M Lenses on the X-Pro 1, a few results

[dcsang]

<snip>I think the potential problem with doing non-test-shots w/ a new camera or lens is that if you have a good subject and nail the metering, it's way too easy to overlook the test aspect of it all. I usually think "great shot" and forget all about sharpness/contrast/bokeh.</snip>

THIS!!

(isn't that what the kids say these days?) 🙂

Cheers,
Dave

 

[mouren]

If you are speaking of RF lenses, this is partially correct. Some of them do, some are fantastic, depends on their design and focal length. SLR lenses may be better options for adapting.

There might be some truth to this. I just tried my Minolta 50mm f1.7, very sharp. While, I tried my voigtlander 40mm f1.4 M-mount, and Konica Hexanon 90mm M-mount both came up bit soft.

Gonna try a Nikon 50mm f1.2 when I get the appropriate adapter.

Will report back then.

 

[noimmunity]

If you are speaking of RF lenses, this is partially correct. Some of them do, some are fantastic, depends on their design and focal length. SLR lenses may be better options for adapting.

I think I cannot resist getting the C/Y adapter for the XP1.

 

[icaro2007]

I have tried myself but at this point in time the Fuji X-Pro 1 is not the best available solution for legacy lenses for at lest two reasons:
-inadequate manual focus assistance which is applicable to any focal length but might be corrected with future firmware.
-substandard performances with most WA due to the absence of ad hoc designed microlenses.
SRL lenses perform better but in genera they are too bulky to be considered an ideal solution for this camera.
Having said that the X-Pro 1 is an excellent performer when equipped with its own lenses.
Ario

 

[ninetwentynine]

maybe fuji will put out some sort of manual focus assistance in a new firmware update by the time their own M mount adapter comes out 😉

i was flirting with just going all alt lenses, but after what i've read and seen— guess i'll just play with the native fuji 35mm until i see something better.

 

[Adanac]

i am not in the least disappointed by what i get from my RF collection and 2x crop m4/3 sensor. the 'cron 40 and cv 75 are in fact absolutely stunning, whilst, within iso limitations, the rest as good as any other combination ive used on film or FF. i'm not sure why this should be the case on one 'crop' sensor vs another crop sensor...?

Don't forget that on m4/3 - 4/3 period your full frame rangefinder lenses are not having to work too hard... much of the smeared area on an APS-C crop camera will naturally fall outside the image circle covering the m4/3 sensor.

In addition, there is significant variation in how well RF lenses work, camera to camera, because at the company and even model level the sensor implementations vary greatly. Two manufacturers may source the same basic sensor from Sony et al but add different filter packs etc, and certainly when the sensor is different you are going to see different response. The NEX-5N for example is generally more kind to RF lenses than the NEX-7.

Zeiss seems to lay a lot of the blame on anti-alias filters; according to one of their white papers the oblique angle at which light hits the edge area of the anti-alias filter fronting the sensor essentially results in astigmatism. My right astigmatic eye concurs!

That's not to say that a lack of an AA filter is a cure all - look at the X Pro 1 as a case study here where what is apparently a rather thick glass filter (not AA) fronting the sensor seems to be causing the grief with RF lenses. Their own lens design uses larger rear elements to reduce the angle of incidence and thus minimize the problem... and coincidentally and maybe not accidentally reduce the threat of competition from alt-glass providers new and used.

What we do know from the Leica M8, Leica M9, and Ricoh GXR Mount cameras is that it is possible to develop full frame and crop cameras that allow rangefinder lenses to perform free-enough from edge smearing. Ricoh proved it is even possible to produce such good performing cameras for RF lenses without extraordinary expense and that may bode well for the future. None of these cameras have anti-alias filters, probably not coincidentally.

 

[icaro2007]

A clear explanation of the problem can be found here:http://blogs.zeiss.com/photo/en/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/en_CLB41_Nasse_LensNames_Distagon.pdf

Ario

 

[mouren]

I take it back, once I stopped my voigtlander 40mm f1.4 to f2, quite sharp.

The edge thing, I am not so sure. I tried to put something at the edge of my shot, then tried to focus on it, and I have gotten very sharp results.

 

[dcsang]

Just got the Kipon adapter and put it on the X-Pro1 - to me, for longer lenses such as the 50mm lux (or elmarit) and the 90mm summicron (and I would assume the 75mm summicron or summilux) this is a "no brainer" imho. It's not that difficult to focus (for me mind you - I learned on an old Pentax SL which had a really bad screen and my eyesight is *touch wood* quite good) the lenses on this body. I'm pretty pleased but wonder what, unless they're tightening up tolerances, will or can Fuji do to THEIR adapter to make it "better" or more "in tune" with the camera/lenses.....

Cheers,
Dave

 

[aleksanderpolo]

The ability to read 6 bit code and set the frameline in OVF accordingly (and disallow third party adapter to do so), and sell the adapter for $599. 🙂

Dave, do you see any unusual smearing on the 50 by the way?

 

[dcsang]

Here's a shot (larger on my Flickr) with the 50mm Summilux @ f1.4. So basically the Fuji X-Pro1, Leica Summilux pre-ASPH @ f1.4, Nikon SB900 in Auto Thyristor mode and Kipon adapter at 1/125. A real "frankenstein" set up (good looking Frankenstein mind you... 😀):

I keep looking for "smearing" but meh - I can't tell what's "smearing" and what's bokeh at f1.4 - maybe if I stop down to like f11 or something? - then again, I rarely shoot my lenses at f11 or f16..

Cheers,
Dave

 

[Spyro]

maybe if I stop down to like f11 or something?

Stop down a 50lux 😱
Isnt that the equivalent of killing a kitten or something?

The photo looks *very* good to me (awesome doggy too) 🙂

 

[Spyro]

The ability to read 6 bit code and set the frameline in OVF accordingly (and disallow third party adapter to do so), and sell the adapter for $599. 🙂

and a cam that will read focus distance and adjust said framelines for parallax

$999 😀

 

[gho]

The image quality with M lenses seems quite ok to my eyes, how is the handling?

 

[dcsang]

Handling of the 50' Lux, the 90 Cron (I shot a few with that lens too) and the 50 Summarit was all very natural. The only thing that's missing in the viewfinder is the RF patch (or at least to me that's the only thing missing).

If you focus manually using the Fujinon XF lenses and then switch to just about any M-mount lens (regardless of brand) you tend to "forget" that the focus throw is a LOT shorter than manual focusing with the Fujinon XF lenses *LOL* If you have the camera with the 35mm f1.4 Fuji lens, give it a go with manual focus, especially if you're closer than the minimal focus distance (which can be done by using the EVF) - the throw is ridiculously long but you can get accustomed to it because there's a distance scale in the viewfinder (EVF).

Cheers,
Dave

 

[danielschwartzkopf]

The ability to read 6 bit code and set the frameline in OVF accordingly (and disallow third party adapter to do so), and sell the adapter for $599. 🙂

Dave, do you see any unusual smearing on the 50 by the way?

I've assumed that the whole "6-bit code" thing fell under some Leica patent, as well as the ability for a camera to read said code (which is why Zeiss or CV lenses don't ship with codes bored in to the mounting plate). Of course, licensing the "read" portion of the 6-bit code system might make sense since the mount will undoubtedly sell more leica glass and the competitors don't have the ability to "build in" the codes...

just thinking out loud...

 

[GaryLH]

Thanks Dave. Btw love your pet, one of my favorite dogs.
Gary

 

[dmc]

Damn, now I need a silver XPRO1, to match my L lenses.

 

[wintoid]

Thanks for that, it's really useful. What about shutter lag? I read somewhere that even with a non-Fuji lens mounted, there's a lag in the pre-release (when an AF lens would be doing its autofocus thing). Is that really true?

 

[Benjamin Marks]

Dave: I traveled over to your flickr pix and I have to say, I am impressed. I liked the image of your friend done in B&W too. I was under the impression that the "smearing" was worse with ultra wides with the X1 Pro, but I think if there is nothing much to smear e.g. you are looking at an OOF area anyway, whatever optical effect there was of the lens-sensor combination would be obscured by choice and placement of subject. Have you tried the camera with any non Fuji lens wider than your 50? Because of the crop factor, if (when) I get this camera, my lenses of choice would be between 15 and 28.

BTW I do understand that one could crop away this problem and wind up with a m-4/3 imaging area that still had good high ISO performance, but I generally like all the imaging "real estate" I can get my hands on.

Thanks for the post, BTW. Very helpful to those of us waiting in the wings.