[Leica] RE; Autofocusing M lenses

Fri Feb 12 00:05:33 PST 2016

Probably is, and also a little sharper, but that could also be because it
has been stopped down 1.5 stops, while the Summicron is wide open.

I would accept either as a top quality portrait lens, but the Fuji is less
than half the price, and 1.5 stops faster, so it my preferred choice for
this particular combination. It also showed that Fuji lenses, in general,
can more than hold their own with any other manufacturer.
Cheers
Jayanand

On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 1:26 PM, Peter Klein <boulanger.croissant at gmail.com>
wrote:

> It works fine. It looks like Sheeya enjoyed being your model.  Is it my
> imagination, or is the Fuji 56mm a little contrastier than the Summicron?
> --Peter
>
> On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 10:53 PM, Jayanand Govindaraj <jayanand at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Never tried it. I find Focus Peaking works quite well, even for my
> weakish
> > eyesight, as long as the subject is stationary. Here are some samples
> which
> > I took mainly at the behest of Alastair Firkin, with various lenses
> mounted
> > on the Fuji XT-1, all manually focused with the aid of focus peaking. All
> > are just default processed in Lightroom, with no additional processing.
> The
> > models were my niece Shreeya, and my younger son, Aditya :
> >
> > The first was an unscientific look at both the Summicron and the Fuji
> 56mm
> > as short portrait lenses, both at f2:
> >
> > Shreeya - Leica Summicron:
> >
> >
> http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/jayanand/album333/Leica+Summicron+50.jpg.html
> >
> > Shrreya - Fuji 56mm:
> > http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/jayanand/album333/Fuji+56.jpg.html
> >
> > Then, two of  Aditya with the Tele-Elmarit 90mm wide open:
> >
> > Natural Light:
> >
> http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/jayanand/album333/1+Natural+Light.jpg.html
> >
> > Artificial Light:
> >
> >
> http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/jayanand/album333/2+Fluoroscent+Light.jpg.html
> >
> > Cheers
> > Jayanand
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 11:47 AM, Peter Klein <
> > boulanger.croissant at gmail.com
> > > wrote:
> >
> > > Ah, another check mark on Fuji's chalkboard.  Didn't know they had a
> > split
> > > image. How accurate is it? One advantage of a "real" RF is that the
> > > physical baselength can be as long as can fit on the camera body,
> whereas
> > > the physical baselength of the digital split image is the diameter of
> the
> > > lens. Although some magnification could mitigate that...?
> > >
> > > I will sometimes put a Leica lens on my Olympus E-M5, usually for
> > > telephoto.  A 90mm Leica mount lens makes a rather compact 180mm
> > > equivalent.  I usually just use the digital focus magnifier.  Easy.
> > >
> > > --Peter
> > >
> > > On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 9:52 PM, Jayanand Govindaraj <
> jayanand at gmail.com
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Both a Digital Split Image overlay and Focus Peaking as manual focus
> > aids
> > > > are available on my Fuji XT-1, which accepts M lenses quite
> > effortlessly
> > > > with an adapter. In fact Fuji themselves make an adapter.
> > > > Cheers
> > > > Jayanand
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 8:42 AM, Peter Klein <
> > > > boulanger.croissant at gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > In theory it should work just fine. You leave the lens on infinity,
> > and
> > > > the
> > > > > adapter does the rest.  The adapter must:
> > > > >
> > > > > -Interface to the camera's AF electronics such that the camera can
> > tell
> > > > it
> > > > > "forward, back, stop").
> > > > > -Be thin enough to allow infinity focus.
> > > > > -Contain motors and a mechanism that will rack the lens out
> > > sufficiently
> > > > to
> > > > > focus the lens to a reasonable close distance. The mechanism must
> fit
> > > in
> > > > > the adapter. This is easier to do with SLR lens adapters. M lenses
> > > have a
> > > > > shorter back focus distance, and M to mirrorless adapters are quiet
> > > short
> > > > > compared to SLR adapters. Perhaps some of the mechanism could be
> > below
> > > > the
> > > > > adapter, or concentric to it.)
> > > > >
> > > > > The major problems with M lenses on other cameras would still be
> > corner
> > > > > smearing and color shifts, unless the sensor's Bayer array was
> > designed
> > > > for
> > > > > M lenses. And would the autofocus be fast and accurate enough, and
> > > would
> > > > > using the adapter be convenient enough that you wouldn't get fed up
> > > with
> > > > it
> > > > > quickly?
> > > > >
> > > > > Personally, I'd love to have an autofocus M that also did RF
> > focusing.
> > > > But
> > > > > as Larry mentions, it would have to be worth someone's while to
> > > > > manufacture. Most manufacturers have already passed on making their
> > own
> > > > > rangefinder mechanism. Leica seems to be willing to make RF cameras
> > > along
> > > > > traditional M lines, but not to do anything radical with them.  But
> > > what
> > > > > about something entirely new by a third party--an AF camera that
> also
> > > did
> > > > > some sort of visual rangefinder simulation in an EVF, and was
> > designed
> > > to
> > > > > take M lenses. Ideally, the version for M lenses would have a Bayer
> > > array
> > > > > with microlens offsets licensed from Leica.  The SLR lens version
> > would
> > > > > have a more conventional sensor.
> > > > >
> > > > > All technically possible. The big question is whether there are
> > enough
> > > > > legacy(*) lens fans, and in particular M lens fans, to make such a
> > > camera
> > > > > commercially viable.
> > > > >
> > > > > --Peter, who actually dislikes the word "legacy."
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 4:22 PM, Larry Zeitlin via LUG <
> > > > > lug at leica-users.org>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > About 40 years ago, give or take a decade, a precision camera
> make,
> > > > > > probably Zeiss. marketed a camera in which the focus was adjusted
> > by
> > > > > moving
> > > > > > the film plane. This simplified lenses but had the downsides of
> > > > increased
> > > > > > expense for the camera body and the difficulty of providing
> enough
> > > > motion
> > > > > > for long focus lenses. The idea was abandoned after a few years
> > but I
> > > > > > believe that with modern electronics it could provide automatic
> > focus
> > > > > for M
> > > > > > lenses. But, of course, there would be little incentive for Leica
> > to
> > > > > adopt
> > > > > > such a system. Maybe a third party could sell a universal camera
> > > which
> > > > > > would autofocus with all makers lenses.
> > > > > > Larry Z
> > > > > >
> > > > > > + + +
> > > > > > LUG:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Any idea whether this would actually work or not?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> http://www.thephoblographer.com/2016/02/11/the-techart-pro-lens-adapter-promises-autofocus-for-leica-m-mount-glass/#.VrywD_krJaQ
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Tina
> > > > > >
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > 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
>