p.2 #1 · Has anyone tested M-mount lenses on the Lumix S1RII
Steve Spencer wrote:
I did for a number of years. It is a great approach, but I decided to sell my Leica M10 and simplify my camera kit. In doing so, I also got to use focus aids based on the AF system of the camera which I actually prefer to even the rangefinder patch and they work with all focal lengths. Further I can build a great kit with M lenses that perform the same on mirrorless as they do on Leica M cameras. I would have more options for lenses on Leica M, but I have more than sufficient options using mirrorless and I can add in a few mirrorless lenses and old SLR lenses that either can't be used on a Leica M camera or would be a lot harder to use....Show more →
I fully understand what you are saying and agree for many this is the best solution. It occurs to me that when using MF lenses that have been optimized for use on Sony or Nikon cameras you are no longer shooting M lenses but more correctly shoot M inspired lenses. That leads back to my original statement M lenses are best shot on M bodies for optimum performance.
Jul 10, 2026 at 05:58 AM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #2 · Has anyone tested M-mount lenses on the Lumix S1RII
1bwana1 wrote:
I fully understand what you are saying and agree for many this is the best solution. It occurs to me that when using MF lenses that have been optimized for use on Sony or Nikon cameras you are no longer shooting M lenses but more correctly shoot M inspired lenses. That leads back to my original statement M lenses are best shot on M bodies for optimum performance.
Some Leica M mount lenses perform equally well on mirrorless. For example, I have the Voigtlander 21 f/3.5 and it performs just as well on my Canon R5 II as it does on a Leica M camera. I'm also going to get the Voigtlander 75 f/2.8 APO, and that lens too performs as well on my Canon camera as it would on a Leica M camera. One of my kits will pair those two lenses with the Voigtlander 40 f/1.2 for Canon RF mount. It will make a light and versatile kit. I will have excellent focus aids.
I will also add a number of other lenses including five Zeiss lenses made for Canon that are a bit bigger and which I really enjoy shooting. For travel I don't want these bigger lenses (mostly anyway as sometimes I will take one with a couple of Leica M lenses that will still let the kit be small and light enough), but when I am not traveling they are my favorites to use and would be difficult or impossible to use on a Leica M camera. They are all made by Cosina (the same people who make the Voigtlander lenses) and they are very well made.
Finally, there are some AF lenses that I really like and combining them my MF lenses is a nice bonus. For example, Canon just came out with what looks like a very nice 20-50 f/4 in their premium series that is quite light and I will likely fairly often swap into my travel kit instead of the Voigtlander 21 f/3.5. It will give my very nice capabilities for landscapes and architecture while still keeping my kit small. I also have a 100-400mm lens that weighs just 633g. I will swap that into my travel kit when we vacation at the beach which will let me shoot shore birds while my wife snorkels--as I am fairly poor swimmer I mostly avoid the water except for short forays to cool off.
So nothing wrong with have a Leica M camera. I thoroughly enjoyed having mine, but a mirrorless camera lets me simplify to one system and still make it portable for travel. I can have just one camera that shoots all the type of things I like to shoot and for me it is important that it provides excellent MF aids that makes MF easy and enjoyable.
p.2 #3 · Has anyone tested M-mount lenses on the Lumix S1RII
Steve Spencer wrote:
I can have just one camera that shoots all the type of things I like to shoot and for me it is important that it provides excellent MF aids that makes MF easy and enjoyable.
SL3-P is on my radar as a ONE camera scenario.
Don't have my hands on one yet (S1R II in the bag, atm), but as it is a bump in MP and AF from my SL2-S ... the versatility of the platform with Leica / Panny / Sigma / M lenses is pretty good. One one hand, I've got my Siggy 500/5.6. Otoh, I've got my M glass. The variety of SL / Panny / Siggy glass options is pretty good, too.
If I were to "cash in" everything and have ONLY one ... SL3-P would probably be my Swiss Army knife.
Personally, I'm still fumbling around a bit with my S1R II. Menu systems, etc. I did recently use my Siggy 24-70/2.8 DG DN II with it in manual focus and it automatically "punched in" when I adjusted focus manually. I can't seem to get it to do this with my M lenses. Not sure if the SL3-P will do that with my M glass or not.
For punching in, I prefer to use a joystick for both position and activation of zoom in (focus aid). I will say that the experience with the S1R II hasn't been "dialed in" yet. It seems that moving the box is a bit laggy, compared to some others I've worked with. Still learning, and placing it in "operator error" or "leaning curve" territory for now, wrt to getting it optimally set up. So, take my input with a grain of salt, for now.
Jul 10, 2026 at 07:25 AM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #4 · Has anyone tested M-mount lenses on the Lumix S1RII
RustyBug wrote:
SL3-P is on my radar as a ONE camera scenario.
Don't have my hands on one yet (S1R II in the bag, atm), but as it is a bump in MP and AF from my SL2-S ... the versatility of the platform with Leica / Panny / Sigma / M lenses is pretty good. One one hand, I've got my Siggy 500/5.6. Otoh, I've got my M glass. The variety of SL / Panny / Siggy glass options is pretty good, too.
If I were to "cash in" everything and have ONLY one ... SL3-P would probably be my Swiss Army knife.
Personally, I'm still fumbling around a bit with my S1R II. Menu systems, etc. I did recently use my Siggy 24-70/2.8 DG DN II with it in manual focus and it automatically "punched in" when I adjusted focus manually. I can't seem to get it to do this with my M lenses. Not sure if the SL3-P will do that with my M glass or not.
For punching in, I prefer to use a joystick for both position and activation of zoom in (focus aid). I will say that the experience with the S1R II hasn't been "dialed in" yet. It seems that moving the box is a bit laggy, compared to some others I've worked with. Still learning, and placing it in "operator error" or "leaning curve" territory for now, wrt to getting it optimally set up. So, take my input with a grain of salt, for now....Show more →
I do think the SL3-P does have the possibility of being a one camera for both MF and AF. The AF has improved. It is a faster camera and it will shoot almost all Leica M lenses and a wide variety of AF lenses. For my tastes Leica needs to develop focus aids based on the AF system and they need to make the camera a bit smaller. If you don't care about those things, however, it could be a really good system.
p.2 #5 · Has anyone tested M-mount lenses on the Lumix S1RII
RustyBug wrote:
SL3-P is on my radar as a ONE camera scenario.
Don't have my hands on one yet (S1R II in the bag, atm), but as it is a bump in MP and AF from my SL2-S ... the versatility of the platform with Leica / Panny / Sigma / M lenses is pretty good. One one hand, I've got my Siggy 500/5.6. Otoh, I've got my M glass. The variety of SL / Panny / Siggy glass options is pretty good, too.
If I were to "cash in" everything and have ONLY one ... SL3-P would probably be my Swiss Army knife.
Personally, I'm still fumbling around a bit with my S1R II. Menu systems, etc. I did recently use my Siggy 24-70/2.8 DG DN II with it in manual focus and it automatically "punched in" when I adjusted focus manually. I can't seem to get it to do this with my M lenses. Not sure if the SL3-P will do that with my M glass or not.
For punching in, I prefer to use a joystick for both position and activation of zoom in (focus aid). I will say that the experience with the S1R II hasn't been "dialed in" yet. It seems that moving the box is a bit laggy, compared to some others I've worked with. Still learning, and placing it in "operator error" or "leaning curve" territory for now, wrt to getting it optimally set up. So, take my input with a grain of salt, for now....Show more →
A few hints for manual focusing with the S1Rii:
- Make sure that you set up the camera to have IBIS enabled when punching in. It's much easier to tweak the focus of a stabilized image. As I recall that was not the default.
- When manual focusing lenses with automatic aperture control, make sure that you are focusing with the lens stopped down to the working aperture (via "constant preview"), in case there is some focus shift. Again, this is not the default. If you focus with the lens wide open it can look like you have nailed the focus, but then when the lens stops down to the set aperture the focus will shift (with some lenses) introducing a bit of softness.
- Use focus peaking when punched in, and set the sensitivity to the maximum. That is far too much sensitivity for a non-magnified view, but it is just the right amount when zoomed in.
Using these tweaks it is a trivial matter to achieve a 100-percent hit rate. :-)
Some Leica M mount lenses perform equally well on mirrorless. For example, I have the Voigtlander 21 f/3.5 and it performs just as well on my Canon R5 II as it does on a Leica M camera. I'm also going to get the Voigtlander 75 f/2.8 APO, and that lens too performs as well on my Canon camera as it would on a Leica M camera. One of my kits will pair those two lenses with the Voigtlander 40 f/1.2 for Canon RF mount. It will make a light and versatile kit. I will have excellent focus aids.
I will also add a number of other lenses including five Zeiss lenses made for Canon that are a bit bigger and which I really enjoy shooting. For travel I don't want these bigger lenses (mostly anyway as sometimes I will take one with a couple of Leica M lenses that will still let the kit be small and light enough), but when I am not traveling they are my favorites to use and would be difficult or impossible to use on a Leica M camera. They are all made by Cosina (the same people who make the Voigtlander lenses) and they are very well made.
Finally, there are some AF lenses that I really like and combining them my MF lenses is a nice bonus. For example, Canon just came out with what looks like a very nice 20-50 f/4 in their premium series that is quite light and I will likely fairly often swap into my travel kit instead of the Voigtlander 21 f/3.5. It will give my very nice capabilities for landscapes and architecture while still keeping my kit small. I also have a 100-400mm lens that weighs just 633g. I will swap that into my travel kit when we vacation at the beach which will let me shoot shore birds while my wife snorkels--as I am fairly poor swimmer I mostly avoid the water except for short forays to cool off.
So nothing wrong with have a Leica M camera. I thoroughly enjoyed having mine, but a mirrorless camera lets me simplify to one system and still make it portable for travel. I can have just one camera that shoots all the type of things I like to shoot and for me it is important that it provides excellent MF aids that makes MF easy and enjoyable. ...Show more →
I went the other direction. Mainly Sony AF shooter. Started adding MF lenses, primarily E Mount Voigtlander. Ended up being pretty much all Leica bodies and lenses. Vintage screw mount through L mount in both lenses and bodies. Mix of analog and digital. All work perfectly together on the SL AF/MF. The L mount lenses of course don't work on M bodies.
p.2 #7 · Has anyone tested M-mount lenses on the Lumix S1RII
Steve Spencer wrote:
I do think the SL3-P does have the possibility of being a one camera for both MF and AF. The AF has improved. It is a faster camera and it will shoot almost all Leica M lenses and a wide variety of AF lenses. For my tastes Leica needs to develop focus aids based on the AF system and they need to make the camera a bit smaller. If you don't care about those things, however, it could be a really good system.
I get why people want cool focus aids. But I don't seem to have much issue getting focus either with my RF, or the SL3. My hit rate is acceptably high even at f/1.4 with my Summilux lenses. Yes, faster and easier with AF.
Jul 10, 2026 at 10:09 AM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #8 · Has anyone tested M-mount lenses on the Lumix S1RII
1bwana1 wrote:
I get why people want cool focus aids. But I don't seem to have much issue getting focus either with my RF, or the SL3. My hit rate is acceptably high even at f/1.4 with my Summilux lenses. Yes, faster and easier with AF.
Focus aids in my experience get me three things that are advantages over a rangefinder.
1) You don't need to focus and recompose. You can use them in any part of the frame.
2) They work well with all focal lengths. Shooting 90mm and especially 135mm lenses can be tough with a rangefinder. They are easy/peasy with focus aids and as easy as wider focal lengths. Likewise wider than 28mm, you can compose much more easily with a EVF based camera and focus aids work very well with both ultra wides and even long telephotos.
3) For portraits with my camera I get excellent focus aids for eye focus, which can come in really handy for portraits as it nails focus on the eye pretty much 100% of the time.
I do like and miss the optical finder of a rangefinder, however. I like both the non-projected image and being able to see outside of the picture area in the viewfinder. So everything is a tradeoff, I actually value the focus aids more than the optical finder, but YMMV.
From what you posted that looks like pretty equal performance and you took field curvature out of the equation by focussing on the far corner. A large part of the effect of different sensor cover glass is that it affects field curvature. It is totally possible that the Z-mount lens has greater field curvature and worse performance if you don't focus on the corner on Nikon. What we really need to know is the discrepancy between center and corner to evaluate if field curvature is exacerbated on the Nikon camera, but with the methodology you report in this thread you wouldn't pick it up.
That said, I have used the Sony E mount Voigtlander 21 f/1.4 on Nikon extensively and the performance is pretty similar. I doubt there is much to see one way or the other in terms of better performance on Sony or Nikon.
p.2 #12 · Has anyone tested M-mount lenses on the Lumix S1RII
Steve Spencer wrote:
From what you posted that looks like pretty equal performance and you took field curvature out of the equation by focussing on the far corner. A large part of the effect of different sensor cover glass is that it affects field curvature. It is totally possible that the Z-mount lens has greater field curvature and worse performance if you don't focus on the corner on Nikon. What we really need to know is the discrepancy between center and corner to evaluate if field curvature is exacerbated on the Nikon camera, but with the methodology you report in this thread you wouldn't pick it up.
That said, I have used the Sony E mount Voigtlander 21 f/1.4 on Nikon extensively and the performance is pretty similar. I doubt there is much to see one way or the other in terms of better performance on Sony or Nikon....Show more →
The increase in sensor stack thickness mostly affects field curvature, as you wrote. It does introduce aberrations, but I believe it's a minor point.
I did a very interesting experiment a couple days ago. I tested a Voigtlander 40mm f/2 Septon E-mount adapted to Z-mount and compared it to a 40mm f/2 Septon native Z-mount. The result surprised me a bit. I knew I had a perfectly centered E-mount copy, and the Z-mount copy I tested was also centered. What I found was slightly better performance from the Z-mount lens at mid-field, but the corners looked pretty similar, and perhaps even a touch better on the E-mount (that was the surprising part), though I had to magnify to 200 to 300% to see it.
In all practical applications, they perform very similarly, whether it's native Z-mount or E-mount adapted to the Nikon mount.
p.2 #14 · Has anyone tested M-mount lenses on the Lumix S1RII
I do think the SL3-P does have the possibility of being a one camera for both MF and AF. The AF has improved. It is a faster camera and it will shoot almost all Leica M lenses and a wide variety of AF lenses. For my tastes Leica needs to develop focus aids based on the AF system and they need to make the camera a bit smaller. If you don't care about those things, however, it could be a really good system.
This 100% plus continue to build out smaller/lighter AF lenses inspired by their M series lenses like the new 50mm Summilux SL that's been announced. I'd be willing to move off the Nikon ZF and lenses if they can give me some better focus aids and reduce the weight of the entire kit and I imagine there would be plenty more who would do the same.
