A slightly unrelated question to this maybe; does the Voigtlander VM-E Close Focus Adapter or this new Techart Pro LM-EA9 offer more magnification? I'm seeing 4.5mm of movement for both, so would it be equal?
Alan Parker wrote:
A slightly unrelated question to this maybe; does the Voigtlander VM-E Close Focus Adapter or this new Techart Pro LM-EA9 offer more magnification? I'm seeing 4.5mm for both, so would it be equal?
VM-E Close Focus Adapter version II has 4.3mm helicoid extension and this LM-EA9 has 4.5mm so I think LM-EA9 could offer slightly more magnification. The original VM-E Close Focus adapter had 4.0mm helicoid extension if I remember right.
Juha Kannisto wrote:
VM-E Close Focus Adapter version II has 4.3mm helicoid extension and this LM-EA9 has 4.5mm so I think LM-EA9 could offer slightly more magnification.
The LM-EA9 focuses a bit beyond infinity which might eat up that potential advantage though
Just a heads up if anyone is waiting, I'm going to be listing my LM-EA9 on the B&S shortly (probably this weekend, when I have time for a few product shots of it).
I was trying to build an interchangeable lens Leica Q with the a7c and this adapter and M-mount lenses.. I think it would work, but the a7c viewfinder was just useless.
I've got a RX1R II arriving from LensRentals to see how I get along with that.
Anyway, PM me if you want to talk (adapter) turkey!
I don't think you'll enjoy the RX1RII VF over the a7c...But...I love that 35mm lens. I shot you a PM regarding the EA9
BrandonSi wrote:
Just a heads up if anyone is waiting, I'm going to be listing my LM-EA9 on the B&S shortly (probably this weekend, when I have time for a few product shots of it).
I was trying to build an interchangeable lens Leica Q with the a7c and this adapter and M-mount lenses.. I think it would work, but the a7c viewfinder was just useless.
I've got a RX1R II arriving from LensRentals to see how I get along with that.
Anyway, PM me if you want to talk (adapter) turkey!
I got mine a couple days ago…used with a Noct 50/1 and 35 Lux pre-asph. I am quite impressed by the size, sound, and speed of the adapter. I am not impressed with its ability to lock on to a static object or using Eye AF mode on people or animals moving slowly/little using an A7c. Lots of micro fluttering and hesitation before locking on. I have fiddled with the AF settings with minor improvement.
The a7c with native lenses is quite capable.
This weekend I’ll try a Syoptic 50/1.1 ZM 50/1.5, CV 28/2, CV 35/2 Ultron, 35 Apoqualia and 73 Sonnetar and update to the latest FW.
Edit: using in AF-C (wide, flexible, etc) and AF-S settings
BrandonSi wrote:
I was trying to build an interchangeable lens Leica Q with the a7c and this adapter and M-mount lenses.. I think it would work, but the a7c viewfinder was just useless.
In what way was the viewfinder useless? I have been thinking of trying to build the same type of setup now that I have "failed" with the Leica M system.
ArchnemeSwiss wrote:
In what way was the viewfinder useless? I have been thinking of trying to build the same type of setup now that I have "failed" with the Leica M system.
Super small.. and hard to use, it's like looking through a child's toy telescope, you need to line your eye up just right to see into the viewfinder. It honestly gave my a headache.
BrandonSi wrote:
Super small.. and hard to use, it's like looking through a child's toy telescope, you need to line your eye up just right to see into the viewfinder. It honestly gave my a headache.
What about using the LCD? Not a workable solution?
OK, so I need to understand why everybody saying that VM lens on E body are terrible.
If that was the case, what would be the point making this AF adapter?
phinix wrote:
OK, so I need to understand why everybody saying that VM lens on E body are terrible.
If that was the case, what would be the point making this AF adapter?
Terrible is subjective. In general, the performance is not as good as on a purposely designed M-mount sensor (or even the SL sensors). The performance depends on the lens, but it can manifest itself as a lack of overall sharpness / contrast across the frame, or at the extreme, complete color shifts and smearing towards the edge of the frame. Wider lenses usually perform worse.
Fred Miranda wrote:
I like the 35/1.4 Apoqualia's rendering.
I do too--I like it at 1.4 especially, though it can be wild at times, I enjoy the ride . It would still be my character lens of choice, and favorite overall 35mm lens for m-mount had I not shot the 35 Lux pre-asph. Though the draws are quite apart from each other as the optical corrections are different.
Grenache wrote:
35 Lux pre-ASPH Do you have a thin sensor stack conversion? I thought that would be rubbish on Sony sensor, but it looks great.
Thanks,
Jim
I do have a thin sensor, but I actually prefer the 35 Lux pre-asph on a stock sensor. The midzone is better for bokeh and sharpness, while the outer zone and corners are worse. I really don't care about optical correction on this type of lens. Sebboh did formal testing and has crops. The photo from above you like is on a stock a7c with the focal point about 4 feet away.
phinix wrote:
OK, so I need to understand why everybody saying that VM lens on E body are terrible.
If that was the case, what would be the point making this AF adapter?
35 Cron asph is a lovely lens on film or a Leica thin sensor but smears colors like crazy halfway to the corners…like rainbow psychedelic smears.
Any M lens wider than 50 is a risk. Some are ok. Some are horrible, like the above example. The 16-18-21 WATE is fine. Thin sensor conversion rescues some of this bad behavior.
The point of making the adapter is that there are many M mount lenses >50mm, and there are a fair number of Leicaphiles who convert their Sony stock sensors.
There are on the order of 100 pages of threads here on performance of various lenses on stock Sony sensors and loads of other data online as well. To add a bit of complication, the different Sony sensor stacks perform differently… a7 vs a7R series, for instance.
Grenache wrote:
35 Cron asph is a lovely lens on film or a Leica thin sensor but smears colors like crazy halfway to the corners…like rainbow psychedelic smears.
Any M lens wider than 50 is a risk. Some are ok. Some are horrible, like the above example. The 16-18-21 WATE is fine. Thin sensor conversion rescues some of this bad behavior.
The point of making the adapter is that there are many M mount lenses >50mm, and there are a fair number of Leicaphiles who convert their Sony stock sensors.
There are on the order of 100 pages of threads here on performance of various lenses on stock Sony sensors and loads of other data online as well. To add a bit of complication, the different Sony sensor stacks perform differently… a7 vs a7R series, for instance.
Yes--this is spot on. Several of my m-lenses are essentially the same/negligibly different on stock versus thin/Leica--including 35/1.4 Apoqualia, 35 Lux pre-asph, CV 35/1.2iii. Other m 35mm's I have owned suffer quite badly like the ZM 35/1.4, CV 35/2 Ulron and 35 Lux asph. It's pretty much a guessing game.
All the 28mm's seem to suck from what I can tell. Somehow, Fred found the CV 21/3.5 was good on both which I find odd and cool. The two 50mm's I would use often on a stock Sony are both pretty severely affected--the ZM 50/1.5 and 50 Lux ASPH. I do shoot a Noct 50/1 often, but that lens doesn't change meaningfully to me even though it's worse. The Sypoptic 50/1.1 is essentially the same on both too.
And back to the thread, I find the Noct 50/1 (despite the weight) and Syotpic 50 1.1 (which Bastian already reported) work fairly well on the new TAP.
BrandonSi wrote:
Terrible is subjective. In general, the performance is not as good as on a purposely designed M-mount sensor (or even the SL sensors). The performance depends on the lens, but it can manifest itself as a lack of overall sharpness / contrast across the frame, or at the extreme, complete color shifts and smearing towards the edge of the frame. Wider lenses usually perform worse.
---------------------------------------------
Grenache wrote:
35 Cron asph is a lovely lens on film or a Leica thin sensor but smears colors like crazy halfway to the corners…like rainbow psychedelic smears.
Any M lens wider than 50 is a risk. Some are ok. Some are horrible, like the above example. The 16-18-21 WATE is fine. Thin sensor conversion rescues some of this bad behavior.
The point of making the adapter is that there are many M mount lenses >50mm, and there are a fair number of Leicaphiles who convert their Sony stock sensors.
There are on the order of 100 pages of threads here on performance of various lenses on stock Sony sensors and loads of other data online as well. To add a bit of complication, the different Sony sensor stacks perform differently… a7 vs a7R series, for instance.
nehemiahphoto wrote:
Yes--this is spot on. Several of my m-lenses are essentially the same/negligibly different on stock versus thin/Leica--including 35/1.4 Apoqualia, 35 Lux pre-asph, CV 35/1.2iii. Other m 35mm's I have owned suffer quite badly like the ZM 35/1.4, CV 35/2 Ulron and 35 Lux asph. It's pretty much a guessing game.
All the 28mm's seem to suck from what I can tell. Somehow, Fred found the CV 21/3.5 was good on both which I find odd and cool. The two 50mm's I would use often on a stock Sony are both pretty severely affected--the ZM 50/1.5 and 50 Lux ASPH. I do shoot a Noct 50/1 often, but that lens doesn't change meaningfully to me even though it's worse. The Sypoptic 50/1.1 is essentially the same on both too.
And back to the thread, I find the Noct 50/1 (despite the weight) and Syotpic 50 1.1 (which Bastian already reported) work fairly well on the new TAP....Show more →
I see.
I'm planning to use just a few particular Voigtlanders on that adapter - 40mm 1.2, 35mm 1.4 - maybe 40mm 1.4, or 50mm 1.5.
Can anyone who has these VM lens could confirm how they act on Sony bodies?
If body is also important, I have A7II now, which will switch with A7C in the future.
Do you have a thin sensor stack conversion? I thought that would be rubbish on Sony sensor, but it looks great.
. It would still be my character lens of choice, and favorite overall 35mm lens for m-mount had I not shot the 35 Lux pre-asph. Though the draws are quite apart from each other as the optical corrections are different.