firmware with little improvement. Only Single shot AF is available with this adapter on the 7s.
The shutter trips only after 2-3 seconds of being fully depressed! The first shot might be better, but not always the case. OK for landscapes, I suppose. Factory Support has not responded to my request for assistance.
Khor
BastianK wrote:
My LM-EA9 is still working fine, but sadly I have received too many reports of this adapter failing lately.
And these have been confirmed sales through the official channels.
What is even worse: it seems the customer support is pretty much non-existent at this point.
I therefore added several warnings to my review and until something about this situation changes I have to advise against buying one.
Are there similar failure reports with the Nikon version of this adapter (TZM-02)?
I'm using it with my a7rV and A7cR right now and really enjoying it. Eye focus tracking with my Summilux FLE, yes please. I have a 35GM, 35ZA and a fricken Loxia 35 but none of them look as good as my Summilux FLE. The more I use the LM-EA9 the more I like it.
I'm starting to think that if you use the adapter with the lens wide open near the center point as i do quite a bit, it's way better than the SL system. You just can't AF an m lens on a SL, period, so the advantage is at the edges. If you want optical perfection, go with an m body or SL, if you want the Leica m look with AF, use it on one of the new Sony bodies. It's fun and to me, it's still crazy that I can AF my 1969 Summilux 50.
Just some random thoughts, cheers.
Matt Kerby wrote:
I'm using it with my a7rV and A7cR right now and really enjoying it. Eye focus tracking with my Summilux FLE, yes please. I have a 35GM, 35ZA and a fricken Loxia 35 but none of them look as good as my Summilux FLE. The more I use the LM-EA9 the more I like it.
I'm starting to think that if you use the adapter with the lens wide open near the center point as i do quite a bit, it's way better than the SL system. You just can't AF an m lens on a SL, period, so the advantage is at the edges. If you want optical perfection, go with an m body or SL, if you want the Leica m look with AF, use it on one of the new Sony bodies. It's fun and to me, it's still crazy that I can AF my 1969 Summilux 50.
Just some random thoughts, cheers.
I totally agree about the 35/1.4 FLE. My favorite 35mm lens!
If you want autofocus and better optics, try using M-lenses on a smaller APS-C sensor camera like those in the Fuji system. This setup crops out problematic areas caused by the thicker sensor. I've used the Fotodiox AF adapter for this, and AF worked well across the frame (not just center), better than the EA9 adapter. Just keep in mind, it only supports AF-S, not continuous autofocus.
Fred Miranda wrote:
I totally agree about the 35/1.4 FLE. My favorite 35mm lens!
If you want autofocus and better optics, try using M-lenses on a smaller APS-C sensor camera like those in the Fuji system. This setup crops out problematic areas caused by the thicker sensor. I've used the Fotodiox AF adapter for this, and AF worked well across the frame (not just center), better than the EA9 adapter. Just keep in mind, it only supports AF-S, not continuous autofocus.
I've been very curious about the Fuji and Fotodiox AF. Which body would you suggest Fred?
Matt Kerby wrote:
I've been very curious about the Fuji and Fotodiox AF. Which body would you suggest Fred?
I use the X-Pro3 and I'm absolutely thrilled with it. While some may not prefer the hidden screen, that's actually one of the things that attracts me to it. It also offers a OVF that works like a rangefinder. (But it's not like a Leica)
It's just slightly heavier than the X100VI, which also features an OVF. However, the X-Pro3 sets itself apart by offering interchangeable lenses, including the Fotodiox AF adapter, and a firmer grip without requiring any extra accessories.
For the price though if you prefer having a screen, the X-T5 is a great choice.
