Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2016/02/11
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]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 >