p.1 #1 · Any Leica M + Minolta A + Sony E shooters?
Hi all,
Somehow I've found myself with three system:
1. Minolta A (a7, a9)
2. Sony E (a7 iii)
3. Leica M (M6)
I have some nice lenses across all three systems. Mostly Minolta A mount lenses. I use those on the a7 and a9 since the a7 iii can't use the LA-EA5.
Do y'all think it's worth upgrading the Sony A7iii to an A7iv or a7C ii to be able to use the LA-EA5 adapter? I'm worried the bulk will make it an unpleasant experience.
I also don't have an adapter for the Leica lenses to the Sony A7iii. Is that worth trying?
Or should I just get rid of the a7iii and go back to M and A mount? The only thing I'd miss is the Eye AF.
What are you all doing? Are there other systems or camera bodies I should look at? I'm open to any lens system that has nice vintage character lenses, even if it needs to be manually focused. I do have a toddler though and need to use AF sometimes.
p.1 #2 · Any Leica M + Minolta A + Sony E shooters?
I'd keep the Leica M6 and sell everything else. Take that money and buy a used Sony A7V & 35GM. You'll have thousands of in focus pictures of your baby. Speaking from experience and very happy with my choices of bodies and lenses.
p.1 #3 · Any Leica M + Minolta A + Sony E shooters?
LA-EA5 adapter is worth it for me, less bulky then older adapters... I used it with Minolta 135mm 2.8 (as below) and eye af works great with A1, but Tamron 28-300mm af was not that great with the adapter, maybe needs some firmware update as I was using it with previous version adapter with the mirror...
A1+Minolta 135mm 2.8+LA-EA5
M lens performance also depends on the lens. You need to tell which lenses to see if it is good with the Sony sensor thickness unless you are only shooting portraits. AF m adapter gives eye af also, but the area of the coverage is usually better in the center area depending on the lens...
A7C+CV 75mm 1.9+techart m adapter with eye af:
pontoon wrote:
Hi all,
Somehow I've found myself with three system:
1. Minolta A (a7, a9)
2. Sony E (a7 iii)
3. Leica M (M6)
I have some nice lenses across all three systems. Mostly Minolta A mount lenses. I use those on the a7 and a9 since the a7 iii can't use the LA-EA5.
Do y'all think it's worth upgrading the Sony A7iii to an A7iv or a7C ii to be able to use the LA-EA5 adapter? I'm worried the bulk will make it an unpleasant experience.
I also don't have an adapter for the Leica lenses to the Sony A7iii. Is that worth trying?
Or should I just get rid of the a7iii and go back to M and A mount? The only thing I'd miss is the Eye AF.
What are you all doing? Are there other systems or camera bodies I should look at? I'm open to any lens system that has nice vintage character lenses, even if it needs to be manually focused. I do have a toddler though and need to use AF sometimes....Show more →
p.1 #4 · Any Leica M + Minolta A + Sony E shooters?
Surfnsun wrote:
I'd keep the Leica M6 and sell everything else. Take that money and buy a used Sony A7V & 35GM. You'll have thousands of in focus pictures of your baby. Speaking from experience and very happy with my choices of bodies and lenses.
This sounds like the voice of reason. Especially with the toddler chaos...
There’s just something about those Minolta lenses, though. I really like their character, and I’ve had some of them long enough that I can’t quite see myself parting with them.
Maybe the sane answer is M6 + Minolta for slower paced shooting, and an upgraded a7 for real life moving at toddler speed.
p.1 #5 · Any Leica M + Minolta A + Sony E shooters?
serhan_ wrote:
LA-EA5 adapter is worth it for me, less bulky then older adapters... I used it with Minolta 135mm 2.8 (as below) and eye af works great with A1, but Tamron 28-300mm af was not that great with the adapter, maybe needs some firmware update as I was using it with previous version adapter with the mirror...
M lens performance also depends on the lens. You need to tell which lenses to see if it is good with the Sony sensor thickness unless you are only shooting portraits. AF m adapter gives eye af also, but the area of the coverage is usually better in the center area depending on the lens...
Wow, so you’re using an M-mount lens on an E-mount body with Eye AF? I was under the impression that M lenses on Sony would be manual-focus only, so that sounds like a lot of fun to try.
I’m glad to hear you like the LA-EA5. That picture of your cat is amazing, too. Those Minolta lenses really are special.
Upgrading my A7III to a body that can use the LA-EA5 properly is sounding more and more appealing.
p.1 #6 · Any Leica M + Minolta A + Sony E shooters?
Just keep In mind all A mount adapters have a noticeable shutter delay once you stop down from wide open. So for a moving toddler, it makes it a tough decision. The work-around to this delay is to burst shot while using af-tracking, as once the lens stops down, it will stay that way while the shutter button is held down. So your first shot of a moving subject will be back/front focused, but the subsequent burst should be in focus.
p.1 #7 · Any Leica M + Minolta A + Sony E shooters?
Tschanrm wrote:
Just keep In mind all A mount adapters have a noticeable shutter delay once you stop down from wide open. So for a moving toddler, it makes it a tough decision. The work-around to this delay is to burst shot while using af-tracking, as once the lens stops down, it will stay that way while the shutter button is held down. So your first shot of a moving subject will be back/front focused, but the subsequent burst should be in focus.
Woah, I had no idea, thanks for the heads up. That is a tough decision. Dang, I sure wish Sony would bring back another A mount body. That work around seems good though, since if the subject is moving, having a little burst is probably good to get the timing right. Or the a99ii has eye af, though it’s also big and expensive.
p.1 #8 · Any Leica M + Minolta A + Sony E shooters?
pontoon wrote:
Hi all,
Somehow I've found myself with three system:
1. Minolta A (a7, a9)
2. Sony E (a7 iii)
3. Leica M (M6)
I have some nice lenses across all three systems. Mostly Minolta A mount lenses. I use those on the a7 and a9 since the a7 iii can't use the LA-EA5.
Do y'all think it's worth upgrading the Sony A7iii to an A7iv or a7C ii to be able to use the LA-EA5 adapter? I'm worried the bulk will make it an unpleasant experience.
I also don't have an adapter for the Leica lenses to the Sony A7iii. Is that worth trying?
Or should I just get rid of the a7iii and go back to M and A mount? The only thing I'd miss is the Eye AF.
What are you all doing? Are there other systems or camera bodies I should look at? I'm open to any lens system that has nice vintage character lenses, even if it needs to be manually focused. I do have a toddler though and need to use AF sometimes....Show more →
Why not sell your e-mount and pick up a 99ii? Keep your M6.
p.1 #9 · Any Leica M + Minolta A + Sony E shooters?
Eye-af on the A99M2 is the same as the A7RII. It requires a separate function button to engage, and once engaged it does not fall-back to face detection if no eye is found. It was ground-breaking at the time, but by today's standard it can be cumbersome.
In a few months the A7RIV will drop in value due to the A7RVI release. I believe that will be the best budget route with the LA-EA5, and should be cheaper than A7IV.
p.1 #10 · Any Leica M + Minolta A + Sony E shooters?
nehemiahphoto wrote:
Why not sell your e-mount and pick up a 99ii? Keep your M6.
I've definitely considered it. The upside is that I can just use one system for film and digital. I could sell a few lenses including two I never use. Pretty awesome.
The downside is the camera is larger, older, and has worse AF. The reason I grab digital at this point is to reliably get a shot under tough conditions (1.4 in full sun, no time to find an ND; running kids, low light), so giving up some AF is tough.
I'm still debating what to do, and the a99 ii is definitely on my mind. I do wish it weren't so expensive...
p.1 #11 · Any Leica M + Minolta A + Sony E shooters?
Tschanrm wrote:
Eye-af on the A99M2 is the same as the A7RII. It requires a separate function button to engage, and once engaged it does not fall-back to face detection if no eye is found. It was ground-breaking at the time, but by today's standard it can be cumbersome.
In a few months the A7RIV will drop in value due to the A7RVI release. I believe that will be the best budget route with the LA-EA5, and should be cheaper than A7IV.
That's good to know, thank you. I knew the a99 ii had eye AF, and all the reviews I watch on this camera describe it as awesome. Of course the reviews are about 10 years old, so I'm sure it was at the time.
Regarding the A7RIV, good to know. I noticed a ton of those for sale right now. Actually, I think it's a7V for sale I'm seeing. I've always found the a7iii sized files to be plenty big, so I didn't look into the A7R series too much. I'll check it out.
p.1 #12 · Any Leica M + Minolta A + Sony E shooters?
The build quality differs too, but somehow it's not discussed often. Most notably, the a7III and a7IV have plastic rear cabinets (the back side of the camera). The a7RIII and a7RIV the rear is metal. Also, the screen is brighter on the A7RIV, I believe the A7IV is using the same screen as the A7C, and it has a flaw where the "Sunny Westher" setting falsely blows out highlights
Something you should know about the a99m2 build that differs greatly from the a7RII and later generations, the brass bayonate in the a99m2 is attached to plastic housing/mirror box. In the A7RII and newer it's a metal housing attached to a metal backplate. It's a strange shortcoming, considering the a99 is otherwise full magnesium alloy. My guess is cost, as even Nikon did this plastic mirror box on the D8XX series up until the swan-song D850 which features a metal mirror box.
p.1 #13 · Any Leica M + Minolta A + Sony E shooters?
I switched some years ago from a77 ii and a99 to e-mount (a7 IV) and adapted all my Minolta and Sony lenses.
The AF was in my opinion faster and a lot of more responsible and reliable due the tracking. Eye AF is working great with all lenses. But, the AF speed for birds in flight is not fast enough. The SSM (version 1) 70-300G or the Sigma 300 4.0 with screw drive is to slow. But, never tested it with the SSM version 2 build in in the 70-300 G2 and 70-400G2, which should a lot of faster than the SSM version 1.
For people shots SSM and screw drive is the performance sufficient.
In the moment, I have adapted all my Minolta and Sony primes (20, 24, 28, 50 Zeiss, 100 macro) and zooms (beercan, 35-70, etc.) and are really happy with the results, except the bird in flight use cases...
As the rendering of the modern lenses are to clinical and I also like the rendering of the A-mount lenses, I have no pressure to switch to modern glass.
Which A-mount lenses do you own?
Do you know Dyxum (https://www.dyxum.com/)? - I a Minolta / Sony forum with a great lens database for A- and E-mount, including sample pictures and ratings from the users.
p.1 #14 · Any Leica M + Minolta A + Sony E shooters?
When I switched from Leica to Sony 5 years ago I could not believe how good the Sony 35GM was, and what a delight to have everything quickly and completely in focus. OTOH there is something special about Leica M that nothing else quite matches. So if you can still focus the rangefinder okay (I couldn't, at the time) I agree with the recommendation above from Surfnsun -- keep the M6, sell everyting else to fund a recent Sony body and the 35GM.
p.1 #15 · Any Leica M + Minolta A + Sony E shooters?
Dotsch wrote:
I switched some years ago from a77 ii and a99 to e-mount (a7 IV) and adapted all my Minolta and Sony lenses.
The AF was in my opinion faster and a lot of more responsible and reliable due the tracking. Eye AF is working great with all lenses. But, the AF speed for birds in flight is not fast enough. The SSM (version 1) 70-300G or the Sigma 300 4.0 with screw drive is to slow. But, never tested it with the SSM version 2 build in in the 70-300 G2 and 70-400G2, which should a lot of faster than the SSM version 1.
For people shots SSM and screw drive is the performance sufficient.
In the moment, I have adapted all my Minolta and Sony primes (20, 24, 28, 50 Zeiss, 100 macro) and zooms (beercan, 35-70, etc.) and are really happy with the results, except the bird in flight use cases...
As the rendering of the modern lenses are to clinical and I also like the rendering of the A-mount lenses, I have no pressure to switch to modern glass.
Which A-mount lenses do you own?
Do you know Dyxum (https://www.dyxum.com/)? - I a Minolta / Sony forum with a great lens database for A- and E-mount, including sample pictures and ratings from the users. ...Show more →
"Which A-mount lenses do you own?" - too many, according to my wife. Yes I have been on dyxum since 2010, and I've seen the vast collections some have. I've got these lenses (Minolta AF unless indicated otherwise):
- Sigma 18mm 3.5
- 24mm 2.8
- 28-70 G RS 2.8
- 28-75 D 2.8
- 35mm f2
- 35mm 1.4 G RS (ridiculously expensive)
- 50mm 1.7 (broken, got it free off Dyxum)
- 50mm 1.4
- 85mm 1.4 G D RS
- 100mm macro 2.8 D
- 200mm APO 2.8
- Also a 24-85mm f3.5-4.5 and 24-105mm F3.5-4.5 D I'm trying to sell (included on camera bodies)
Thank you for the info on the focusing. I don't take pictures of flying birds or anything like that, so the LA-EA5 seems like a good option.
I actually came across a Sony A7 IV on the forums here and picked that up. If I can sell my A7 III, the upgrade to the newer body and an LA-EA5 should be about $700 all together. That seems like a good option given the small hoard of Minolta lenses.
If I really must nail focus I'll always have a few native E mount lenses.
p.1 #16 · Any Leica M + Minolta A + Sony E shooters?
rob_ww wrote:
When I switched from Leica to Sony 5 years ago I could not believe how good the Sony 35GM was, and what a delight to have everything quickly and completely in focus. OTOH there is something special about Leica M that nothing else quite matches. So if you can still focus the rangefinder okay (I couldn't, at the time) I agree with the recommendation above from Surfnsun -- keep the M6, sell everyting else to fund a recent Sony body and the 35GM.
The 35mm 1.4 GM is certainly tempting... I have the 35mm 1.8 and 2.8 currently. And yes, I agree 100%, there isn't a single AF lens for the E mount that has the character of the vintage (or vintage inspired) Leica lenses.
p.1 #17 · Any Leica M + Minolta A + Sony E shooters?
Wow, a impressive collection of a lot great lenses.
From my opinion it's worth to use them.
Eventually, the LA-EA4 is a solution to use the lenses on the a7 iii. But, the focus will be slower and not so reliable, as the LA-EA4 uses the AF module from a older A-Mount camera. I guess a55.
Do you know phillipreeve.net? They are testing and reviewing also a lot of Leica lenses.
p.1 #18 · Any Leica M + Minolta A + Sony E shooters?
Dotsch wrote:
Wow, a impressive collection of a lot great lenses.
From my opinion it's worth to use them.
Eventually, the LA-EA4 is a solution to use the lenses on the a7 iii. But, the focus will be slower and not so reliable, as the LA-EA4 uses the AF module from a older A-Mount camera. I guess a55.
Do you know phillipreeve.net? They are testing and reviewing also a lot of Leica lenses.
Thanks! I actually ordered an LA-EA5 to go with the a7 iv I just got from the for sale forums here. I haven't received the LA-EA5 yet, but I'm eager to try the vintage Minolta lenses on the a7 iv.
Yes I think I've seen phillipreeve.net. He's the guy who takes pics of a castle from a distance, right? I like his reviews, it has all the info I could want (and more). I do use other review sites, and I like to just look at flickr photos without zooming in, to get a sense for how the lens actually looks in regular photography.
