Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2008/12/28
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]A lot of the guys here will try and sell you on the el cheapo adapters, the focus confirmation adapters and adapters made in China, Viet Nam or where ever. I have tried a number of these and while they are fine for the small 35mm and 50mm lenses, the 400mm and especially the 560mm Telyts put a lot of pressure on the adapter. The mechanism that these inexpensive adapters use to keep the adapter tight to the lens mount is to add a slit in a soft piece of metal and then open up the slit to add pressure. I have had these adapters loosen to the point where the lens would fall off the adapter. I settled on the Novoflex. The downside is it is very expensive, probably nearly the price of the lens you're buying. My second choice would be an adapter from CameraQuest. Good Luck, Len On Dec 28, 2008, at 11:21 AM, James Laird wrote: > Ok, found a 400 6.8 Telyt for a very good price...much less than the > Canon so definitely worth a try. Which leica eos adapter do you > recommend? Saw one on **bay from jinfinance with focus confirmation > and "desired light metering modes", which is a little confusing. > Anyone recommend one adapter over the others. I'm a little worried > about the fit and ruggedness of an adapter considering the mass of the > Telyt I'll be mounting on the camera. > > Regards and thanks for all the help, > Jim > > On Sun, Dec 28, 2008 at 9:39 AM, Leonard Taupier > <len-001@verizon.net> wrote: >> Jim, >> >> Don't forget you're talking to a lot of Leica guys. I already have >> a 400/6.8 >> Telyt but if I had the Canon 400/5.6, I would use the Canon lens >> much more >> often. >> >> Len >> >> >> On Dec 28, 2008, at 10:15 AM, James Laird wrote: >> >>> I've seen some Telyts on **ay and elsewhere, but all but one 400/6.8 >>> came without the shoulder stock. And if the 400/6.8 will suffice for >>> my crop-sensor 40D, why not just get the Canon 400/5.6L? Thought >>> about >>> the 100-400 Canon because it has IS, but I'll probably be using a >>> tripod most of the time anyway, and I've heard it's quality declines >>> at 400 like most zooms. I'm confused. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Jim >>> >>> On Sun, Dec 28, 2008 at 5:27 AM, Seth Rosner >>> <sethrosner@nycap.rr.com> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Jim, try the 400/6,8 Telyt, MUCH handier, same image quality and >>>> only a >>>> bit >>>> lower magnification. >>>> >>>> Seth >>>> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "James Laird" >>>> <digiratidoc@gmail.com> >>>> To: "Leica Users Group" <lug@leica-users.org> >>>> Sent: Saturday, December 27, 2008 7:54 PM >>>> Subject: Re: [Leica] Canon 800mm IS >>>> >>>> >>>>> George, >>>>> >>>>> My bad. But they are stunning. I'd still like any luger's >>>>> opinion of >>>>> the 400 5.6L. I've also considered the 560 6.8 Telyt but they >>>>> seem to >>>>> be in very short supply and I just don't know if I could get >>>>> used to >>>>> carrying that cannon around. Still considering. >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> Jim >>>>> >>>>> On Sat, Dec 27, 2008 at 6:29 PM, Lottermoser George >>>>> <imagist3@mac.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Wish I could do as well; >>>>>> but, >>>>>> not my images Jim. >>>>>> I only found them in a search >>>>>> for better examples from the 800. >>>>>> >>>>>> Fond regards, >>>>>> George >>>>>> >>>>>> george@imagist.com >>>>>> http://www.imagist.com >>>>>> http://www.imagist.com/blog >>>>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/imagist >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Dec 27, 2008, at 5:34 PM, James Laird wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> George, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Absolutely stunning images! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I'll never be in you're league but have been contemplating a >>>>>>> Canon 400 >>>>>>> 5.6L for my 40D to try my hand at bird photography and >>>>>>> wondered if >>>>>>> you've used one and what you think of it. I'ts not the 800 >>>>>>> but it's >>>>>>> one-tenth the price and in my budget. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>> Jim >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Sat, Dec 27, 2008 at 11:07 AM, Lottermoser George >>>>>>> <imagist3@mac.com> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Here's the first one I found - wide open >>>>>>>> <http://www.pbase.com/martinisabelle/image/106665049> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Fond regards, >>>>>>>> George >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> george@imagist.com >>>>>>>> http://www.imagist.com >>>>>>>> http://www.imagist.com/blog >>>>>>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/imagist >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Dec 27, 2008, at 10:49 AM, Lottermoser George wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Here's a better example of the lens's possibilities: >>>>>>>>> <http://www.pbase.com/martinisabelle/image/105425263> >>>>>>>>> and >>>>>>>>> <http://www.pbase.com/martinisabelle> >>>>>>>>> where 800 is indicated >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Fond regards, >>>>>>>>> George >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> george@imagist.com >>>>>>>>> http://www.imagist.com >>>>>>>>> http://www.imagist.com/blog >>>>>>>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/imagist >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Dec 27, 2008, at 10:27 AM, Leonard Taupier wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> You're right Doug. While I'm primarily a Nikon SLR user, I >>>>>>>>>> bought a >>>>>>>>>> used >>>>>>>>>> EOS 1DS MK II to use with my 560mm Telyt. This combination >>>>>>>>>> gives me >>>>>>>>>> beautiful results. I have since purchased Canon's 400mm f4 >>>>>>>>>> DO and >>>>>>>>>> 1.4X >>>>>>>>>> extender which also gives me beautiful results. Since I >>>>>>>>>> already had >>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>> full >>>>>>>>>> frame body (This was before the D3 and D700), I started >>>>>>>>>> looking at >>>>>>>>>> some >>>>>>>>>> of >>>>>>>>>> the better Canon L lenses to carry with me. I am fortunate >>>>>>>>>> that my >>>>>>>>>> dealer >>>>>>>>>> lets me try anything I want. I have since had to pass on 4 >>>>>>>>>> L lenses >>>>>>>>>> I >>>>>>>>>> tried, >>>>>>>>>> including the 24mm f1.4, the 16-35mm f2.8 and the 24 >>>>>>>>>> -105mm lenses. >>>>>>>>>> I >>>>>>>>>> did >>>>>>>>>> get the 35mm f1.4L lens which I find very nice. I almost >>>>>>>>>> passed on >>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>> 400mm >>>>>>>>>> DO lens as well. I tried a used one from my dealer which I >>>>>>>>>> found >>>>>>>>>> had >>>>>>>>>> low >>>>>>>>>> contrast. A week later he let me try a new one. It was >>>>>>>>>> nothing like >>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>> first one. It had excellent contrast and high resolution. >>>>>>>>>> I bought >>>>>>>>>> it. >>>>>>>>>> I >>>>>>>>>> don't know if this kind of variability is common but it's >>>>>>>>>> certainly >>>>>>>>>> scary >>>>>>>>>> for a lens that cost over $10,000. which is the case with the >>>>>>>>>> 800mm. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Len >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Dec 27, 2008, at 10:57 AM, wildlightphoto@earthlink.net >>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Leonard Taupier wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> This lens is getting glowing reviews from the Fred >>>>>>>>>>>> Miranda site. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I'm beginning to question the value of user reviews >>>>>>>>>>> particularly >>>>>>>>>>> where >>>>>>>>>>> the user's quality standard, techniques and intended use are >>>>>>>>>>> unknowns >>>>>>>>>>> and >>>>>>>>>>> may differ from mine. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> An example is the user reviews of the EF 24mm f/1.4 L on >>>>>>>>>>> FM and >>>>>>>>>>> B&H >>>>>>>>>>> where it seems many are awed by the fast aperture and are >>>>>>>>>>> willing >>>>>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>>>> forgive >>>>>>>>>>> weaker image quality at the faster apertures and the >>>>>>>>>>> expectation >>>>>>>>>>> of >>>>>>>>>>> cherry-picking dealer's (or importer's) stock to find one >>>>>>>>>>> of the >>>>>>>>>>> better >>>>>>>>>>> samples, and give the lens a very high rating. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> At any rate I expect that with the right conditions and >>>>>>>>>>> technique >>>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>> 800mmm f/5.6 IS can deliver much more than the sample photos >>>>>>>>>>> demonstrated. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Leica Users Group. >>>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more >>>>> information >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> ------------- >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> No virus found in this incoming message. >>>> Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com >>>> Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.0/1866 - Release Date: >>>> 12/27/2008 >>>> 8:49 PM >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> 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 >> > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information