Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2010/04/15

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] M Lenses on GF-1
From: photo at frozenlight.eu (Nathan Wajsman)
Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 18:48:36 +0200
References: <j2x6e74b3701004150617q6674f861n2e043329e2e08ce5@mail.gmail.com> <5564A951-14E1-4477-A297-C1AD95FD1AE6@comcast.net> <CDE7B56DB012459BAC2A5B8D992DCC66@jimnichols> <3DBE0CFF-F301-43BE-8E22-1A060F2A4244@comcast.net>

The only M lens I use a lot on my GF-1 is the 90mm Elmarit, partly because I 
am not too keen on it on my M8 (prefer the 75mm there). It does fine, but in 
fairness I use it mostly for far-away subjects, i.e. on infinity or 
thereabouts. Given the I have the 20mm pancake, I have not felt the need to 
try the shorter M lenses in my stash.

Next month I will pick up either the 7-14mm Olympus or the new 9-18mm to 
complete my GF-1 outfit on the wide end.

Nathan

Nathan Wajsman
Alicante, Spain
http://www.frozenlight.eu
http://www.greatpix.eu
http://www.nathanfoto.com

Books: http://www.blurb.com/bookstore/search?search=wajsman&x=0&y=0
PICTURE OF THE WEEK: http://www.fotocycle.dk/paws
Blog: http://www.fotocycle.dk/blog






On Apr 15, 2010, at 5:08 PM, Richard Taylor wrote:

> There should be.  SLR lenses need to be further away from the sensor than 
> M lenses in order to clear the mirror, are usually retrofocal, and should 
> have better image quality on 4/3rds sensors.  
> 
> I was tempted to buy an 20mm R lens to try on the G-1 but after the 
> introduction of the 20mm Lumix pancake I put that off because the Lumix 
> was such a good performer and far smaller than the R lens. 
> 
> I think there were some postings on R lenses on micro 4/3rds cameras but 
> can't remember when.  I search of the archives might turn them up.  
> 
> Regards, 
> 
> Dick
> 
> 
> 
> On Apr 15, 2010, at 10:48 AM, Jim Nichols wrote:
> 
>> Hi Richard,
>> 
>> I use Leica-R lenses on my Olympus E-1.  Is there a lot of difference 
>> between the Summicron-R and the Summicron-M design?
>> 
>> Jim Nichols
>> Tullahoma, TN USA
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Richard Taylor" <r.s.taylor at 
>> comcast.net>
>> To: "Leica Users Group" <lug at leica-users.org>
>> Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2010 9:42 AM
>> Subject: Re: [Leica] M Lenses on GF-1
>> 
>> 
>>> The best way to think about this is to think of each pixel as a tiny 
>>> bucket with steep sides and the light sensitive area at the bottom.  
>>> Light must go straight in in order to be detected.  Light arriving at 
>>> anything other than almost straight in is either lost or scattered.
>>> 
>>> That's why the sensors in the M8 and M9 have the offset lenses on top of 
>>> the sensor.
>>> They allow the sensor to respond better to the off-axis light coming out 
>>> of M-type lenses.
>>> 
>>> SLR lenses are usually retrofocus designs that send the light close to 
>>> straight in to the sensors and therefore work better on the micro 4-3rds 
>>> cameras than M lenses do.
>>> 
>>> Dick
>>> 
>>> (Who works with sensors like these in the infrared for space missions.)
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Apr 15, 2010, at 9:17 AM, Simon Ogilvie wrote:
>>> 
>>>>> I'm also perplexed at how Contax G lenses can be materially better on
>>>>> Micro Four Thirds than are Leica M lenses, or even CV lenses for that
>>>>> matter. While I haven't used all on Micro Four Thirds I have used them
>>>>> all on film and for the most part they're all pretty good. Thus I'm
>>>>> curious as to why the performance would be so different on Micro Four
>>>>> Thirds. What kind of adapters are you using?
>>>> 
>>>> I agree - one of the primary reasons I bought into the 4/3 system was
>>>> because it allowed me to use my Leica M (and Voigtlander) lenses which
>>>> don't see much use any more as I shoot very little film these days.
>>>> The results using these lenses were very disappointing.  The Panasonic
>>>> 14-45 covers the range of nearly all of my M lenses anyway, so as the
>>>> results seem better and it's much more convenient to use, I stick with
>>>> the zoom.    I was surprised that the results from the Contax G lenses
>>>> looked so much nicer.  Why this is the case when the Leica lenses are
>>>> so nice with film I cannot explain.  The adapters are the Voigtlander
>>>> one for the Leica-M lenses, and an adapter imported from Hong Kong for
>>>> the Contax G with a little manual focus wheel that engages with the
>>>> focussing drive on the lenses.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
> 



Replies: Reply from r.s.taylor at comcast.net (Richard Taylor) ([Leica] M Lenses on GF-1)
In reply to: Message from simon.ogilvie at gmail.com (Simon Ogilvie) ([Leica] M Lenses on GF-1)
Message from r.s.taylor at comcast.net (Richard Taylor) ([Leica] M Lenses on GF-1)
Message from jhnichols at lighttube.net (Jim Nichols) ([Leica] M Lenses on GF-1)
Message from r.s.taylor at comcast.net (Richard Taylor) ([Leica] M Lenses on GF-1)