Your GXR lens mount lenses wishlist? ;)

[riccadonna]

Oh yes, one glass more please, shift mounted VC 15/4.5 like the one german firm BIG proposed. It would allow you to take two left/right shifted pict for a stich thus giving you APC-S eqv. 10mm.

 

[jankap]

Yes, you got me there.

Never knew of these lenses or the manufacturer. The big 50 is f/0.75, just 0.05 short of Zeiss's fastest 50mm f/0.7 ever. Impressive.

Interesting. I worked there for 3 months, before going to the TU Delft. That was in 1961. The lens was "available" at that time. But it was designed for the x-ray department. Of course it could not be adapted to my IIIf.

Wishing for the M-mount.
1. Would it be interesting to manipulate the card files? Defining a setting (MYSET) with your laptop?
2. Using this helical distance adjustment (available for the NEX)?
3. A shift possibility on the mount?
4. A possibility to mount a focal length reducer? To reduce/eliminate the crop factor.

The points 2 to 4 seem to suggest a change of the mount from Leica-M to Sony-E.
Does a fixed adapter from E to M have some negative influence? The IQ of the existing M-mount is very good.
Imagine the new APO-Summicron without cropping??!!
Jan

 

[kuuan]

....
The points 2 to 4 seem to suggest a change of the mount from Leica-M to Sony-E.
Jan

right! the new Speed Boosters, the use of tilt and helicoid adapters are real advantages of the short E mount!
a cheap Chinese helicoid Leica M to E mount adapter I bought recently adds close focusing keeps infinity too

 

[Tom Caldwell]

....
The points 2 to 4 seem to suggest a change of the mount from Leica-M to Sony-E.
Jan

right! the new Speed Boosters, the use of tilt and helicoid adapters are real advantages of the short E mount!
a cheap Chinese helicoid Leica M to E mount adapter I bought recently adds close focusing keeps infinity too

Yes I am there already. I have the original Metabones Speed Booster and the Zhongyi Lens Turbo in PK and FD. Hoping to add a M42 version as that is more where my lens interests lie. Just taken delivery of a Yeenon helicoid M42 to NEX which has proven very interesting. Cheap Chinese helicoid it is not - very well made and priced accordingly.

I had an idea that maybe the focal reducer concept might work on the LM mount. There is not enough space to do this on the normal flange focal length of the adapter as it needs about 10mm more depth to fit the elements. However if it were possible to insert the elements into a rearward protruding tube then it might be more possible. There are already several regular LM/LTM lenses with rear protrusion greater than this (but not a lot more). Therefore as long as the glass elements could have sufficient diameter to direct the image from the rear protrusion then there might be a possibility. As most other cameras fit electronic contacts and light baffles inside they could not carry such a rear protrusion depth but the Ricoh M mount module does not labour under this difficulty.

Tom

 

[kuuan]

Mine is a Zhongyi Lens Turbo in PK mount. Most, not all tests I saw suggest that the Speed Booster is better though.
Got the PK version because my primary two mounts I want to use are Pentax K and M42. My M42 > PK adapter works very well on the PK lens turbo, so Tom I don't think that you would need yet another adapter for your M42 lenses, there are M42 > Canon FD adapters available too.
Because it has the shortest register distance and because I have some Olympus OM and Canon FD lenses I'd love to use on the focal reducer too I almost had gone for the FD lens turbo, but because I had not found any Pentax K > FD adapter on the market I opted for the PK.
My helicoid adapter is an M>E mount and very well made too, it cost abt. 50 usd. It works very well also with all the lenses I had bought adapters for to use on my M module.

 

[dontblameureyes]

Leica Elmarit 28/2.8 ASPH

 

[Tom Caldwell]

Mine is a Zhongyi Lens Turbo in PK mount. Most, not all tests I saw suggest that the Speed Booster is better though.
Got the PK version because my primary two mounts I want to use are Pentax K and M42. My M42 > PK adapter works very well on the PK lens turbo, so Tom I don't think that you would need yet another adapter for your M42 lenses, there are M42 > Canon FD adapters available too.
Because it has the shortest register distance and because I have some Olympus OM and Canon FD lenses I'd love to use on the focal reducer too I almost had gone for the FD lens turbo, but because I had not found any Pentax K > FD adapter on the market I opted for the PK.
My helicoid adapter is an M>E mount and very well made too, it cost abt. 50 usd. It works very well also with all the lenses I had bought adapters for to use on my M module.

Andreas,

Just a post-note to an old subject. I tried to get one of the Chinese manufacturers who I was "chatty" with to make a focal reducer for the LM mount. I did the basic (not optical engineer) maths and worked out using the "lens checker" that if the lens elements were to protrude into the body they could be made easily to come within 1mm or less of doing the job. It would be that last 1mm that would be the hardest. I am sure that a bit of design ingenuity could accomplish it. We even got talking to the point where they offered to make a sample for me to test. But nothing came of it, I am still waiting.

The principal problem is that it would be only suitable for the mount module and Leica M8 cameras where there would be enough room inside the body to accept the protrusion and use an aps-c sensor to take advantage of focal reduction. None of the other digital camera mounts that will accept LM adapters give any significant rear protrusion because only Ricoh go anywhere near supporting the internal dimensions of the LM mount. With the mount module stalled if not dead and buried the only real market would be to current mount module owners as I am sure that Leica M8 owners would scarcely raise a ripple even if they were interested. not only that but such a focal reducer would only be suitable for legacy slr lenses as RF lenses could not use it. This would further reduce the market and the focal reducer demand would be further split between all the various legacy slr mounts that exist. So in the end the market might end up as myself and a handful of others.

Maybe the Leica T might create a market for a LM mount focal reducer - I suppose the T mount with adapter will accommodate the same deep protrusion that the Ricoh mount module does. Or has the unsaid happened and the T mount might not be 100% compatible to all legacy RF lenses?

Of course Leica are not at all interested in anything but T mount or LM RF lenses on their "T" and it would be up to the aftermarket to supply. But the "T" seems to have disappeared from the airwaves since the first interest talk. I had a look and thought "no thanks" and I think that the general vibes are that this new camera is a simple camera made to sell at a scandalous cost to those who who really don't have much idea about cameras other than they like how it looks and can afford one.

Hand built simply because there is hardly enough demand to make it otherwise.

Tom