Rob, I havent used my Noktilux on an M only on rd1 so far.
This is my third rd1 which focuses near to ok at least with some of my lenses.
The front focus I get with the 50/1.0 is consistent.
So it is not the missing accurancy, it is just allways ff.
As I said its my third rd1 allready and I also had sent in my 35 and 28mm lens for calibration and I am kind of getting tired of all these focus issues.
Therefore I try to use not faster than f2.8 or f4 as much as possible.
I just dont have the time to test each lens with each body (M6,M7 and rd1), also maybe the bodys are alligned different-so if I let Leica fit my Noktilux to the M7 it might not work with the rd1.
I will wait until I have the digital M and then test all lenses and send the ones to calibration with my (future) digital M. I also can get the chip at the same time. I mean the "make people use only Leica lenses ond the digital M-CHIP"
open81 wrote:
No problem, Woody. Just a slight misunderstanding.
Thanks Carsten for your advice and thanks to all for understanding. I guess I am a little sensitive because Guy's DMR Bible Thread from its very inception was characterized by interested people genuinely trying to help each other by adding information they had which could broadly apply. There was extremely little negativism and carping and that was what made the thread so much fun.
I think this thread is also potentially very valuable given that virtually all of us from the DMR bible thread are interested in being able to use the M rangefinder for a class of images (read wide). So I would love to see the thread have the same tenor as the bible thread. Also I suspect that many many current M film users will be getting on here to learn from folks who have already made the conversion to (Leica) digital.
Please dear Lord - Nooooo. I haven't visited ADS&L for a while, and now a Digital M is truly on the way!? How can I resist!? How many more ways can I find to part with money?
Now if Mamiya would just make a 7IID with 30-odd MP, I can get divorced, have my wages garnished 'til 2103 and die broke and alone.
Thank you so much Leica! :-)
If you didn't mind a hump back camera, I could probably make something for you. The crop would still be pretty big since the biggest sensors are (still) only 50mmx40mm. Wouldn't have EXIF or anything like that, but I bet it could be done. Might be a tad ugly though. Could probably do the same with the Mamiya 6 too.
I used to shoot the Leica M's. A lot. My favorite lenses were the 21 Asph, 28 Cron Asph, 35 Lux Asph, 50 Lux and 90 Elmarit. My most used lenses were the 28 Cron Apsh and 50 Lux.
However-But: Since the digital M is a 1.33 crop sensor, Leica is introducing a new digital-specific 15mm to get to the 21mm AoV... I am also contemplating going wider this time for that reason. If money were no object, my digital M set would look like two bodies, a 15, 21, 35 and 75, with the 21 and 35 mounted on the bodies. Since money is an issue, probably a single body and the 21 and 35 to start.
I love the Summilux-M 35 ASPH, but it's too long on any crop factor camera for me to use as a normal general-purpose lens. So I'll probably move it in favor of a Summicron-M 28 ASPH. The ZM Biogon 21 is a good lens too, but again a little long on a crop factor camera. But I'll probably keep it, a 28 can be nice as a general-purpose lens indoors, where there's not much room to move around. In fact, maybe I'll try using it as a general-purpose 28 to begin with. It produces a somewhat hard-looking image though, but I might give it a shot.
A think a 15 is definitely going to be a must-have for me with the D-M. It just remains to see which of the Leica or ZM will be the better choice. (Probably the Leica, but I'd prefer to see results before plunking down money on either.)
Since the 80 summilux is one of my go-to lenses on the DMR based on preferred focal length, I'm wondering if anyone has thoughts on the major differences between the 75/2 asph and 75/1.4. How usable and sharp is 1.4 on this lens? Since I'd actually prefer the 80 to be a little sharper wide open, the 75 in an M mount could be an intriguing lens if it is indeed sharper.
kidigital wrote:
Since the 80 summilux is one of my go-to lenses on the DMR based on preferred focal length, I'm wondering if anyone has thoughts on the major differences between the 75/2 asph and 75/1.4. How usable and sharp is 1.4 on this lens? Since I'd actually prefer the 80 to be a little sharper wide open, the 75 in an M mount could be an intriguing lens if it is indeed sharper.
Kurt
Kurt
I have no personal experiences with these two lenses. However if you read the last four issues of LHSA Viewfinder magazine, you will find that the writers consistently prefer the new 75 APO/ASPH to both the older 75 1.4 and the 90 APO/ASPH. Feels to me that if this is true with the film bodies, then the 75 APO/ASPH with the 1.33 digital M will be the real winner. I know that I am on the prowl for this lens and will own it soon, either as a used lens (preferred) or a new one. I can't wait for the new digital M to surface. This body may save the entire brand before the day is through!
With M8 looking real for maybe 3months from now, I think many would welcome continued discussion of Leica M lenses. I have never used and so would be helpful. But maybe all bagage from some discussions (Woody , who is this Go4IT guy? Glad you stopped that stuff)
Maybe we start another thread although some good info here. What everybody think, start new one?
Yes, as someone who has not used leica m cameras before himself, this thread is giving me huge amounts of usefull knowkedge in tesm of lens selection etc.
Not because I am interested in learning about the myth of the leica m as such but this knowledge is great for anyone looking for the best image quality in a small, discreet, carry everywhere camera...which for years has proved to be the leica m series.
It would also be really interesting to hear from anyone that has used the zeiss ikon rangefinder and it's lenses to gain some comparisons.
So thanks everyone and keep it coming!
P.S. I did use a leica cl for six months about ten years ago..it was very nice!
My digit. M is pre-ordered and I decided for black.
Now I agree with somebody else here who wrote that we have to try/check the lenses how they work on the real digital M.
Lens performance is one thing, focus another thing.
With my rd1 my lenses focus quit different, some show front focus , others are fine.
I would consider 28 quit usefull with 1.33 crop, 75 for sure, and something in between, like 35 or 50 (I am not sure on that but think 50 more usefull for me).
21 should be usefull and be like a 28mm in ff-world.
And I hope the 15mm will not be too expensive, otherwise I will think about a voigtländer.
I was just reading an interesting thread over at photo.net about the crop factor on the digital M. Joseph Wisniewski's posts about the design issues are extremely informative. He offers a very detailed explanation of why the crop factor is actually 1.37x, not 1.3x or 1.33x.
Those crop factor formulas are the biggest sources of confusion IMO. When dealing with any camera format, the best way to select a lens is to know what the normal lens is, then work off that. In this case a normal is a 35.
Tom,
Slighly off topic but if you don't mind me asking..how do you find your rd-1 in terms of image quality and buffering when shooting raw and which of your wide m lenses do you find works the best with it..i.e. in terms of focus etc.
Thanks.
Do you think we can assume that a zeiss m lens would work as well on the digital m as they do on the film m series cameras..thinking of the zeiss 15mm distagon here for the widest option..or even the voightlander 12mm with adapter.. if leica don't bring a wider than 21mm lens out also...
One of the other topics here mentioned that the Zeiss 15 ZM was pulled out of production for some unknown reasons and will not return until several design changes are made and implemented.
