|
|
Rank: Contributing Author
Groups: Member
Joined: 1/9/2009
Posts: 17
Points: 51
|
Leica 28mm f2.8 on a Canon 5D - is that like putting blinkers on a donkey?
I am very happy with the years of good use I have got out of this lens on a Leica RE body but am not sure if it is worthwhile in terms of image quality to invest in a simple adapter to mount it on a Canon 5d. So would like to hear from anybody who has tried this lens or a similar one on this camera body or a similar one.
I read some place that vignetting could be a problem when the lens is wide open at f2.8 but that this is not the case at f4 or wider.
Is there a simple Canon wide angle lens (ie not zoom) that would do just as good a job (or better) without costing a fortune?
And just to toss in a wild card - what would happen if I tried to mount a 28mm 645AFD lens on a 5D. I am wondering if the focal length would be the same or...???
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Contributing Author
Groups: Member
Joined: 1/9/2009
Posts: 17
Points: 51
|
Errr...  permit me to (partly) answer my own (partly stupid) question! No way to mount a 645AFD lens on a canon 5d anyway since no way to focus. Isn't this the second time I have made this blunder - probably due to power of wishful thinking! The serial number of my Elmarit-R 28mm f2.8 is 2480409 and according to this link it was made in 1971. Therefore (according to this very useful pebble place table ) it should be ok on the Canon 5d Still unsure if vignetting would be a problem. One way to find out I guess...
|
|
Rank: Administration
Groups: Administration
Joined: 1/31/2008
Posts: 193
Points: 676
Location: Dallas, Texas
|
Hi Peter -
As best as I know the 28mm will work fine on your 5D. The CURRENT 28mm F2.8 Elmarit-R is supposed to be spectacularly sharp. I have not used the lens, so I can comment. The older versions are good too -
Quote:Distortion is visible with 2% and vignetting is 2.1 stops. At full aperture the contrast is medium and there is clean definition of fine detail in a central disc of about 6mm radius. There is a sensitivity to flare and some coma in the outer zones and corners the images softens visibly. At F/4 and f/5.6 the outer zones improve very much, and fine details are rendered with clarity. Best aperture is F8, where we have very good imagery over most of the picture area (on the extreme corners are a bit weak) with clear reproduction of very fine detail. "Leica Pocket Book" 7th Edition, Hove Collectors Books
Assuming the lens isn't costing you too much, then maybe an adapter is probably worth it. The last HappyPageHK Leica-R / EOS adapter I had was a slight bit too thick @ ~3.05 to 3.08mm. 3mm is ideal. The cheaper Chinese adapters might be too thick - good for mirror clearance, bad for infinity focus. The Contax CY 28mm F2.8 Distagon is another widely loved 28mm, but probably not the best for people shots. I like the 28mm F2 Distagon for people shots - though, that's a bigger lens. Both the Contax lenses have mixed results with adapters / mirrors / and the 5D.
John
|
|
Rank: Contributing Author
Groups: Member
Joined: 1/9/2009
Posts: 17
Points: 51
|
Thanks John
Seems that 28mm 2.8 Leica Elmarit-R lens (bird in hand) and adapter plate should work ok provided that I don't open the aperture too much (ie no wider than f4 and if possible shoot at f8). Don't expect the standard plastic Canon 28mm 2.8 EF lens would be any better at f2.8 -- though am wondering how a wide angle L lens (bird in bush) would perform in comparison with a Leica-R lens on Canon 5D.
Maybe I should just shoot the 5D without any lens - though guess the result would be a little fuzzy!
|
|
Rank: Contributing Author
Groups: Member
Joined: 1/9/2009
Posts: 17
Points: 51
|
Looks like these lens adapters come in more different flavors than I thought. With my ageing eyes it would be nice have one that could at least confirm focus is correct like this one. Have not found a supplier in Bangkok but I have a friend in USA who will be meeting me in Ghana soon and may be able to bring me one, so any suggestion about where I could purchase on-line a good Elmarit-R Canon 5D lens adapter with focus confirmationin the US would be most welcome. Interesting to read reports that some Canon 5D bodies require mirror shaving to accomodate a 28mm Leica-R lens while others don't. Seems to be quite hit and miss (or should I say flip up or down).  I guess the only way to find out is to try one and see if their is an awful splitting CRACK the first time the shutter is released!
|
|
Rank: Contributing Author
Groups: Member
Joined: 1/9/2009
Posts: 17
Points: 51
|
then suddenly stumble across this very favorable review of what appears to be the PLASTIC-FANTASTIC Canon EF24mm f2.8 that seems to be a reasonable performer even at f2.8 and not bad at other f-stops either. Why bother about a lens adpater if a plastic EF lens from the 1970s does as good as an Elmarit-R (also from the 1970s). But it is a big IF - isn't it?
|
|
Rank: Administration
Groups: Administration
Joined: 1/31/2008
Posts: 193
Points: 676
Location: Dallas, Texas
|
I have not used either of the Canon 28mm's. The Canon 35mm F1.4 L is also an option, but more costly. The Canon 35L is not as sharp wide open as a Leica 35mm F1.4 M Summilux ASPH, but then again the Leica costs 3X more, so the Leica should be better  The 35L is larger than the Canon 28mm, but it does provide F1.4 which offers creative DOF options.
If you plan to shoot F2.8 or slower most of the time, then there's probably no need for the Canon 35L. If size and weight are high priorities, then the Canon 28mm or 35m F2.8 make good sense. Many people seem to like the Canon 35mm F2 also. Between the Canon 28mm F2.8 and Canon 35mm F2.0; I would choose the F2.0 lens for the brighter viewfinder and some added wiggle room when it comes to DOF (I prefer a narrower DOF).
Here are some images from the Canon 1Ds Mark II and the Canon 35L; the light fall off (if present) was mostly likely added in Photoshop for effect. Most of these were shot between F1.4 and F2 -         
|
|
Rank: Contributing Author
Groups: Member
Joined: 1/9/2009
Posts: 17
Points: 51
|
Very impressive images - particularly the church. This really shows what this camera can do with a good lens. I am wondering if you used a tripod and about the asa you used for the church interior. The dynamic range looks better than I had anticipated. It makes me happy to see these images as I have just picked up a preloved 5d with 50mm f1.4 and accessories for a good price. Of course it is old technology compared to the MKII but so far am not unhappy. Seems smaller and easier to point and shoot than I had imagined. Also nice to find that it isn't overburdened with bells and whistles like video, pop up flash and other gimmicks. I have found out how to turn off the sharpening. Now all I have to do is find out how to make a decent image. Next step is to get an adapter to mount the Elmarit 28mm and weld the aperture to f4 or f5.6. Voila  full frame point and shoot! So far so good...
|
|
Rank: New Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 6/2/2009
Posts: 1
Points: 3
Location: Charleston SC
|
Nothing to do with Leica but thought some of you may like this. I recently bought an adapter so that I could play with my old Minolta lenses on my 5d MKII. Here is what I found interesting. The background on the Minolta is very different than any of my Canon lenses. This was shot with both the Canon 24-70L lens and an old Minolta 50mm standing in about the same spot for both shots. I liked the clarity of the her face using the Canon and the background with the Minolta. I used PS to swap out the background. I took about 2 mins to change the background since no real precision editing was required. The second photo is a flower with just the Minolta lens wide open.  
|
|
Rank: Administration
Groups: Administration
Joined: 1/31/2008
Posts: 193
Points: 676
Location: Dallas, Texas
|
I think what you are seeing is why people are attracted to - lets call it - retro lenses. Modern lenses have new coatings optimized for digital, the designs focus on putting the light perpendicular to sensor, current tastes are for bold (contrasty) and sharp images. Going back to the 60-70's the look was muted with soft backgrounds - a more delicate, warmer rendering. Different colorings were in vogue then and lens makers were working with popular films like Velvia and such.
A modern Canon lens will take a crisp, contrasty image. Some lenses have better background blur than others, etc. But what Canon misses (IMO) is nuance. What I like about the old(er) lenses is that they render a look that is somewhat retro and I don't have to spend hours in photoshop trying to recreate that atmosphere. How do you compare a lens made 30 years ago where an optical technician ground blank after blank to create the prototype lens vs a lens designed today on a CAD system?
I wish there was an easy way to take old(er) lenses, swap their mount, have an auto-aperture and electronics for focus confirmation, EXIF, etc. Adapters get us there to a degree, but I want more
|
|
Rank: Contributing Author
Groups: Member
Joined: 1/9/2009
Posts: 17
Points: 51
|
Some months after buying a Leica R - EOS adapter ring I am continuing to explore the viability and value of using legacy Leica R lenses on my Canon 5D, which I am not yet sure is a good idea or not, particularly after reading this interesting compendium of advice compiled by Andrew Nemeth (which also includes a link to pebbleplace.com) Seems that focus confirmation via Leica-EOS adapter rings may not work very well with wider angle lenses - at least this is what I have come to suspect after using an adapter ring that I purchased a few months ago with my Leica R 28mm Elmarit with mixed results. Is the focusing problem me or the adapter ring? Conclusion: probably both… No problem… I thought… the logical solution as for everything else in life is to just spend more money! Invest another hundred bucks in an EC-based split focusing screen, right? Until I read about the following issues, which I am concerned about: 1) split prism screen not easy to install! 2) unusable spot or evaluative metering!! 3) likely inaccurate meter reading!!! 4) etc etc etc Ouch! My head hurts! Is this just defensive Canon marketing hype or not? Maybe split prism focusing screen is not such a good idea after all? Too bad since I find it very difficult to manual focus the 28mm lens using the standard Canon 5D focusing screen. Maybe be best to spend my money elsewhere and just use my 28mm and 90mm Leica lenses as paperweights?
|
|
Rank: Administration
Groups: Administration
Joined: 1/31/2008
Posts: 193
Points: 676
Location: Dallas, Texas
|
Mount a Canon 17-40L or Canon 16-35L on a 5D and you'll find auto focus to be hit or miss with those lenses too. The issue is - often too many potential contrasty targets fall within the AF sensor's zone. With a wide angle lens, details are small and there are many, many targets the AF system could select. Fortunately we usually shoot a wide angle lens at F8 or F11 (light permitting), so these focus errors are covered up by the DOF. Our eyesight is no better - try manually focusing an AF lens - the results won't be any better.
With wide angle lenses, assuming there is time, I suggest finding a good focus target and adjusting until it's in focus. Then recompose. We know that's bad. We know that introduces error. But, it will get you in the zip code and then focus can be refined as needed.
Split screens are not a problem. We have to focus wide open anyhow, so the split screen won't cause a problem at that point. I've used splits on the 1-series and Evaluative metering did fine. Spot metering could conceivably be compromised. I seldom use spot, so that wasn't a concern. For wides you're probably center weighted or average anyhow, so it's sounds scary when you read about it, but in practice it's not a game ending issue.
On the whole, I do not see a compelling reason to use manual lenses on a Canon body at this point. The Canon 16-35L II is a decent lens and will get the job done. The Canon 24-105L IS is good at 24mm assuming F8 or F11. And now there are the 14L II and 24L II. The Canon lenses are more expensive, but at least there are options today that were not available just a couple years ago. The only compelling reason to use a manual lens is because you like how a given optic draws. Sometimes a lens draws in such a unique way that the extra effort is worth it. If that's not the case for you with the 28mm, then be all means, move on.
I think a Canon 24mm F1.4 L II could be an interesting choice. 24mm is a bit wide for me, so I haven't spent the money. I'm more of 35L person and that lens travels well enough. Though, a Canon 24-105mm F4 L IS is sharper in the corners (at 35mm) than the 35L, so depending on your needs, the right lens will vary.
|
|
Rank: Contributing Author
Groups: Member
Joined: 1/9/2009
Posts: 17
Points: 51
|
Thanks heaps for the useful input that seems to suggest that in your experience <1> autofocus is a problem with wide angle lens (but may not be such a problem with my 90mm?) & <2> installing a split screen could work ok without interfering with non-spot metering. I guess the split screens available are the same size as the standard screens that come with the camera, so shaving is not likely to be needed if the standard mirror didn't need any? How difficult is it to install a split screen and is there any particular new/used source you would recommend more than any other for a split screen for the Canon 5D?
|
|
Rank: Administration
Groups: Administration
Joined: 1/31/2008
Posts: 193
Points: 676
Location: Dallas, Texas
|
I changed focus screens on the 5D and didn't use any shims. There is the EC-S screen which is recommended for fast lenses, you might want to try it. I do not like split screens because it makes me a slave to center focus / composition. And with the split screen I'm always looking for an edge to align against, with landscapes it doesn't help much. Overall I've found focus confirmation to be more flexible. Find something in the target zone, get the beep, see if I agree, recompose and tweak the focus as needed. It's certainly less than ideal, and except for a few lenses, I don't bother anymore.
Here's the EE-S screen for the original Canon 5D - B&H Photo. For a split screen you'll need something a Bob Maxwell or Beattie. A Bob Maxwell screen is expensive. Supposedly he adds coatings to brighten the screen, but then that alters the metering. I'm not a fan of that. By the time you buy the adapter, focus screen and the lens - it all adds up.
For the wide angle side, I'd be more inclined to go with a Canon 35L; F1.4 provides considerably more latitude as the light drops too. For the tele side, you might want to consider the 90mm Summicron (non APO) over the 90mm Elmarit. The 90mm Elmarit is quite sharp, but F2.8 makes for a dim viewfinder. The 'Cron will bright the viewfinder which helps with manual focus. Also, the 'Cron has a kinder rendering for wide open work. Stopped down to F4-F5.6 is supposedly just as sharp as the Elmarit. I have not used the 90mm 'Cron-R. M yes, R no.
Considering the total bill of a 28/2.8 and 90/2.8, adapters and focus screen - it's easing into the $1k mark. Have you considered the 24-105L? It's not the sexiest lens, but IS buys alot of latitude.
Here's a review: http://www.pebbleplace.com/Personal/Canon_24-105L_IS.html
And a huge gallery: http://www.pebbleplace.com/Personal/Canon_24-105L_IS_G.html
The biggest drawback to the 24-105L IS is F4; it's a challenge to get a nice background blur, but with care it's possible. A used 24-105L IS is ~$800 USD. I've come to the point that unless a manual lens (such as a R) does something really, really special, then it's easier just to shoot a Canon AF lens.
|
|
Rank: Contributing Author
Groups: Member
Joined: 1/9/2009
Posts: 17
Points: 51
|
I agree completely that in terms of quality, ease of use and value for money (what else is there..) the Canon path is preferable unless you already have, as I do, two legacy R lenses (plus adapter ring) gathering dust in the dry cabinet that means the total cost of addiitonal investment (ie one focussing screen) is likely to be about USD100, right? I guess this legacy thing is one reason why others may also consider going this non-OEM adapter + screen route. If the Canon 5D were my main rig I would definitely consider investing in the fine lenses that you recommend here but since I plan to use the 5D mostly as a backup I am not ready to invest in Canon glass (unless of course there is somebody who would like to trade a 90mm Elmarit for a Canon cousin but if such a person exists then I have not met them yet). So will probably go for the split screen...
Now if I had realised all this before I bought the almost-focus-confirmation adapter ring (sigh)...
Oh well - no use shutting the door after the horse has bolted, right? So why not just buy a pig to keep in the horse stall instead?
|
|
Rank: Administration
Groups: Administration
Joined: 1/31/2008
Posts: 193
Points: 676
Location: Dallas, Texas
|
But if the 28 & 90 aren't doing the trick for you, why keep them? Their resale value will cover the 24-105L purchase so the result is the same, just a different way of getting there. And, the adapter cost a fraction of the lenses. You have Contax 645AF en route and that most likely will be the system you prefer to use with primes, so I'd used the Canon 5D as the broad stroke brush and then the Contax set-up as fine detail brush.
|
|
Rank: Contributing Author
Groups: Member
Joined: 1/9/2009
Posts: 17
Points: 51
|
Hmmm.... hadn't really thought about moving the 90 that is in ex condition but will do so; though not an option with the scruffy old 28mm that maybe would be useful as a bottle opener, which leaves the adapter - maybe earring; unless of course...
|
|
Rank: Administration
Groups: Administration
Joined: 1/31/2008
Posts: 193
Points: 676
Location: Dallas, Texas
|
It's always easy to spend other people's money. Glad to help
|
|
|
Guest |
