Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2014/02/24
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I was wondering how the 19mm Elmarit R would work on the A7r. I have no doubt that on the M240 with the right lens profile selected. I'm guessing that the SLR wide angles will work better on the A7r than the M mount lenses, due to the less extreme incident light angles. It seems that if you want the best performance out of your M wide angles, an M9 or M240 is still the best option. On Feb 24, 2014, at 2:10 PM, Tina Manley <images at comporium.net> wrote: > I have the 19 Elmarit R I can try on the M240. What would be a good test > photo? > > Tina > > > > > On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 4:46 PM, Jim Laurel (gmail) <jplaurel at > gmail.com>wrote: > >> Thank you for doing this quick test, Sonny. Looks like the CV 15mm Heliar >> has same issue as with the M9 and M240, only much worse. The M240 with the >> lens set to the 21mm Elmarit shows far less magenta in the corners. >> That's, >> of course, easy to correct with CornerFix or LR Flat Field, but the more >> worrisome thing is how soft the edges are with both lenses. I have the >> Heliar and the Elmarit 21mm ASPH and while the Heliar does exhibit some >> minor magenta shift on the edges, at least the edges are sharp. And of >> course, on the M240, the Elmarit is perfect. I am surprised to see that >> much color shift with your pre-asph Elmarit 21 on the A7, though. >> >> I suspect that you would not have these color shifts or edge sharpness >> falloff with SLR lenses adapted to the A7. It would be interesting to see >> how a 24mm or 19mm Elmarit R would perform. I have been playing with the >> 24mm Elmarit R on the M240 with the Leica adapter and it works perfectly. >> >> Thanks again for taking the time to demo this... Very informative. >> >> --Jim >> >> >> On Feb 21, 2014, at 4:28 PM, Sonny Carter <sonc.hegr at gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> This was a totally unscientific test, but Jim Laurel asked a question, >> and >>> I had the stuff to answer it, and I think it will help me in the future. >>> >>> The question was, Does the V/C 15mm exhibit magenta corners with the Sony >>> A7r? Also up was the question of smearing with wides on that camera. >>> Looks like the answer is yes on both counts, though it may not be only >> the >>> camera. (I haven't tested the lens for smearing on my M9.) >>> >>> I also held a ir-uv cut filter up to one side of the lens, and to my eye, >>> it seemed to lessen the magenta effect. If I can find one of the correct >>> diameter, I'll try that one again full frame. >>> >>> I also did the same shot with my 21 pre asph Elmarit and the Sony Zoom >> set >>> at 28mm. >>> I just set the camera at auto for all 3 lenses. >>> >>> This test probably is not in depth enough for some of you, but it tells >> me >>> what I want to know, and that's to use these two lenses on my M9. Easy >>> enough, as I barely use them anyhow. I rarely take a 35 off my camera >> ever >>> except for my flower shooting. >>> >>> Here are the snaps. >>> >>> http://sonc.com/look/?page_id=3324 >>> >>> To see full sized jpegs of the four shots, go to www.sonc.com/a7r >>> >>> www.sonc.com/a7r/15-big-DSC00641.jpg >>> www.sonc.com/a7r/21bigDSC00648.jpg >>> www.sonc.com/a7r/28zoomDSC00650.jpg >>> www.sonc.com/a7r/filter-bigDSC00645.jpg >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 6:23 PM, Geoff Hopkinson <hopsternew at gmail.com >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Leica raah raah forum !! >>>> On Feb 22, 2014 1:00 AM, "Steve Barbour" <steve.barbour at gmail.com> >> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Feb 20, 2014, at 5:46 PM, Jim Laurel (gmail) <jplaurel at gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> All I've seen, Steve, is some anecdotal evidence. Don't get me started >>>>> on Ken Rockwell, but on this page, he does have some examples of a 21mm >>>>> Super Elmar-M adapted to the A7 that appears to show sensor reflections >>>> and >>>>> smeared corner detail. Lurking around the dpreview forums, I've seen >>>> others >>>>> report similar results. But of course it's hard to know for sure >>>>>> >>>>>> http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/comparisons/2013-12-leica-sony-canon/ >>>>> >>>>> hi Jim, we are happy to see you back. My point of course is....we don't >>>>> exactly have PROOF of anything, though we do have anecdotal and >> selected >>>>> stories by people with an agenda. No completeness or worst case >> scenarios >>>>> by unbiased individuals with data for the leica M240, as well as the >> Sony >>>>> A7 and A7r. Selected stories to make a point by people who wish to >> make >>>> a >>>>> point. No semblance of a real unbiased careful comparison. All of this >> is >>>>> then presented to a leica rah rah forum by people who like leica, >> whether >>>>> they use one or not.. I would like to know what the real facts are, >> based >>>>> on real world data, with carefully done comparisons. And if the cameras >>>> in >>>>> question have flaws in some areas, I will use the cameras accordingly, >>>>> always the case for all of us. >>>>> I used a CV 12 mm lens on my A7r, with many usable results, but some >>>>> unacceptable results as well. >>>>> That alerted me to be careful, especially with the widest of the wide. >>>>> Extrapolating this to all lenses under 50mm is not a conclusion based >> on >>>>> the facts. Some results of the widest lenses are acceptable, and we >> need >>>> to >>>>> have some reasonable ground rules. It occurred to me that we don't have >>>>> rigorous comparative data, even for the M240. What is clear is that >>>> many!! >>>>> lenses on the A7r, give incredibly wonderful results, it would seem far >>>>> greater in number for the A7r than the M240 because the list includes >>>> most >>>>> lenses ever made by most optical companies, including all of the leica >> R >>>>> lenses. >>>>> >>>>> Looked at in this light, I feel that the least we need to do, is >> approach >>>>> this question with complete understanding of the situation, an open >>>> mind, >>>>> and armed with some real world comparative data. >>>>> >>>>> By the way, the above subject line says OT, but in my estimation this >>>>> subject is very much on topic. >>>>> >>>>> thanks for bringing it up, >>>>> >>>>> Steve >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> --Jim >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Feb 20, 2014, at 5:10 PM, Steve Barbour <steve.barbour at >>>>>> gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone >>>>>>> Steve Barbour >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Feb 20, 2014, at 4:39 PM, Jim Gmail <jplaurel at gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Aren't there a lot if reported issues with adapted lenses? The Leica >> M >>>>> primes, at least, seem to perform much better on the M240 than on the >> A7. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> where is this proven? >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Leica Users Group. >>>>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Leica Users Group. >>>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >>>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Leica Users Group. >>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Regards, >>> >>> Sonny >>> http://sonc.com/look/ >>> Natchitoches, Louisiana >>> 1714 >>> Oldest Permanent Settlement in the Louisiana Purchase >>> >>> USA >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Leica Users Group. >>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> >> > > > -- > Tina Manley > http:// <http://tina-manley.artistwebsites.com/>www.tinamanley.com > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information