Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2014/02/24
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Jim, As I've said before, it is not too worrisome to me as I don't really like what a 15 does in landscape work. The 21 is a more interesting lens to me, but then I do have the M9 as a platform for it, and so it might be nice to carry two cameras, one with a 21, the A7r with a 35 and a 75 mm (Is that a tele or are you happy to see me?) in my pocket. ;-) By the way, my new porch is the perfect height to shoot nice square 15mm shots of Adreen's house across the street. The garden of that house is where I get many of my Friday Flowers each week. On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 3:46 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 > -- Regards, Sonny http://sonc.com/look/ Natchitoches, Louisiana 1714 Oldest Permanent Settlement in the Louisiana Purchase USA