R lens issues on M240?

[Denton]

I've noticed there are 2-CAM and 3-CAM lenses. Not sure what this means, but are there any limitations to using all R lenses on the M240? (with proper adapter of course)
Would like to get some macro and telephoto capability at those R prices.
D

 

[Addy101]

So, you missed the one cam and ROM lenses....

 

[helvetica]

The different cam models - including ROM and one cam, as Addy pointed out, where all evolutionary steps in the R mount. To my knowledge, all will work with the M adapter, as the cams only relayed aperture and distance data back to the R bodies. Older bodies - such as the Leicaflex - would only work with 1, 2, or 3-cam models, whereas later bodies such as the R8 & R9 would only work with 3-cam and ROM models.

It should be noted that if you are going to be using a high performance modern camera like the M240, you should probably be using the most modern R glass, such as the APO lenses to get the most out of the sensor.

Unless of course, you are wanting the glare and flare and beautiful imperfections of older designs!

 

[jaapv]

Save some money by getting the Novoflex adapter. A lens to look for is the Summilux 80 R, as good as, some say marginally better than, the Summilux 75 M.
There is no real need IMO to go for the highest resolving newest lens.
The lens and the sensor play together. A "mediocre" lens will still look better on a better sensor. A lens "outresolving a sensor" or the other way around is an unwarranted simplification. Go for character of the lens.

 

[helvetica]

There is no real need IMO to go for the highest resolving newest lens.

I would agree with you there as far as the mythical "resolving power" goes - but there are other advantages to newer designs. Personally, I think that you get some stronger cyan / magenta chromatic aberrations with older lenses, whereas the newer aspherical lenses address this. Older lenses, however, often has more pleasing or at least unique rendering of the out-of-focus areas.

I think that any of the above could be good for your purposes, assuming you know why you want it.

 

[LCT]

The lens and the sensor play together. A "mediocre" lens will still look better on a better sensor. A lens "outresolving a sensor" or the other way around is an unwarranted simplification. Go for character of the lens.

+1. Try "modest" lenses like Summicron-R 35, 50 or 90 pre-apo and you will get superb results for relatively little money. Same for lenses like Macro-Elmarit-R 60/2.8, Elmarit-R 135/2.8, or Vario-Elmar-R 35-70/4. Among apo lenses, the Apo-Telyt-R 180/3.4 is not too expensive either and will deliver the best at medium to long distance.

 

[Godfrey]

I've noticed there are 2-CAM and 3-CAM lenses. Not sure what this means, but are there any limitations to using all R lenses on the M240? (with proper adapter of course)
Would like to get some macro and telephoto capability at those R prices.
D

This site will fully inform you about the Leica R lens cams:
http://www.photoethnography.com/ClassicCameras/Lens-R.html

The Leica R cams (and ROMs) are all bits and pieces of the mechanical and electronic interface that is needed for SLR camera functionality. None of it is needed or gets in the way of using Leica R lenses adapted to Leica M or other mirrorless camera systems. All Leica R lenses fit on an M or mirrorless body as a simple, manually operated lens, with whatever adapter.

The major advantage of using the Leica adapter for R to M is that it will enable the M body to list the lens correction profiles that Leica has included for the R lenses. Not really a big deal IMO, but some people like what they do.

As to what R lenses to use on a digital body, well, the most recent R lenses are definitely superior in some ways to the earlier ones, but whenever you hear that it's important to realize that even the poorest of Leica R lenses are about as good as the best of any other SLR lenses.

I have acquired a nice little collection of R lenses, about ten in all, that span from 1965 to 1983 production series. Most of mine are 3 cam models, so they're compatible with nearly all Leicaflex and Leica R bodies. I use them mostly with a Sony A7 body on a Novoflex NEX/LER adapter. They produce outstanding results, every one of them. My favorites are the Summicron-R 50mm f/1.4 and the Summicron-R 90mm f/2, although all are great.

I've seen results using them on the Leica M as well, they work just as well on its sensor as on the Sony A7.

G

 

[Ben Z]

Save some money by getting the Novoflex adapter.

I got the Novoflex adapter Jaap, in fact I found a used one (late model with 6-bit coding) for about 60% of new price. Mine doesn't have a tripod adapter like the Leica one does, and I'm not sure if there is a Novoflex one that does. But for mounting any of the longer/heavier R lenses on a tripod it might be a consideration. I know the M has a stronger tripod mount than the M9 but I'm not sure if cantilevering a heavy R lens off of it could pose a problem, either in terms of stress or shake.

 

[Godfrey]

I got the Novoflex adapter Jaap, in fact I found a used one (late model with 6-bit coding) for about 60% of new price. Mine doesn't have a tripod adapter like the Leica one does, and I'm not sure if there is a Novoflex one that does. But for mounting any of the longer/heavier R lenses on a tripod it might be a consideration. I know the M has a stronger tripod mount than the M9 but I'm not sure if cantilevering a heavy R lens off of it could pose a problem, either in terms of stress or shake.

I have the Novoflex NEX/LER adapter. Novoflex lists ASTAT/NEX tripod mounting foot accessory as being compatible with all NEX and LEM/LER model mount adapters. That will solve your R lens-tripod mounting problems: it works very nicely and takes all the load off the camera tripod socket. Both the lens and the camera are supported by the lens mounting flanges on the mount adapter, and the adapter is fixed to the tripod with the mounting foot.

The B&H Photo website says they have it in stock. It's about $140, and worth it.

G

 

[YYV_146]

As people have stated above, the CAM designation is only meaningful if you wish to use these lenses with the Leica R bodies. On the M adapted they are essentially the same, and can be used freely.

I second Novoflex. They make the best adapters, really no competition there.

 

[jaapv]

I got the Novoflex adapter Jaap, in fact I found a used one (late model with 6-bit coding) for about 60% of new price. Mine doesn't have a tripod adapter like the Leica one does, and I'm not sure if there is a Novoflex one that does. But for mounting any of the longer/heavier R lenses on a tripod it might be a consideration. I know the M has a stronger tripod mount than the M9 but I'm not sure if cantilevering a heavy R lens off of it could pose a problem, either in terms of stress or shake.

Many heavier Rlenss come with a tripod mount, and the bayonet on the 240 has been strengthened just for this reason, so not much to worry about.

 

[Godfrey]

Many heavier Rlenss come with a tripod mount, and the bayonet on the 240 has been strengthened just for this reason, so not much to worry about.

Well, the Summicron-R 90 and Elmarit-R 135 are both pretty weighty and have no tripod mounting. I like how the ASTAT/NEX distributes the weight rather than hanging it all on gthe camera body.

G

 

[Ben Z]

Many heavier Rlenss come with a tripod mount, and the bayonet on the 240 has been strengthened just for this reason, so not much to worry about.

Good to know, thanks. My 400 has a tripod mount. My zoom doesn't. Those are my only R lenses, so it would only be for the zoom. I was thinking not just about strength, but of vibration from having the mounting point so far posterior to the center of gravity. Though with a sturdy tripod and head I'm probably over-thinking it.

I have the Novoflex NEX/LER adapter. That will solve your R lens-tripod mounting problems:

The B&H Photo website says they have it in stock. It's about $140, and worth it.

G

$140 plus the $150 I paid for my used adapter is within spitting distance of the costs of a Leica adapter though, and significantly more if the Novoflex adapter were bought new 🙁

 

[YYV_146]

Well, the Summicron-R 90 and Elmarit-R 135 are both pretty weighty and have no tripod mounting. I like how the ASTAT/NEX distributes the weight rather than hanging it all on gthe camera body.

G

Isn't there is a stand-alone tripod mount ring for the Novoflex M-R adapter? I may be wrong, though.

 

[jaapv]

Good to know, thanks. My 400 has a tripod mount. My zoom doesn't. Those are my only R lenses, so it would only be for the zoom. I was thinking not just about strength, but of vibration from having the mounting point so far posterior to the center of gravity. Though with a sturdy tripod and head I'm probably over-thinking it.



$140 plus the $150 I paid for my used adapter is within spitting distance of the costs of a Leica adapter though, and significantly more if the Novoflex adapter were bought new 🙁

One of these might fit. A matter of trial and error in the shop.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/s/?ie=UTF8&...vptwo=&hvqmt=b&hvdev=t&ref=pd_sl_8uhyg0ecq8_b

 

[Godfrey]

Isn't there is a stand-alone tripod mount ring for the Novoflex M-R adapter? I may be wrong, though.

That is the ASTAT/NEX tripod mount I spoke about earlier in this thread.

G

 

[Godfrey]

One of these might fit. A matter of trial and error in the shop.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/s/?ie=UTF8&...vptwo=&hvqmt=b&hvdev=t&ref=pd_sl_8uhyg0ecq8_b

Having owned several of the Canon lens mounting rings you pointed to, they're all WAY too large in diameter for the R lenses, never mind there not being anywhere on most any R lens without its own mounting foot to put them.

Although R lenses are much larger than M lenses in general, they're still manual focus lenses that are much more compact than any of the Nikon or Canon AF series lenses overall.

It seems a false economy not to spend the money for the right piece to work with a Novoflex mount adapter, rather than trying to adapt and jigger up a mount.

G

 

[Ben Z]

One of these might fit. A matter of trial and error in the shop.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/s/?ie=UTF8&...vptwo=&hvqmt=b&hvdev=t&ref=pd_sl_8uhyg0ecq8_b

I did check out the specs on Canon and Nikon tripod collars. Not so easy, as the manufacturer's have no reason to post the diameters since they are dedicated to specific lenses. And I found several conflicting listings as well. The ones I found were either too small or would need some sort of bushing to take up the extra space. It just seems more straighforward to off the Novoflex and buy the Leica adapter if I find there's a problem. I'm just cheap is all, considering I have only one R lens that needs a collar and doesn't have one.