LTM or M-mount on m4/3
- Thread starter gohaj
- Start date
clubgrit
Senior Member
My experience differs, as I find 25mm ZM as excellent on m4/3. I also saw some good examples using the 12mm Voigtlander.
These legacy lenses also give their respective Leica, Zeiss, Voigtlander character to digital, great. Although m4/3 does not match the resolution of Leica M digital at the moment (like they still have an AAF although getting lighter as each new model is released), they are wonderful tools, poor man's Leica.
As for focusing, I find it great with the EVF, can compose before focus anywhere on the frame, can see exposure, no more excuses on wrong exposure or mistakes in moving camera to recompose from center.
25mm Zeiss on m4/3, f/4
night, f/2.8
indoors, f/4
50mm pre-asph summilux with Leitz Oufro extension tube, too much bokeh when usied with Oufro. This one already at f/5.6, not easy to use with Oufro (used with Visoflex in the 1960s), but saves money buying macro lens
No extension tube, at f/4
.
Last edited:
My experience differs, as I find 25mm ZM as excellent on m4/3. I also saw some good examples using the 12mm Voigtlander.
These legacy lenses also give their respective Leica, Zeiss, Voigtlander character to digital, great. Although m4/3 does not match the resolution of Leica M digital at the moment (like they still have an AAF although getting lighter as each new model is released), they are wonderful tools, poor man's Leica.
As for focusing, I find it great with the EVF, can compose before focus anywhere on the frame, can see exposure, no more excuses on wrong exposure or mistakes in moving camera to recompose from center.
25mm Zeiss on m4/3, f/4
night, f/2.8
.
While it is hard to judge corner sharpness of these low res img (maybe a 100% crop of the corner of the first image could help?), I'm not saying that ZM 25mm on m43 cannot be used to take decent pic. I know for a fact that there are many great pic taken with LOMO
There is an interesting test on three 25mm lens on m43, I thought it is quite detailed and objective. Link is HERE
Hopefully the price of the cheapo canon FD 24mm lens would not jump after this post.
Last edited:
clubgrit
Senior Member
There must be something wrong with that guy's Zeiss copy :bsmilie:
Anyway, I am experienced enough to know that it's great, from hands on use, not reading about it. The only 25mm that I used with noticeable corner distortion is the Pentax 25mm CCTV lens, but it was expected of course, and part of its charm, make use of the distortion as part of the picture.
Compared to Lumix 20mm ? Different, 20mm is so ... digital ... cold. That's from me as a film user. But next time I bring an m4/3 into the studio, I better bring it, it's impossible to see anything to use manual focus if one wants to shoot at f/8 or f/11, must use AF. Can always pp with a Film Effect filter anyway.
100% crop ? Sure, when I get home. However, I find it has no relevance in the real world, IMHO. The images here are big enough to see, that is what one will see in a magazine or newspaper or exhibit, not a 100% crop.
I'd rather see the full picture as comparisons than 100% crops. Otherwise, we don't see the overall impact of the picture, the big picture so to speak, which is the most important. Colors, dimensionality, character ... Like if you compare pre-ASPH or ASPH at 100% crop, no contest. That doesn't help, it's only for pixel watchers, not artists. When viewed as a whole, then people get split up on which they prefer.
Of course, if I am a lens manufacturer, it's different.
Anyway, some posts have been made on the contrary against edge problems, like this one below using CV 21mm for example, also with more links within to posts in the Rangefinder forum. Their conclusion ? It works after all.
http://e-p1.net/index.php?topic=1724.0
On the other hand, there are some lenses that may not work because of telecentricity. But the Zeiss 25mm ZM is not one of them.
.
Anyway, I am experienced enough to know that it's great, from hands on use, not reading about it. The only 25mm that I used with noticeable corner distortion is the Pentax 25mm CCTV lens, but it was expected of course, and part of its charm, make use of the distortion as part of the picture.
Compared to Lumix 20mm ? Different, 20mm is so ... digital ... cold. That's from me as a film user. But next time I bring an m4/3 into the studio, I better bring it, it's impossible to see anything to use manual focus if one wants to shoot at f/8 or f/11, must use AF. Can always pp with a Film Effect filter anyway.
100% crop ? Sure, when I get home. However, I find it has no relevance in the real world, IMHO. The images here are big enough to see, that is what one will see in a magazine or newspaper or exhibit, not a 100% crop.
I'd rather see the full picture as comparisons than 100% crops. Otherwise, we don't see the overall impact of the picture, the big picture so to speak, which is the most important. Colors, dimensionality, character ... Like if you compare pre-ASPH or ASPH at 100% crop, no contest. That doesn't help, it's only for pixel watchers, not artists. When viewed as a whole, then people get split up on which they prefer.
Of course, if I am a lens manufacturer, it's different.
Anyway, some posts have been made on the contrary against edge problems, like this one below using CV 21mm for example, also with more links within to posts in the Rangefinder forum. Their conclusion ? It works after all.
http://e-p1.net/index.php?topic=1724.0
On the other hand, there are some lenses that may not work because of telecentricity. But the Zeiss 25mm ZM is not one of them.
.
CV 35f1.4SC stopped down to f2.0, i would go for this any MF lens any day when compared to m4/3 kit lens or the 20mm f1.7. It's rendition and built is so much better, faster, much more glass for the same money, i could even use it on a analog RF. Its a no brainer for me to pick CV. Works great with my G1 EVF
Last edited:
Fotophilic
Senior Member
E-P1 with voigtlander 40/1.4 M mount.
No PP done. I shot this at F2 (i think).
No PP done. I shot this at F2 (i think).
Similar threads
