NikonGear'23
Gear Talk => Lens Talk => Topic started by: rosko on September 27, 2019, 14:29:08
-
Welcome to the discussion ! :)
When I saw first this mirrorless body, I thought : Wow ! A smaller full frame body ? Lighter ? Ok, good !
Now, let's have a look on the lenses...What is that ? Z lenses ? As big as the F lenses ? Ok, are they lighter ? No necessarily, although they are made with plastic.
Wait a minute, what about F lenses compatibility ?
Ah ! There is a special adaptor to use our F lenses, FTZ ? that's good...What ? You only get autofocus with AFS lenses ?
What about AFD lenses ? Oh, I see, no AF because no build-in motor...
Well, I really wondered what is the interest to buy such body, then ?
And after further readings and opinions, I find out about :
# the focus peaking;
# the IBIS system reducing vibrations to any lens ;
# the possibility to do focus stacking (if you have an AFS macro-lens, though)
#And most of all : A 16mm REGISTER DISTANCE …
And then, the first Z adaptors appeared. This how my decision to purchase was triggered.
I could see on this chart https://www.graphics.cornell.edu/~westin/misc/mounts-by-register.html , that the leica M lenses's register distance is 27.95 mm.
So, 27.95mm minus 16mm = 11.95mm whicht means that any M/Z adapter cannot be thicker than 12mm !
This is how and why I went for M/M39* range of lenses.
In this mount there are many different makes from wide angle lenses to telelenses of good quality :
# Leitz
# Voiglander
# Nikon (vintage, like S models)
# Minolta (40mm)
# Zeiss Jena
# Zeiss (made by Cosina now)
# Canon
# Russian lenses like Jupiter
# ect.
My first Leitz is the summarit 50mm f/1.5. Vintage from the 50ies. I love it for its sharpness and ''character''. A masterpiece of glass and metal (plus a small piece of fabric glued in the lid to fit the lens smoothly). I.am not sure what the red dot is made of. Perhaps plastic...
So, small but not light !.
To hold this lens, a LM/Z adaptor.
With M39 screwing mount lenses, like Jupiter 50mm, you just need a very thin ring which go inside the M/Z. or buy a specific adaptor, M39/Z.
To be continued...
* LTM : Leica Thread Mount
*M39 : screw diameter of 39mm. pitch is 1mm.
-
Will follow with interest, Francis.
-
Thanks, Fons !
Will post some pics soon !
-
This is one and maybe only reason I would buy a Z... of course after the banding issue gets fixed.
-
Very interesting, Francis, thanks for the write-up. Looking forward for the continuation ;)
-
This is one and maybe only reason I would buy a Z... of course after the banding issue gets fixed.
I never noticed banding issues with the Z6 so far. Probably because a lack of practice with long exposure ?
Or not enough pixels in Z6 sensor to notice any banding ?
-
So, Rosko, since I have an M mount collapsible Summicron and two LTM lenses,(28mm Canon) and the tiny 35mm f3.5 Summaron, both currently fitted with screw to M mount adaptors, do I need two different adaptors, or just the M to Z adaptor?
-
Very interesting, Francis, thanks for the write-up. Looking forward for the continuation ;)
You're welcome, John ! ;)
-
I love the Z6.
But which lenses?
I will start with the Z 1.2/50S
and then?
-
So, Rosko, since I have an M mount collapsible Summicron and two LTM lenses,(28mm Canon) and the tiny 35mm f3.5 Summaron, both currently fitted with screw to M mount adaptors, do I need two different adaptors, or just the M to Z adaptor?
Actually, I bought a M39/LTM ring to use my 35mm f/3.5 Summaron which I got recently, on Z6 via the LTM/Z6 adapter. The problem this ring is so thin and sharp that I now leave it on this lens, as it's no easy to unscrew. the second reason, I tried to use this ring on my Nikon CRT 55mm f/1.2 (and the LTM/Z6 adapter, but it didn't work hence the purchase of a M39/Z6 adapter allowing me to get infinity with this lens. It as a M39 scew mount.
So, I would say the M39/Z6 is better because less manipulations when you swap lenses. In addition this adapter is cheap and work well.
Few pics below :
1# Z6+Leitz Summaron 35mm f/3.5
2# same
3# Z6+Jupiter 50mm f/2
4# Z6+nikon CRT 55mm f/1.2 set to infinity.
-
I love the Z6.
But which lenses?
I will start with the Z 1.2/50S
and then?
Frank, it depends on your photographic habits. I know you use AF lenses, so go for a Z lenses.
As for my habits, I mostly use MANUALS lenses. Just matter of feelings : I love to set my lens, taking my time, choosing the right aperture (stop), controlling the DOF, touching all the rings of my lens it's something sensual...this is why I am not impressed with AF lenses, mostly the G ones (without a aperture ring).
When I bought the Z6, I purchased a second-hand zoom AFS 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5 G, the one I used mostly in Scotland because there were so many nice things to shoot in a limited time. I had a macro lens as well for close-up, plus my old 300mm (manual too).
For those who shoot manual, Leica mount lenses is a goldmine of treasures, I mean excellent lenses, not bulky and for decent prices . (well, may be not some leica lenses like Summilux or Summicron). :P
Below : Z6+summarit 50mm f/1.5 @ f2.8
-
Francis,
yes, Leica lenses make perfect sense on the Z6. Very high quality glass, very small and light package.
Gosh, look at these beautiful mushrooms!!!
All the best
Frank
-
Digital sensors work best if the light strikes near perpendicular, I guess this is why modern mirrorless wide-angle lenses are telecentric, and relatively big. Most wide-standard Leica M lenses are not telecentric, the exit pupil is very close to the sensor and light strikes the corners of the image at a shallow angle. Does that give problems with vignetting and colour shifts?
It is nice to use old quality glass on new cameras, even if the resulting combination looks less than elegant, the proof is in the pictures!
-
It does - That's why Leica M8, M9, M, M10 have a very special sensordesign with offset lenses on the sensor to compensate for this.
Only very few wide Leica M lenses perform well on digital sensors anyway despite the special design,,,
-
Erik: Where is the threshold in your experience? 35mm+ or 50mm+ ?
-
Leica M 35mm f/1.4 ASPH FLE works really well, amazing actually also on Sony A7 series cameras.
The Leica M 24mm f/3.8 ASPH doesn't it is more or less useless.
But another thing is; Even with focus peaking your challenged since they are so sharp, too much lights up as in focus, so correct focus is not easy,,,
There a rangefinder system is much better!
I se similar difficulty with Nikkor 19mm PCE f/4 - Too much lights up as if it is in focus so it is difficult to find the actual focus plane even at f/4 in on Z7 and in Live View on Nikon D850, so I use a Hoodman loupe to see the image on the rear display of the D850 for critical work.
-
Digital sensors work best if the light strikes near perpendicular, I guess this is why modern mirrorless wide-angle lenses are telecentric, and relatively big. Most wide-standard Leica M lenses are not telecentric, the exit pupil is very close to the sensor and light strikes the corners of the image at a shallow angle.
This is why I'll avoid any wide-angle lenses, wider than 24 mm.
It is nice to use old quality glass on new cameras, even if the resulting combination looks less than elegant, the proof is in the pictures!
Well, this is a subjective matter. ;)
Thanks Roland, for your interesting explanations.
Francis.
-
But another thing is; Even with focus peaking your challenged since they are so sharp, too much lights up as in focus, so correct focus is not easy,,,
There a rangefinder system is much better!
Thanks for this analysis, Eric !
I will henceforth cheek carefully when I am focusing...Or buy a Leica body ! ;D
I had a try using the zoom, but the focus peaking lights disappear as you are zooming, which is not an issue, as the focus point is enlarged.
By the way, I am wondering whether the Z7 is better with M lenses than the Z6 as it has no filter on its sensor.
-
As far as I have heard it's a much more easy, distinct and clear view using focus peaking on the Z7 compared to Z6 for critical manual focus lenses,,,
-
As far as I have heard it's a much more easy, distinct and clear view using focus peaking on the Z7 compared to Z6 for critical manual focus lenses,,,
Technically It should be better as the Z7 has no anti-aliasing filter.
As the focus peaking, I am happy with it on the Z6 (I use the yellow colour).
See you soon, Erik, my 125mm apo-lanthar will be with me... ;)
-
Just got a Voigtländer 75mm f/2.5 LTM mount I won on ebay. Nearly mint condition with its L39/M adapter.
The first tries are promising : rendition, sharpness and bokeh not bad, but its lightness is incredible...
240 gr. with both caps! :P :)
So, now I have got the basic series : 35mm f/3.5 Leitz Summaron, 50mm f/1.5 Leitz Summarit and this last one 75mm.
-
Salut Rosko !
Thanks for your testing !
I had the same (but black) Voigt 75 and it really is a good lens (on film or Fuji XE2), light, solid and good contrast (bokeh is so-so, depending on background and distance...).
I found lens hood too short and not very practical (screw-in).
On my Fuji XE2s the best lenses I had were the Summicron M 2/50 (type 5) and the Canon 1,4/50 L from the 1954-56 (type 1). Voigt 4/21 M was disappointing, elmarit 2,8/28 (4) was good but not so brilliant as with film. tele Elmarit 2,8/90 was very good (contrasty) with good light but poor against backlight (contrejours).
Nantes cathédrale : 90mm Tele Elmarit
Collonges la Rouge (in BW!) 28mm Elmarit
Hope to get a Z6 or Z7 to test my Leica M lenses with it !
-
Thanks for your passage, Didier !
Glad to hear some feedbacks about the Voigt 75mm. Overall, mostly all users I could read on line are satisfied.
I start with cheap lenses first until I am sure M lenses match very well the Z6. I keep an eye on 40mm LTM lenses, as this focal would replace both 50mm and 35mm. this focal exists in Leitz, Minolta, Voigtländer (but not the best, according to many reviews).
So, I need to use more the lenses I have, to build a firm opinion before investing in expensive lenses.
Francis.
Below : 75mm color heliar at closest distance (1 meter):
#1
-
# Same lens, same distance :
-
# 3- still the same distance, lightly cropped :
-
Summicron C 2/40mm from the CL or Minolta CLE 2/40mm are the same lenses and very good (I did not test it but reading some blogs...).
They cost usually between 300 and 500 € today...A few years ago, I found a CLE with 2/40mm for 500€ !
Voigt 1,4/40 seems not a so good performer, a new 1,2/40 seems much better but not so cheap ! If only Voigtländer would/ could make a good 2/40mm like the SL 2 for Nikon and Canon SLR !
Or if Nikon could make some compact, light Z-lenses (like Fuji with its 2/23 ; 2/35; 2/50 and the new 2,8/16...for APS/DX)...!
A bon entendeur salut ! (French to say " Hope they (someone) hear that. "
-
Francis: let us see more photos!
-
The cropped pic I didn't post yesterday...With Voigt 75mm Color Heliar.
-
The only real advantage that the Z series has over the Sony E mirrorless cameras is that the flange distance is 16mm, which is 2mm shallower than the Sony mount, and which is significant for some special purpose lenses. That being said, both the Z6 and Z7 suffer from PDAF striping (not really banding), which can become obvious in high contrast scenes or with post processing, and which is a big downside, in my experience, using vintage lenses, which are often of low contrast and sharpness, and for which post processing is useful.
That being said, mirrorless flange distances are pretty much indispensable when trying to adapt vintage lenses to digital cameras. Personally I prefer Sony A series cameras because they lack the striping problem, but also because adapters are much more widely available, at least for the moment, than for the Nikon Z mount.
-
but also because adapters are much more widely available, at least for the moment, than for the Nikon Z mount.
This is what I noticed. But so far I could find all adapters I need.
# M42/Z
# L39/
# MD-Rokkor/Z
# of course M/Z
# and even an Exacta/Z in case I find a hugo meyer bargain... ;)
I even made a wooden Zeiss/Contax645/Z with mahogany :o, but it's not very good looking as my wood lathe is still in France... ::)