Michael Reichmann's take on smaller full frame Sony FE mount lenses

Started Dec 18, 2013 | Discussions thread
Anders W Forum Pro • Posts: 21,468
Re: Michael Reichmann's take on smaller full frame Sony FE mount lenses

tt321 wrote:

Anders W wrote:

G L wrote:

Anders W wrote:

On the other hand, what Reichmann says about Leica M lenses is a bit of a red herring. The Leica M (and other rangefinder) WAs were originally designed for film and their lack of telecentricity is a problem with digital sensors since the light destined for the edges of the sensor has a fairly large angle of incidence. This may cause problems with vignetting (due to poor utilization of the light that comes in at such angles) as well as edge sharpness and purple color casts (due to crosstalk). Leica is now forced to work around these problems in various ways. These digitial-specific problems aside, the old rangefinder WAs also have problems with so-called natural vignetting. See here, under "Natural vignetting" for an explanation:

http://toothwalker.org/optics/vignetting.html

I think MR himself compared some time back a Leica lens on a m43 camera (or was it APSC) and the outcome was not that great. So far I remember the Leica lens was just a bit worse to a native lens for that mirroless system.

A lens designed for a larger sensor can as a rule be expected to do worse when used on a smaller sensor. Although the lens can use its so-called sweet spot (the central part of its image circle) when used on a smaller sensor, the sharpness requirement (as measured in lp/mm) simultaneously increases, and the former is usually not enough to make up for the latter. Furthermore, several MFT lenses are good enough to compete with Leica primes even with the latter used on its native format. See the results reported here for various MFT lenses on an E-M5

http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/05/wide-angle-micro-43-imatest-results

and compare with those for the Summilux 50/1.4 (the best of all the 50 mm FF lenses tested) on an M9 here

http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/01/the-great-50mm-shootout

Would not be that a big surprise if the outcome on a mirrorless 35mm camera would be somewhat worse to a native lens for this system.

A Leica M WA on an A7/A7R would in all likelihood run into at least some of the problems I mention and I would think a native lens would have less trouble in these regards.

It kept being said that there is at least one Leica M WA which is designed after digital became the norm. Is this true?

I am hardly an expert on the Leica lens genealogy, but I would think that at least some may be newly designed and still more redesigned in the digital era. However, I would also think that if you start looking at those lenses that actually fit the small Leica M WA stereotype, they are either old or "warmed-over" designs.

 Anders W's gear list:Anders W's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-G1 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus E-M1 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-45mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH OIS Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH +28 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
G L
G L
G L
G L
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow