Thinking about A7xx with Leica M lenses, good idea?

Janbe78 · May 12, 2016

Hi,

I've been using an analog Leica M kit for some time, and I'd like to explore using my M lenses in the digital world. Since the Leica digital rangefinder cameras are super expensive, I'm considering buying a used Sony A7 with an M adapter.

The lenses I plan to use are the Leica Elmar 50mm f2.8 (retractable) and the Voigtlander 35mm f2.5 (pancake, Color Skopar II). Does this make sense?

Which Sony A7 would be recommended? Are there any types that are better/worse for manual focus lenses?

Thanks!

Jan

RHD Phoyo · May 12, 2016

I use Leica M and Zeiss ZM lenses on Sony A7R and A7RII cameras with considerable success. The Sony A7 series is not good for wide angle Leica M mount lenses because of edge and corner smearing. I tend to use only at 50-135 end of the M range. I have not used the 35 MM M mount lenses on Sony A7 cameras but I believe that the results have been reported to be generally free of the edge issues for lenses wider than that.

tammons · May 12, 2016

If you buy the A7II or A7RII or A6300 with PDAF, then you can use the Techart M mount AF adapter.

And the A7II and A7RII both have IBIS.

The A7R wins for resolution per cost, but has a loud double whacking shutter, and occasional shutter shake.

Lift Off · May 12, 2016

For those lenses only I'd go with the original A7. It's the perfect digital tool for using adapted optics. Very pure and simple experience.

If you then wish to use more wide-angle rangefinder lenses and if money's not a problem, I'd go with the A7RII because its sensor totally eliminates the color shifting issues on these lenses.

SQLGuy · May 12, 2016

You might want to take a look at the Kolari thin-stack mod. This replaces the hot filter on the A7 series sensor stack with a thinner version, and also removes the AA filter from cameras that have it (A7 and A7II, at least). The main result is much less smearing at the edges and corners with rangefinder wide angle lenses. Color cast may still be there in some of these lenses, but that is easy to correct... in post, or even in-camera.

This mod would be particularly helpful if you get an original A7, because it also provides better anti-reflective coating than the factory sensor stack had (A7's suffer from some sensor reflection issues with bright lights at night). An original A7 is also smaller than the newer models and still provides electronic first curtain shutter... so no issues with shutter shock and quieter shutter than on the A7R.

Rol Lei Nut · May 12, 2016

I don't have any experience with the lenses you have, but the 50mm Elmar perform beautifully.

*Some* rangefinder wideangle lenses perform poorly on the A7x cameras, some don't: you really have to look at it on a case by case basis.

My M lenses which do extremely well are:

- 16-18-21 WATE. Expensive, but has lovely rendering and excellent corner sharpness (unless your adapter is too short, then the floating elements will result in soft corners, something many testers don't take into account).

- 35mm Summicron 2.0 Type IV. Tiny, ridiculously light, great rendering.

- 90mm 4.0 Macro-Elmar. Tiny, light, fantastic and expensive. Less expensive alternatives which come close are the 90mm Tele-Elmarit and the Minolta M-Rokkor.

- 135 4.0 Tele-Elmar. Ridiculously sharp and relatively cheap. A great answer to those who think that 40+ year old lenses can't keep up with hi-resolution sensors.

Richard Ettinger · May 12, 2016

Janbe78 said:
Hi,

I've been using an analog Leica M kit for some time, and I'd like to explore using my M lenses in the digital world. Since the Leica digital rangefinder cameras are super expensive, I'm considering buying a used Sony A7 with an M adapter.

The lenses I plan to use are the Leica Elmar 50mm f2.8 (retractable) and the Voigtlander 35mm f2.5 (pancake, Color Skopar II). Does this make sense?

Which Sony A7 would be recommended? Are there any types that are better/worse for manual focus lenses?
Thanks!

Jan

I have a Leica 90 Summicron M mount and 3 R mount lenses 28, 50 and 135.

They all work wonderfully on my a7, a7ii and a7rii.

If you can afford the rii, that's the one to get. If not, definitely go for the a7ii. the IBIS is worth the extra $$$ alone.

Good Luck

olstrup · May 12, 2016

The kit I use at the moment:

A7S. (People use to say that the 12MP is too little, but it delivers all I need the way I view and print my pictyures. IMHO high resolution is somewhat overrated - gets talked about a lot because it's an option. The question is whether it's needed for most people.)

Leica WATE

Leica Summicron M 35 type IV or Leica Summicron 50 Type IV (depending on my mood and the situation)

Leica Tele-Elmarit 90 (slim version)

(If needed I can add a Tele Elmar 135/4 (stellar!) or a Nikon 200/4 AI-S.)

My Leica Elmarit 21/2.8 performs poorly due to corner color shift (no smearing on A7S though).

Section10 · May 12, 2016

I either have my Leica Summilux 35 attached to (pre-asph) or my 55 1.8. As others implied, I wouldn't go wider than that but they work so well in such a compact size. Comparing the Summilux 50mm 1.4 with a Sigma 50 Art is night and day. Different uses but for normal shooting and not needing ultra sharpness wide open the Leica does phenomenal and are even more fun to use than modern lenses.

JimKasson · May 12, 2016

tammons said:
If you buy the A7II or A7RII or A6300 with PDAF, then you can use the Techart M mount AF adapter.

And the A7II and A7RII both have IBIS.

The A7R wins for resolution per cost, but has a loud double whacking shutter, and occasional shutter shake.

The a7R also has the worst corner color casting of all the a7x cameras. The a7RII is the best, because of BSI.

Jim

JimKasson · May 12, 2016

SQLGuy said:
You might want to take a look at the Kolari thin-stack mod. This replaces the hot filter on the A7 series sensor stack with a thinner version, and also removes the AA filter from cameras that have it (A7 and A7II, at least). The main result is much less smearing at the edges and corners with rangefinder wide angle lenses. Color cast may still be there in some of these lenses, but that is easy to correct... in post, or even in-camera.

Here are test results for many M-mount lenses on the a7II, with and without the Kolari thin stack:

Loading…

blog.kasson.com

Jim

tammons · May 12, 2016

JimKasson said:
tammons said:

If you buy the A7II or A7RII or A6300 with PDAF, then you can use the Techart M mount AF adapter.

And the A7II and A7RII both have IBIS.

The A7R wins for resolution per cost, but has a loud double whacking shutter, and occasional shutter shake.

Click to expand...

The a7R also has the worst corner color casting of all the a7x cameras. The a7RII is the best, because of BSI.

Jim

JimKasson · May 12, 2016

tammons said:
JimKasson said:

tammons said:

If you buy the A7II or A7RII or A6300 with PDAF, then you can use the Techart M mount AF adapter.

And the A7II and A7RII both have IBIS.

The A7R wins for resolution per cost, but has a loud double whacking shutter, and occasional shutter shake.

Click to expand...

The a7R also has the worst corner color casting of all the a7x cameras. The a7RII is the best, because of BSI.

Click to expand...

Thanks

Will have to remember that, although I never had that issues with my A7R.

It's highly lens dependent.

Jim

Paul Auclair · May 12, 2016

Rol Lei Nut said:
I don't have any experience with the lenses you have, but the 50mm Elmar perform beautifully.

*Some* rangefinder wideangle lenses perform poorly on the A7x cameras, some don't: you really have to look at it on a case by case basis.

My M lenses which do extremely well are:

- 16-18-21 WATE. Expensive, but has lovely rendering and excellent corner sharpness (unless your adapter is too short, then the floating elements will result in soft corners, something many testers don't take into account).

- 35mm Summicron 2.0 Type IV. Tiny, ridiculously light, great rendering.

- 90mm 4.0 Macro-Elmar. Tiny, light, fantastic and expensive. Less expensive alternatives which come close are the 90mm Tele-Elmarit and the Minolta M-Rokkor.

- 135 4.0 Tele-Elmar. Ridiculously sharp and relatively cheap. A great answer to those who think that 40+ year old lenses can't keep up with hi-resolution sensors.

Hey Rol Lei Nut,

re: your 135 TE....good to hear.

i have one of these incoming (135 TE)... it's the RS, SFK variant..so version 1.

which 135 TE do you have have?

Paul

Rol Lei Nut · May 12, 2016

Paul Auclair said:
Rol Lei Nut said:

I don't have any experience with the lenses you have, but the 50mm Elmar perform beautifully.

*Some* rangefinder wideangle lenses perform poorly on the A7x cameras, some don't: you really have to look at it on a case by case basis.

My M lenses which do extremely well are:

- 16-18-21 WATE. Expensive, but has lovely rendering and excellent corner sharpness (unless your adapter is too short, then the floating elements will result in soft corners, something many testers don't take into account).

- 35mm Summicron 2.0 Type IV. Tiny, ridiculously light, great rendering.

- 90mm 4.0 Macro-Elmar. Tiny, light, fantastic and expensive. Less expensive alternatives which come close are the 90mm Tele-Elmarit and the Minolta M-Rokkor.

- 135 4.0 Tele-Elmar. Ridiculously sharp and relatively cheap. A great answer to those who think that 40+ year old lenses can't keep up with hi-resolution sensors.

Click to expand...

Hey Rol Lei Nut,

re: your 135 TE....good to hear.

i have one of these incoming (135 TE)... it's the RS, SFK variant..so version 1.

which 135 TE do you have have?

Paul

Not really sure, but one of the thin classic versions, possibly the second (they were all optically the same anyway).

Paul Auclair · May 12, 2016

Rol Lei Nut said:
Paul Auclair said:

Rol Lei Nut said:

I don't have any experience with the lenses you have, but the 50mm Elmar perform beautifully.

*Some* rangefinder wideangle lenses perform poorly on the A7x cameras, some don't: you really have to look at it on a case by case basis.

My M lenses which do extremely well are:

- 16-18-21 WATE. Expensive, but has lovely rendering and excellent corner sharpness (unless your adapter is too short, then the floating elements will result in soft corners, something many testers don't take into account).

- 35mm Summicron 2.0 Type IV. Tiny, ridiculously light, great rendering.

- 90mm 4.0 Macro-Elmar. Tiny, light, fantastic and expensive. Less expensive alternatives which come close are the 90mm Tele-Elmarit and the Minolta M-Rokkor.

- 135 4.0 Tele-Elmar. Ridiculously sharp and relatively cheap. A great answer to those who think that 40+ year old lenses can't keep up with hi-resolution sensors.

Click to expand...

Hey Rol Lei Nut,

re: your 135 TE....good to hear.

i have one of these incoming (135 TE)... it's the RS, SFK variant..so version 1.

which 135 TE do you have have?

Paul

Click to expand...

Not really sure, but one of the thin classic versions, possibly the second (they were all optically the same anyway).

yes. that's what i've read....but i've also read that Leitz (like others) sometimes 'may' have changed/upgraded their coatings without any offical whoop-tee-doos about it.

i was just wondering (until i can see for myself) if the two older (E39) versions all share same sharpness/contrast.

no biggie.

Search

Thinking about A7xx with Leica M lenses, good idea?

Janbe78

Well-known member

RHD Phoyo

Member

tammons

Veteran Member

Lift Off

Leading Member

SQLGuy

Forum Pro

Rol Lei Nut

Veteran Member

Richard Ettinger

Senior Member

olstrup

Senior Member

Section10

Senior Member

JimKasson

Community Leader

JimKasson

Community Leader

Loading…

tammons

Veteran Member

JimKasson

Community Leader

Paul Auclair

Guest

Rol Lei Nut

Veteran Member

Paul Auclair

Guest

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts