gyoung143
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 Re: Manual focus M mount lenses on X-E5 vs X Pro 3 | |
mivadep wrote:
gyoung143 wrote:
I had a total of 8 lenses 35mm and less, of which a 28 1.9 Voigtlander Ultron is good, a 21 Elmarit asph was OK, rest poor. 50mm and up are good.
Gerry
Just curious, how are you determining "good" or "not good"? The widest M mount lens I currently have is the CV 35mm f/1.2 III and the few times I've used it on my X-T5 I've been happy with the results (but I'm not shooting landscapes with it).
The tests were very subjective, I had the lenses already and had been using them on film Leicas M3 M6ttl and a III. I simply wanted to know of I could carry on using them as I had done before, for landscape, travel, architecture etc. I had a couple of handy test sites near home, one a row of shops easily viewed from the front so I could get lens axis perpendicular to the plane of focus, the frontages of the shops, and a straight line of poplar trees about 200m long which I could view similarly from distance. I photographed them at apertures from maximum to 16. I did the tests first on a Sony A7, and a couple of years later on an Xpro2.
The 28 1.9 Ultron performs pretty well as good on digital as it does on film, gives visually sharp results to the edge of the frame at f/4 and smaller. On both full frame and APS-C. It is an unusual design for a rangefinder lens, a quite long retrofocus design similar to SLR lenses. Note this is an old design, I bought over 20 years ago and long sierseded. I still use it
The 21mm Elmarit aspheric has a similar 'long' body for its focal length, it produced good results at f/8 across the frame but was at least 2 stops worse than on film. Not reallygood enough at the edges at 4 or 5.6 to use where edge sharpness is required, which for me is pretty well all the time with a wide angle. The Fuji 23 f/2 I have is as good at 4 as the Elmarit was at 8, much more useful.
The other 6 lenses were never really good enough to be useful to me even at f/8 even though they are good performers on film. They are 15mmf/4.5 (vers 1) 21 f/4, 35 f/2.5 LTM Voigtlanders, 35mm f/3.5 Summaron, and two 35mm Summicrons, the original 8 element for M3 and the later aspheric I used on the M6ttl.
I have other Leica lenses from 50 to 200mm and all work well. All are old designs but good ones. Your 35 f/1.2 is a much more recent design, I can't comment on it but if you look at the Sony and Leica and Alternative forums Fred does excellent tests, and usually in the case of M mount lenses does it both on a Leica M and a Sony full frame, so you can see the effect of the different sensor constructions, you can judge what it would be roughly on a cropped aps-c sensor, I think Fuji has similar sensor construction, cover glass construction etc to Sony, apart from the filter array but I don't think that would be significant. I think there have been several versions so make sure you are looking at tests of the right one!
Gerry
|
