Techart Pro LM-EA9 Review
p.9 #1Techart Pro LM-EA9 Review
^ 50/1.5 you’ll be fine
I have not used the others. Voigtlander 35/1.7 is also fine.
Jim
I have not used the others. Voigtlander 35/1.7 is also fine.
Jim
Sep 19, 2022 at 05:45 PM
p.9 #2Techart Pro LM-EA9 Review
Not directly related to this, but more of a follow-up to my question from last week.
I went out and bought a 7Artisans LM-E Close Focus Adapter after a lot of debating. It might be a solution for other people here too.
I was unable to find a Voigtlander vII adapter here and the Techart Pro LM-EA9 didn't really fit my price range.
I went out and bought a 7Artisans LM-E Close Focus Adapter after a lot of debating. It might be a solution for other people here too.
I was unable to find a Voigtlander vII adapter here and the Techart Pro LM-EA9 didn't really fit my price range.
Sep 20, 2022 at 01:33 AM
p.9 #3Techart Pro LM-EA9 Review
Grenache wrote:
^ 50/1.5 you’ll be fine
I have not used the others. Voigtlander 35/1.7 is also fine.
Jim
If 35mm and 50mm would be fine, do you think 40mm should be too?
^ 50/1.5 you’ll be fine
I have not used the others. Voigtlander 35/1.7 is also fine.
Jim
If 35mm and 50mm would be fine, do you think 40mm should be too?
Sep 20, 2022 at 06:45 AM
p.9 #4Techart Pro LM-EA9 Review
Grenache wrote:
^ 50/1.5 you’ll be fine
I have not used the others. Voigtlander 35/1.7 is also fine.
Jim
We think it’s fine on a stock, but many FM’ers are far pickier than us
I thought the 35/1.7 was fine too, just takes more care.
^ 50/1.5 you’ll be fine
I have not used the others. Voigtlander 35/1.7 is also fine.
Jim
We think it’s fine on a stock, but many FM’ers are far pickier than us
I thought the 35/1.7 was fine too, just takes more care.Sep 20, 2022 at 08:12 AM
p.9 #5Techart Pro LM-EA9 Review
phinix wrote:
I have not used the others. Voigtlander 35/1.7 is also fine.
JimIf 35mm and 50mm would be fine, do you think 40mm should be too?
It depends on what you think fine is. All these lenses, including the CV 35/1.7 will show much higher field curvature on Sony sensors. There will be some induced astigmatism as well.
Many shooters find it usable but the thicker sensor stack also affects rendering where depending on subject distance, out of focus areas towards the corners appear sharper and distracting.
Grenache wrote
^ 50/1.5 you’ll be fineI have not used the others. Voigtlander 35/1.7 is also fine.
Jim
It depends on what you think fine is. All these lenses, including the CV 35/1.7 will show much higher field curvature on Sony sensors. There will be some induced astigmatism as well.
Many shooters find it usable but the thicker sensor stack also affects rendering where depending on subject distance, out of focus areas towards the corners appear sharper and distracting.
Sep 20, 2022 at 08:13 AM
p.9 #6Techart Pro LM-EA9 Review
phinix wrote:
I have not used the others. Voigtlander 35/1.7 is also fine.
JimIf 35mm and 50mm would be fine, do you think 40mm should be too?
There are a few discussions of the VM vs. VE versions in the CV40 thread and even some comparisons:
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1512530/269#16012483
There are a few other VM/VE comparisons from a few years back and some discussion. I found one helpful comparison that Fred posted from another user's images:
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1512530/41#14268212
A few comments from people using the old TAP with the CV40 and really liking the results and usability. I think I will give it a try, I'm just deciding whether to try the 50/1.2 first since I have the Sony 35GM. I really like the CV40 though.
Grenache wrote
^ 50/1.5 you’ll be fineI have not used the others. Voigtlander 35/1.7 is also fine.
Jim
There are a few discussions of the VM vs. VE versions in the CV40 thread and even some comparisons:
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1512530/269#16012483
There are a few other VM/VE comparisons from a few years back and some discussion. I found one helpful comparison that Fred posted from another user's images:
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1512530/41#14268212
A few comments from people using the old TAP with the CV40 and really liking the results and usability. I think I will give it a try, I'm just deciding whether to try the 50/1.2 first since I have the Sony 35GM. I really like the CV40 though.
Sep 20, 2022 at 12:08 PM
p.9 #7Techart Pro LM-EA9 Review
nehemiahphoto wrote:
I have not used the others. Voigtlander 35/1.7 is also fine.
JimWe think it’s fine on a stock, but many FM’ers are far pickier than us I thought the 35/1.7 was fine too, just takes more care.
---------------------------------------------
Fred Miranda wrote:
I have not used the others. Voigtlander 35/1.7 is also fine.
JimIf 35mm and 50mm would be fine, do you think 40mm should be too?It depends on what you think fine is. All these lenses, including the CV 35/1.7 will show much higher field curvature on Sony sensors. There will be some induced astigmatism as well.
Many shooters find it usable but the thicker sensor stack also affects rendering where depending on subject distance, out of focus areas towards the corners appear sharper and distracting.
---------------------------------------------
grahamgibson wrote:
I have not used the others. Voigtlander 35/1.7 is also fine.
JimIf 35mm and 50mm would be fine, do you think 40mm should be too?There are a few discussions of the VM vs. VE versions in the CV40 thread and even some comparisons:
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1512530/269#16012483
There are a few other VM/VE comparisons from a few years back and some discussion. I found one helpful comparison that Fred posted from another user's images:
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1512530/41#14268212
A few comments from people using the old TAP with the CV40 and really liking the results and usability. I think I will give it a try, I'm just deciding whether to try the 50/1.2 first since I have the Sony 35GM. I really like the CV40 though.
Yes, well, I'm going through 40mm 1.2 thread again (I've read all pages before I bought E mount) and I don't really see that issues everyone is mentioning/complaining about.
Maybe its because I'm not professional photographer, I do not look (or care) about corners. I dont see those curvature issues - when I look at the photos from vm40 I see nice photos, same as on my E mount.
I know that TAP will add weight and length to the whole kit, bringing it closer to E mount version, but still its smaller and adds autofocus, so for me it is a win situation.
Right now my A7II and 40mm 1.2 E is big and heavy for me. That is why I'm investing (read: flushing down the toilet) more money and selling it all to buy A7C + new TAP + VM40. Result should be a nice little setup for travelling. That is the plan just now
Edited on Sep 25, 2022 at 06:06 PM · View previous versions
Grenache wrote
^ 50/1.5 you’ll be fineI have not used the others. Voigtlander 35/1.7 is also fine.
Jim
I thought the 35/1.7 was fine too, just takes more care.---------------------------------------------
Fred Miranda wrote:
phinix wrote
Grenache wrote
^ 50/1.5 you’ll be fineI have not used the others. Voigtlander 35/1.7 is also fine.
Jim
Many shooters find it usable but the thicker sensor stack also affects rendering where depending on subject distance, out of focus areas towards the corners appear sharper and distracting.
---------------------------------------------
grahamgibson wrote:
phinix wrote
Grenache wrote
^ 50/1.5 you’ll be fineI have not used the others. Voigtlander 35/1.7 is also fine.
Jim
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1512530/269#16012483
There are a few other VM/VE comparisons from a few years back and some discussion. I found one helpful comparison that Fred posted from another user's images:
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1512530/41#14268212
A few comments from people using the old TAP with the CV40 and really liking the results and usability. I think I will give it a try, I'm just deciding whether to try the 50/1.2 first since I have the Sony 35GM. I really like the CV40 though.
Yes, well, I'm going through 40mm 1.2 thread again (I've read all pages before I bought E mount
) and I don't really see that issues everyone is mentioning/complaining about. Maybe its because I'm not professional photographer, I do not look (or care) about corners. I dont see those curvature issues - when I look at the photos from vm40 I see nice photos, same as on my E mount.
I know that TAP will add weight and length to the whole kit, bringing it closer to E mount version, but still its smaller and adds autofocus, so for me it is a win situation.
Right now my A7II and 40mm 1.2 E is big and heavy for me. That is why I'm investing (read: flushing down the toilet
) more money and selling it all to buy A7C + new TAP + VM40. Result should be a nice little setup for travelling. That is the plan just now Edited on Sep 25, 2022 at 06:06 PM · View previous versions
Sep 21, 2022 at 05:30 AM
p.9 #8Techart Pro LM-EA9 Review
Alan Parker wrote:
I went out and bought a 7Artisans LM-E Close Focus Adapter after a lot of debating. It might be a solution for other people here too.
Mine was wobbly and introduced tilt to the lens out of the box (not only extended, also retracted).
Not recommended.
I went out and bought a 7Artisans LM-E Close Focus Adapter after a lot of debating. It might be a solution for other people here too.
Mine was wobbly and introduced tilt to the lens out of the box (not only extended, also retracted).
Not recommended.
Sep 21, 2022 at 08:13 AM
p.9 #9Techart Pro LM-EA9 Review
So, I ordered the new TAP adapter on August 30th. I received an order number and confirmation but nothing since. For those who have received their adapter, how long did it take from Order to shipment to receipt?
I wrote to Techart once and received no response so I just wrote them again.
I wrote to Techart once and received no response so I just wrote them again.
Sep 21, 2022 at 08:56 AM
p.9 #10Techart Pro LM-EA9 Review
rji2goleez wrote:
So, I ordered the new TAP adapter on August 30th. I received an order number and confirmation but nothing since. For those who have received their adapter, how long did it take from Order to shipment to receipt?
I wrote to Techart once and received no response so I just wrote them again.
The first batch already sold out.
I decided to buy one, too, but currently no stock.
So, I ordered the new TAP adapter on August 30th. I received an order number and confirmation but nothing since. For those who have received their adapter, how long did it take from Order to shipment to receipt?
I wrote to Techart once and received no response so I just wrote them again.
The first batch already sold out.
I decided to buy one, too, but currently no stock.
Sep 21, 2022 at 09:35 AM
|
p.9 #11Techart Pro LM-EA9 Review
BastianK wrote:
Mine was wobbly and introduced tilt to the lens out of the box (not only extended, also retracted).
Not recommended.
I can't say I've picked up on that so far, but I will keep an eye on it. I haven't noticed any wobble so far and haven't seen tilt either. It's more of an experiment so far anyway. I'm not expecting great image quality from the adapted Jupiter-12 on 61MP
Mine was wobbly and introduced tilt to the lens out of the box (not only extended, also retracted).
Not recommended.
I can't say I've picked up on that so far, but I will keep an eye on it. I haven't noticed any wobble so far and haven't seen tilt either. It's more of an experiment so far anyway. I'm not expecting great image quality from the adapted Jupiter-12 on 61MP
Sep 21, 2022 at 10:04 AM
p.9 #12Techart Pro LM-EA9 Review
My experience with the Hawks V5 close-focus adapter has been great.
Sep 21, 2022 at 10:20 AM
p.9 #13Techart Pro LM-EA9 Review
Well, I've had this adapter for a couple days now and have tested most my lenses with it on my a7c... I was surprised my 35 FLE worked so well. I set it to 2 meters as Fred suggested and it seems to do just fine.
The lens I most wanted to use on the a7c was the 35 summilux pre-asph, I have a copy from 1992 that is a really wonderful lens. (the wife's favorite) it's tiny...Coupled with the a7c it's smaller than a Q. I don't study my pics for small differences between systems, but, after spending the afternoon on a hike and the evening at the house shooting this little kit. I have to say, so far, so good.
The AF reminds me of older generation AF, works mostly good I'm not gonna go shoot sports with it, but, depending on what mode you have it in, it does pretty well, (eye focus works awesome) and I don't see much difference in the IQ except color. (but like I said, I'm no lens tester)
Here's a couple from yesterday with the Summilux-M 35mm f/1.4 v2
The lens I most wanted to use on the a7c was the 35 summilux pre-asph, I have a copy from 1992 that is a really wonderful lens. (the wife's favorite) it's tiny...Coupled with the a7c it's smaller than a Q. I don't study my pics for small differences between systems, but, after spending the afternoon on a hike and the evening at the house shooting this little kit. I have to say, so far, so good.
The AF reminds me of older generation AF, works mostly good
I'm not gonna go shoot sports with it, but, depending on what mode you have it in, it does pretty well, (eye focus works awesome) and I don't see much difference in the IQ except color. (but like I said, I'm no lens tester)Here's a couple from yesterday with the Summilux-M 35mm f/1.4 v2
Sep 23, 2022 at 08:00 AM
p.9 #14Techart Pro LM-EA9 Review
Matt Kerby wrote:
Well, I've had this adapter for a couple days now and have tested most my lenses with it on my a7c... I was surprised my 35 FLE worked so well. I set it to 2 meters as Fred suggested and it seems to do just fine.
The lens I most wanted to use on the a7c was the 35 summilux pre-asph, I have a copy from 1992 that is a really wonderful lens. (the wife's favorite) it's tiny...Coupled with the a7c it's smaller than a Q. I don't study my pics for small differences between systems, but, after spending...Show more →
It's interesting that from my experience, the Leica 35/1.4 FLE works better than the 28/1.4 Lux with the EA9.
Well, I've had this adapter for a couple days now and have tested most my lenses with it on my a7c... I was surprised my 35 FLE worked so well. I set it to 2 meters as Fred suggested and it seems to do just fine.
The lens I most wanted to use on the a7c was the 35 summilux pre-asph, I have a copy from 1992 that is a really wonderful lens. (the wife's favorite) it's tiny...Coupled with the a7c it's smaller than a Q. I don't study my pics for small differences between systems, but, after spending...Show more →
It's interesting that from my experience, the Leica 35/1.4 FLE works better than the 28/1.4 Lux with the EA9.
Sep 23, 2022 at 08:10 AM
p.9 #15Techart Pro LM-EA9 Review
Same here, although I only popped my 28/1.4 on it for a little while as, it seemed to lag a lot more than the 35 and 50 lux's. My pre-asph and asph 50 lux's did really well with it too.
But, I have to mount each one of my lenses for a day or two like I did with the 35 pre-asph to get a better idea of how they do.
I have the LM-EA7 as well, I'm not sure how much faster the AF is on the EA9 but it's noticeably faster, for me, the size and eye AF make this a worthy upgrade so far and maybe I'll use it more. We'll see
But, I have to mount each one of my lenses for a day or two like I did with the 35 pre-asph to get a better idea of how they do.
I have the LM-EA7 as well, I'm not sure how much faster the AF is on the EA9 but it's noticeably faster, for me, the size and eye AF make this a worthy upgrade so far and maybe I'll use it more. We'll see
Sep 23, 2022 at 08:48 AM
p.9 #16Techart Pro LM-EA9 Review
Oddly, I have found the CV 35/2 Ultron and CV 28/2 are horrible, whereas the 35 Lux pre-asph, 50/1 Noct, ZM 50/1.5, 73 Sonnetar and especially 35/1.4 Apoqualia work WAY better.
Sep 23, 2022 at 09:12 AM
p.9 #17Techart Pro LM-EA9 Review
nehemiahphoto wrote:
Oddly, I have found the CV 35/2 Ultron and CV 28/2 are horrible, whereas the 35 Lux pre-asph, 50/1 Noct, ZM 50/1.5, 73 Sonnetar and especially 35/1.4 Apoqualia work WAY better.
Agree on the CV 28/2. For some reason, this one only focuses well at center.
Another vote for the 50/1 Noct. The Voigtlander 50/1.5 Heliar and Leica 50/1.4 Lux work great too.
I will test out the CV 50/1.2 today.
Oddly, I have found the CV 35/2 Ultron and CV 28/2 are horrible, whereas the 35 Lux pre-asph, 50/1 Noct, ZM 50/1.5, 73 Sonnetar and especially 35/1.4 Apoqualia work WAY better.
Agree on the CV 28/2. For some reason, this one only focuses well at center.
Another vote for the 50/1 Noct. The Voigtlander 50/1.5 Heliar and Leica 50/1.4 Lux work great too.
I will test out the CV 50/1.2 today.
Sep 23, 2022 at 09:24 AM
p.9 #18Techart Pro LM-EA9 Review
Fred Miranda wrote:
Agree on the CV 28/2. For some reason, this one only focuses well at center.
Another vote for the 50/1 Noct. The Voigtlander 50/1.5 Heliar and Leica 50/1.4 Lux work great too.
I will test out the CV 50/1.2 today.
Can you focus outside the mid third square grid box?
And is it correctly focuses on the outer grid boxes?
I have tested several Minolta SR(MC/MD) and M42 lenses from wide to tele and the wide ones only work in the middle, 50-ish lenses can be focused longer out from the center and tele lenses even longer out from the center, but outside of the middle grid box the focus isn't correct, it is front focused.
That is why I wonder.
nehemiahphoto wrote
Oddly, I have found the CV 35/2 Ultron and CV 28/2 are horrible, whereas the 35 Lux pre-asph, 50/1 Noct, ZM 50/1.5, 73 Sonnetar and especially 35/1.4 Apoqualia work WAY better.Another vote for the 50/1 Noct. The Voigtlander 50/1.5 Heliar and Leica 50/1.4 Lux work great too.
I will test out the CV 50/1.2 today.
Can you focus outside the mid third square grid box?
And is it correctly focuses on the outer grid boxes?
I have tested several Minolta SR(MC/MD) and M42 lenses from wide to tele and the wide ones only work in the middle, 50-ish lenses can be focused longer out from the center and tele lenses even longer out from the center, but outside of the middle grid box the focus isn't correct, it is front focused.
That is why I wonder.
Sep 23, 2022 at 10:03 AM
p.9 #19Techart Pro LM-EA9 Review
Fred Miranda wrote:
I will test out the CV 50/1.2 today.
Interested in your findings...I tried the CV50/1.2. Seems like I needed to prefocus it more than I wanted to and was slower to lock than my 50/.95 Noctilux and 50/ASPH lux. So far, my FLE is the fastest and most accurate.
I will test out the CV 50/1.2 today.
Interested in your findings...I tried the CV50/1.2. Seems like I needed to prefocus it more than I wanted to and was slower to lock than my 50/.95 Noctilux and 50/ASPH lux. So far, my FLE is the fastest and most accurate.
Sep 23, 2022 at 10:31 AM
p.9 #20Techart Pro LM-EA9 Review
rji2goleez wrote:
So, I ordered the new TAP adapter on August 30th. I received an order number and confirmation but nothing since. For those who have received their adapter, how long did it take from Order to shipment to receipt?
I wrote to Techart once and received no response so I just wrote them again.
I ordered about a week before you and haven’t heard anything either. They were estimating mid- to late sept when I ordered.
So, I ordered the new TAP adapter on August 30th. I received an order number and confirmation but nothing since. For those who have received their adapter, how long did it take from Order to shipment to receipt?
I wrote to Techart once and received no response so I just wrote them again.
I ordered about a week before you and haven’t heard anything either. They were estimating mid- to late sept when I ordered.
Sep 24, 2022 at 03:09 PM