Benjamin Marks
Veteran
So I have been playing with the Zeiss-to-Leica adapter. Today I had the 53mm Helios/1.8 and the Zeiss-Opton Sonnar/1.5 out. I had expected to have the focus off with the Helios because of what I've read about the Kiev helicals, but both lenses did very well on the R-D1. I would say that the Helios had marginally less contrast, but this is hardly surprising given the differences in the lenses coatings. The R-D1 was set to Auto-exposure in both cases and both lenses had the recommended heavystar hood. Note the nice o-o-f areas (at least I like 'em).
Attachments
Last edited:
Benjamin Marks
Veteran
VinceC
Veteran
Nice.
Focusing helical is seldom an issue with Kiev/Contax-mount lenses. Actually, with the Helios or any other 50, your Zeiss-Leica adapter IS the helical.
Focusing helical is seldom an issue with Kiev/Contax-mount lenses. Actually, with the Helios or any other 50, your Zeiss-Leica adapter IS the helical.
Last edited:
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
Whoa, I'm really liking the Helios! Hard to truly compare since the shots are different, but thanks for posting; lovely shots all, and Burlington IS a lovely spot!
John
Well-known
Benjamin, can you elaborate on the Zeiss - Leica adapter? Are they expensive? How easy is it to find one? 
Benjamin Marks
Veteran
Trius - the Helios is a nice surprise. This one came from Kiev USA and cost around US$60. You can probably find one for much less, but I generally like the idea of dealing with a brick and morter shop and I had purchased a Kiev 66 from these folks in a former life. And what you say is true -- the shots are very different . . . and in fact, made an hour apart (coming and going from burrito and espresso consumption on Church Street) with variably cloudy skies. I'm sort of shoe-horning photography in between other activities these days and it makes rigorous testing an impossibility.
Inspired by Sean Reid, I actually have sitting on my hard-drive a comparison that I did for myself of eight of my 50's at their four widest apertures, but it is a massive amount of data and impractical (or impossible) to post here. The results were interesting, but if I have an hour a week to make pictures, I'd rather try to take a memorable picture of my kids than test glass that, overall, is excellent. Suffice it to say that whether the glass was a Soviet Sonnar copy, a modern Zeiss design, or Leica glass, you can take a good picture with any of them. They all have different flavors, though . . . kind of like different flavors of ice cream - IMHO, there are differences, but none of them is actually bad.
John - to put the lie to the statement I just made, I bought the adapter from a fellow on e-boy whose handle is johnluk63. He is based in Hong Kong. My item # was 7615694559 if you want to check it out. Looking at his feedback, he seems to post one of these every couple of weeks. The transaction was smooth, despite his being half-way 'round the world from me. At US$244 I probably overpaid for this too, but I had searched all my favorite Leica spots and they either had no adapter, or the much-sought-after Orion model for around $1,800. I have to say that the adapter does not seem to work with the CV 35 or 28. Not really an issue for me, as I have those focal lengths in bayonet-mount lenses, but it would have been nice. I have no connection to the seller, etc.
Attached is another Sonnar shot at f11. Stopped down, I think there is less difference between lenses . . . and the shot is not exactly inspired. But it shows how the lens renders a street scene at ordinary shooting apertures. I would like to do some nighttime picture making to see how these two lenses (and the Nikon 1.4 handle flare) . . . of course you don't need the R-D1 for any of this, but the instant feedback sure is nice.
Ben
Inspired by Sean Reid, I actually have sitting on my hard-drive a comparison that I did for myself of eight of my 50's at their four widest apertures, but it is a massive amount of data and impractical (or impossible) to post here. The results were interesting, but if I have an hour a week to make pictures, I'd rather try to take a memorable picture of my kids than test glass that, overall, is excellent. Suffice it to say that whether the glass was a Soviet Sonnar copy, a modern Zeiss design, or Leica glass, you can take a good picture with any of them. They all have different flavors, though . . . kind of like different flavors of ice cream - IMHO, there are differences, but none of them is actually bad.
John - to put the lie to the statement I just made, I bought the adapter from a fellow on e-boy whose handle is johnluk63. He is based in Hong Kong. My item # was 7615694559 if you want to check it out. Looking at his feedback, he seems to post one of these every couple of weeks. The transaction was smooth, despite his being half-way 'round the world from me. At US$244 I probably overpaid for this too, but I had searched all my favorite Leica spots and they either had no adapter, or the much-sought-after Orion model for around $1,800. I have to say that the adapter does not seem to work with the CV 35 or 28. Not really an issue for me, as I have those focal lengths in bayonet-mount lenses, but it would have been nice. I have no connection to the seller, etc.
Attached is another Sonnar shot at f11. Stopped down, I think there is less difference between lenses . . . and the shot is not exactly inspired. But it shows how the lens renders a street scene at ordinary shooting apertures. I would like to do some nighttime picture making to see how these two lenses (and the Nikon 1.4 handle flare) . . . of course you don't need the R-D1 for any of this, but the instant feedback sure is nice.
Ben
Attachments
Last edited:
C
ch1
Guest
Ben,
Although I have a Helios etc. I too am mainly interested in the Sonnar to Leica adaptor.
I've seen the HK eBay listings. Do you know if it will it also work with a Nikkor 5.0cm/1.4?
How about 3.5 and the CV 85? You "nixed" the CV 28 already, alas...
The Orion is unfindable (I saw CQ's notes and then Googled it and, as they say in Joisey, fugghedaboutit).
An S to M mount adaptor is the Holy Grail!
DO YOU HEAR ME MR. KOBAYASHI????
Although I have a Helios etc. I too am mainly interested in the Sonnar to Leica adaptor.
I've seen the HK eBay listings. Do you know if it will it also work with a Nikkor 5.0cm/1.4?
How about 3.5 and the CV 85? You "nixed" the CV 28 already, alas...
The Orion is unfindable (I saw CQ's notes and then Googled it and, as they say in Joisey, fugghedaboutit).
An S to M mount adaptor is the Holy Grail!
DO YOU HEAR ME MR. KOBAYASHI????
VinceC
Veteran
Without any firsthand experience, I would guess that a Zeiss-to-Lietz adapter (based on a Kiev helical, perhaps?) wouldn't work well with a Nikkor 50mm f/1.4 because focus would be inaccurate when wide open, due to the slight difference between the Contax and Nikon-S mounts.
An affordable Nikon S-to-Leica adapter would be intriguing. At some point I'll go digital RF, and there doesn't seem much chance of a digital Nikon S model anytime soon.
An affordable Nikon S-to-Leica adapter would be intriguing. At some point I'll go digital RF, and there doesn't seem much chance of a digital Nikon S model anytime soon.
RObert Budding
D'oh!
I like the Sonnar.
Benjamin Marks
Veteran
I will try to post some shots with the Nikon this weekend. I am sorry to say that when I took some quick shots this morning to respond to Vince's post that the Nikon (at a distance of about 30 feet and wide open) had its focus off. So I tried the Zeiss . . . also front focussed. Hmm . . . was it the adapter? I tried a Nockton 1.5. . . hmm also front focussed. I think I have to have a look at the RD-1's rangefinder this weekend. I can also shoot some . . . gasp . . film in an accurate Leica, but it will probably be a couple of days before I can evaluate, scan and post results. Oddly, early results close up with all three Sonnar (sorry for missing the extra "n" above) lenses were quite promising . . . the Nikon too. More on this later.
BTW, Stephen Gandy on his site seems to suggest that there was a run of Japanese-made adapters like this at the beginning of the decade. This adapter came in a nice presentation box . . . based on fit and finish, I'm betting it is not of Ukranian origin. Provenance uncertain.
Ben
BTW, Stephen Gandy on his site seems to suggest that there was a run of Japanese-made adapters like this at the beginning of the decade. This adapter came in a nice presentation box . . . based on fit and finish, I'm betting it is not of Ukranian origin. Provenance uncertain.
Ben
Last edited:
VinceC
Veteran
Sounds like a fascinating adapter. For what it's worth, I spent more than a year shooting a Nikkor 1.4 on a Kiev, blissfully unaware of the difference in focusing. I just figured I was missing the focus on the close, wide shots.
Off around 30 feet, there really shouldn't be a difference.
Off around 30 feet, there really shouldn't be a difference.
Benjamin Marks
Veteran
VinceC said:
Yeah. I reached the same conclusion . . . don't know how the distance focus on the RD-1 got dinged.
George:
Here's the deal with the CV 35 and 28 in CS mounts. The lenses both mount on a Nikon S2 and a Contax IIIa. On those cameras, the distance scale seems accurate for focussing, but the act of focussing is less than super-smooth. I would describe it as "sounding like I can hear ball-bearings rolling." Still, no damage to either the lenses or the cameras so I assume this is how they are supposed to work.
With the adapter (which, BTW, does not lock in the infinity position like the helicals on the N and C cameras), the external bayonette seems to engage, but the RF patch does not move as expected. This was true with both lenses. Could there be user error here? I will have to play with the lenses more this weekend. Also, I will be trying on an actual Leica rather than on the R-D1.
More when I know more,
Ben
Last edited:
furcafe
Veteran
There could be some user error, but it's mostly caused by slight differences in manufacturing tolerances between the adapters v. actual Contax/Kiev/Nikon RFs v. the lenses themselves.
1st, you have to make sure the lens is set to infinity when you mount it. 2nd, you need to have the focus helical on the adapter set to infinity. I'm sure you know about these 2 steps. However, you may not know about a 3rd step: you have to confirm that the adapter is not stuck on infinity. Yes, there's no infinity lock on the adapters, but sometimes there's enough friction that it prevents the lens from engaging w/the helical. After mounting the lens, turn the focus ring on the lens & listen for a click as the lens grabs onto the adapter helical; once you hear the click, the lens should be fullly engaged & you should be able to see the RF patch move.
1st, you have to make sure the lens is set to infinity when you mount it. 2nd, you need to have the focus helical on the adapter set to infinity. I'm sure you know about these 2 steps. However, you may not know about a 3rd step: you have to confirm that the adapter is not stuck on infinity. Yes, there's no infinity lock on the adapters, but sometimes there's enough friction that it prevents the lens from engaging w/the helical. After mounting the lens, turn the focus ring on the lens & listen for a click as the lens grabs onto the adapter helical; once you hear the click, the lens should be fullly engaged & you should be able to see the RF patch move.
Benjamin Marks said:
Benjamin Marks
Veteran
Minor update - weekend tests show RF out of adjustment at 10m and infinity. Dunno how it happened. So the camera is off to DAG for some TLC. When it is back I will post comparison pics for the Nikkor 1.4, the Helios 1.8 and the Sonnar 1.4. I used the RD-1 very successfully 1 week ago with the DR Summicron at sunset. Beeutiful.
N
nihraguk
Guest
Awesome OOF areas, and beautiful pictures. Thanks for sharing.