Which new FF body for M lenses?

[leicapixie]

The price of new mirrorless cameras is very high!
Pointless to place a Leica lens where there are program fit, it's fiddly and a mess hearking, back to the 1st "T" mounts. sigh.
The small difference in price with a real Leica, really not worth the other way.
I use Leitz and or Leica lenses only on my "M's".
I've used friends Digital "M's" and only really like color of M8!

 

[airfrogusmc]

Sometimes you end up spending a lot more when buying all the stuff or settling and winding up with say a Leica M 10 in the end anyway. I know if I had all the money I spent by settling I could have bought what I thought was so expensive several times over.

 

[Guth]

I was Googling full-frame digital cameras that accept M-mount lenses (a rather elusive subject it seems). I suppose that I shouldn't be surprised that such a search would led me back to RFF.

Just as with the OP who started this thread way back when, I'm not terribly interested in Leica's digital M camera offerings but I am curious to learn about any alternatives that exist. I'm more open to used options than new options but would like to know about either. Now that two years have passed since this discussion originally took place, does anyone have any current opinions/suggestions regarding non-Leica FF digital cameras that will work with Leica M-mount lenses?

 

[Lids]

Hi Guth, I’ve tested the Z7 and the Sigma fp for the purpose of using m-mount lenses. These are probably the best candidates as they have the thinnest sensor covers (1.1mm and 1.3mm respectively) as far as I’m aware. I excluded Sonys as they are the thickest (A7R4 is 1.75mm) so you're pretty much committed to a sensor modification if you go that route.

The Z7 did better with wide angles (21mm and 28mm) in terms of color shift and iirc they were similar in terms of smearing. The fp does have a “color shading correction” feature which minimizes color shifts, but in practice it’s a bit of a pain to set up and use. Plus there's no evf which makes it difficult to use outdoors. So if I had to commit to a full-frame, non-Leica option out-of-the-box, I would go with a Z7. I like the output from the Z7 but I prefer a more rangefinder-like form factor so for now I just continue to use my M240. Now if Nikon made something like say a digital homage to its rangefinder with the Z7 sensor, I’d be all over it.

One more thing. It sounds like Techart is releasing an adapter that would allow you to autofocus M lenses on the Z much like their M->E autofocus adapter. That could make it an even more interesting prospect.

 

[Rayt]

Whenever I buy a camera with the intention of adapting Leica and other manual lenses I eventually recognise whatever I did it’s a compromise because I am not using all the functions the camera was designed to do and eventually I am the owner of also native lenses. Now for Leica lenses just buy a Leica camera. It’s a matter of time anyway. Unless of course the native lenses are the bread and butter and the M adapter is just to scratch an itch.

 

[brusby]

I have a bunch of old and some new Leica glass which I use with an M240. But I wanted something with better focusing capabilities because the M240 is limited to center focus via either rangefinder or live view, which often requires focus and recomposing with it's associated focusing inaccuracies.

Plus I've been really put off by the abandonment of the Leica M9, to the point that I am very reluctant to buy any thing from Leica. If their cameras are effectively disposable now, I'll probably just get a series of cheaper disposable cameras with the same $ if they'll do the job well enough.

I tried a Sony A7II but it didn't play well with some of the M lenses, particularly a current 50mm Summilux ASPH, although doing ok with others.

So I got the Canon EOS R and RP. They were pretty inexpensive on sale, just slightly more than $1k. The Canons allow zooming into any part of the frame at either 5x or 10x, resulting in near perfect focus for almost everything except maybe fast moving subjects, which I rarely if ever shoot.

I haven't experienced the smearing or color shift problems with the Canon mirrorless cameras that others report with some mirrorless gear. I've used wide angle, medium and telephoto focal lengths without any significant problems so far. But I don't claim my experience is extensive, just no problems yet. I was expecting difficulties with a modern 21mm Super Elmar, but it did just fine, at least for my tastes, as you can see in the example below.

Here are 2 test shots taken the day I got the Canon RP, while driving through the French Quarter in New Orleans, just pulling over and shooting out the driver's side window.

Leica 21mm super elmar m f/ 3.4 on Canon EOS RP.

_MG_8249 by Brusby, on Flickr


35mm Summaron f2.8 on EOS RP

_MG_8247 - Summer Sunset French Quarter New Orleans by Brusby, on Flickr

 

[Guth]

Thanks for your thoughts all.

Now for Leica lenses just buy a Leica camera. It’s a matter of time anyway.

I bought all of my Leica stuff decades ago and I do like their gear that I own, but I don't find myself nearly as enamored with Leica as a company these days as I once did. In turn, I can't say that the thought of buying one of their digital cameras bodies really sits all that well with me. Maybe I'm barking up the wrong tree with this idea in the first place.