DSMC Leica M Mount

Zeb B · Nov 8, 2011

Dumb question: For FOV comparision, what sensor size is the Leica M considered?

Dave Blackham · Nov 8, 2011

FF 35mm

Dave Blackham · Nov 8, 2011

Another question about Leica M lenses. As the rear element to sensor distance is very short does this have any effect on using these lenses origional designed for film on an electronic sensor, as the light will strike the sensor at an steep angle. The pixels are effectively down small wells as i understand it. id think the corners and frame edges may be affected propotionaly more than say a PL lens (having a longer rear element to sensor distance) projecting in to the sensor from a greater distance.

Zeb B · Nov 8, 2011

Dave Blackham said:
Another question about Leica M lenses. As the rear element to sensor distance is very short does this have any effect on using these lenses origional designed for film on an electronic sensor, as the light will strike the sensor at an steep angle. The pixels are effectively down small wells as i understand it. id think the corners and frame edges may be affected propotionaly more than say a PL lens (having a longer rear element to sensor distance) projecting in to the sensor from a greater distance.

To Dave's point for my understanding: Other than physical fit and sensor coverage, are there other considerations (like light angle to sensor) that must be considered when frankenfitting lenses to Epic? Anyone know of a thread where this is discussed?

Eric Lange · Nov 8, 2011

Steven Dean said:
Looks promising, thanks for the heads up on that lens!

(Edit) actually upon further review, it does look like it has a protruding element. I saw one photo where it looked like it didn't and got all excited, but most others show a protruding element.

STEVEN ...Thanks for drawing my attention to this!

It’s not 100% clear.

On the technical drawings of the Zeiss 35mm f/2 Biogon on the data sheet it does not show protruding elements. On the B&H website they show the Zeiss ZM 35 mm f/2 T* photographed and it does not show protruding elements. However on Zeiss’s less technical broscure flyers I see they show a lens with protruding elements. Need to look closer because there appear to be a lot errors in the product brochures, for example in one ZM brochure they show someone using a hasselblad! Maybe they are doing wide angle macro of flying bumble bee or something??

See http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/361547-REG/Zeiss_1365_658_35mm_f_2_ZM_Lens.html#

It doesn’t look like they set it to close focus. Maybe the design has changed????

I’ll phone B&H and find out perhaps or some other…

Ok so to be helpful.

The Zeiss range of M's stacks up as follows..I.e. Zeiss ZM (series)

2.8/15mm (this is new is a distagon BUT has protruding elements).

4/18 mm (that’s also a distagon i.e. retrofocal) AND has protruding elements).

2.8/21mm (this is a Biogon, i.e. symmetric lens; AND has protruding elements).

2.8/25mm (This is a Biogon, (symmetric), AND has protruding elements).

2,8/28mm T* (This is a Biogon, AND has protruding elements).

2,0/35 T* (Biogon, AND has or has not protruding elements or older ones do not????).

It’s not 100% clear.(but at this stage I am not super hopeful either)

2,8/35 C Biogon T* (Protruding elements)

1.5/50 mm C Sonnar (i.e. not Biogon/symetric and not Distagon/classic retrofocal), AND NO protruding elements.

2/50 mm T* Planar (i.e. classic Zeiss Planar layout, not Dist or Bio.)..AND NO protruding elements.

4/85mm Tele-Tessar T* (Tessar/telephoto layout, not Dist, not Bio..) AND NO protruding elements.

This fits perfectly with what Sanjin has very generously posted.

I guess my point is that it’s important to look at the individual lens for its specific properties. Some of these lenses have been around for quite a while and some are very recent additions.
So not all lenses that are M mount are Biogons. Not all Biogons have very low distortion. Just because something is M mount does not mean that it naturally has low distortion either. Not all ZM lenses have protruding elements. A lot of the M lenses in all of the lines from Zeiss, Leica, and voightlander have retro-focal layouts of one type or another. However I would say it’s very rare to have a Distagon/retrofocal lens that has less than 1.25% radial distortion typically 2%. Some Biogons (not all) are virtually distortion-less.

I’m not super confident about one of the ZM 35mm lenses NOT having protruding elements..

Will find out more…

Thank you for drawing my attention to this, (hopefully this does not result in me having to commission custom lenses (eek).

The other thing worth checking out is that Zeiss and others have very good photographic primes and other types of primes that can be used on the Canon mount I.e. the ZS line. Most of these lenses typically have about 2% distortion and higher for very wide angle but it should be possible to use some of these lenses for shorter focal lengths that might be required.

It is certainly the case if a recess i.e. 35mm diameter and 11-12mm deep is “cut” out from the EPIC/Scarlet-X then all of the above lenses could be used and of course their Leica equivalents too. Would be nice to get more out of the M mount concept on the EPIC/Scarlet-X.

I suspect there are some good things from Schneider too in terms of optical performance suitable for DSMC EPIC/Scarlet-X

Thanks Everybody!

Eric

Eric Lange · Nov 8, 2011

Josh Beadle said:
Dumb question: For FOV comparision, what sensor size is the Leica M considered?

See for full specs…

http://www.dpreview.com/products/leica/slrs/leica_m9p

35 x 24 mm (no crop factor) full frame 18MP

For the M8.2 sensor was/is 27mm x 18mm (10.3 MP)

http://www.dpreview.com/products/leica/slrs/leica_m8_2

So focal length multiplier 1.3x

The image circles on virtually all the M lenses from Leica, Zeiss or Voightlander cover the 35x24 mm frame very well indeed although there are some issues with certain types of sensors. Basically with wide angle biogons there is the possibility that the rays hitting the sensor could be more oblique and therefore cause trouble/color fringing on sensors that are 35mm wide. Leica has developed, so I hear shifted micro lenses to compensate for that. I would not anticipate this being a problem on a sensor that is let’s say between 27-30mm wide and is 15mm high for example on the Epic/Scarlet-X. Especially as we are right now physically prevented from using wider angle biogons anyway due to the front baffle and chamber surrounding the sensor on the EPIC/Scarlet anyway.

Ta.

Eric

Also worth noting Kodak seems to be in trouble (or shall I say even more trouble)...

Kodak's sensor division is being bought by an equity firm. Kodak supplies the sensors for the Leica S-2, and digital M's, as well as Hassy...

www.dpreview.com/news/1111/11110805kodaknews.asp

Any billionaires hanging around here looking for a new Christmas ornament to hang on the tree?

Kodak’s legacy in digital is monumental I hate to see it disappear also.

Nothing is certain.

Quoted from DPreview...

"Kodak has sold its Image Sensor Solutions business to Platinum Equity in a bid to strengthen its financial position. The company, which has struggled to manage the shift in the consumer photographic market from film to digital, also recently revealed that it may have to raise cash by the sale of more than 1100 patents to survive the coming year. Image Sensor Solutions provides sensors for the Leica M9 and S2 and a number of medium format backs, as well as a wide range of specialist imaging applications. "

I can't imagine picking through a "bin" of 1100 patents...

Dave Blackham · Nov 8, 2011

Eric, thank you for the info, very helpful.

I only know this road where ever it leads is a good place.

Zeb B · Nov 8, 2011

Thank you Eric and all for great info!

Eric Lange · Nov 8, 2011

Not at all it’s good for me to get a little bit more current with what’s out there as this directly affects me. So am happy to share anything I find on my travels that are usefull.

Hopefully time willing I can crunch through the other lines too, Leica, Voightlander, and then also try to weigh up the merits of basic cinematic primes versus photo based retro focal and non retro-focal lenses. As I say I think there may be some very sharp lenses from Schneider too.

So for example that VERY nice Leica 0.95 f 50 mm is over $10k (i.e. as much as the Scarlet-X base unit).

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/586190-REG/Leica_11_602_50mm_f_0_95_Noctilux_M_Aspherical.html

(reminds me more of an R lens perhaps).

http://us.leica-camera.com/photography/m_system/lenses/5915.html

But some of the other Leica lenses (that are slower) are very reasonably priced considering.

So I have a sales inquiry in with BandPro for their Leica C-primes of shorter focal length. For certain applications there would be advantages.

Ta.

Eric

Les Hillis · Nov 8, 2011

Ron Goodman · Nov 8, 2011

We have been studying the problems associated with shallow ray angles on the peripheries of the Epic sensor, cover glass and filter window for over a year now. Briefly the smaller sensor size mitigates fall-off and fringing as compared to the Leica M9 sensor and the problems seem to be generally less that anticipated. There is no easy way to evaluate performance of these lenses other to look at the image itself. We have conducted many tests just this way and have modified certain lenses to fit into the dreaded "cave" leading to the filter window. On the wide end to date, we have seen wonderful results from the rectilinear Voightlander 12mm F5.6 Heliar with center performance rivaling some Leica M Glass. We continue to examine lenses for potential modification and use on the Epic and we have identified several other very interesting candidates. We will keep the "community" posted.
As an interesting aside, a few years ago I designed a successful viewfinding system utilizing a very low light digital camera that looked at the image being focused on the surface of 35mm film as it was exposed in the gate of a camera. This necessitated an angled and perspective-changing optical path. We encountered major fall off problems of course, but surmised that this mainly came from the cover window plate on the sensor itself. This was then removed carefully and the fall-off disappeared completely....wouldn't recommend this procedure here though!!

Dave Blackham · Nov 8, 2011

I get the impression that most of the Voigtlander lenses (which I like very much by the looks of the specs and build though never handled one) are very much photography lenses ie may not lend them selves to mots for Cinematography work. Would any one have first hand knowledge of their suitability ?

I had forgotten how good some of the lenses from Vogtlander are, though not a M mount lens their 125mm Apo Lanthar macro is faultless to be as good if not better than the Leica 100mm Apo macro Lens which is easily the best 100mm macro available. I realise some or actually Cosina glass but this dosnt detract from them in any way.

Ron Goodman · Nov 8, 2011

The build quality is excellent and we see no problem in adding gear rings and lens drive motors and having a very compact and useable high quality system. We are adding extra index pins in the mount of this lens to add rotational rigidity and also insure exact optical centering. The will be know as the LM/ARL mounting and will also accept standard Leica M mount lenses. The image from the Voigtlander 12mm F5.6 Heliar is wonderfully rectinlinear and very impressive on the Epic and I have no doubt that all their glass will perform very well. Imagine an Epic, so equipped, fixed to the hood of an F1 or Indy Car looking back at the driver...then imagine 3 more set to other directions. These types of applications become very attractive with the form factor offered by the Leica M mount lenses on the Epic and Scarlet.

Pawel Achtel · Nov 8, 2011

Ron, just looked at your mount and the the Voigtlander 12mm F5.6 Heliar. They look exceptional. Good work. I will certainly consider them in due course.
Do you know of any good filtering options for the the Voigtlander 12mm F5.6 Heliar?

Ron Goodman · Nov 8, 2011

Pawel Achtel said:
Ron, just looked at your mount and the the Voigtlander 12mm F5.6 Heliar. They look exceptional. Good work. I will certainly consider them in due course.
Do you know of any good filtering options for the the Voigtlander 12mm F5.6 Heliar?

Thanks Pawel......It takes standard 67mm diameter screw-in filters.

Eric Lange · Nov 9, 2011

Les Hillis said:
Thanks for all the previous info.

In regards to the Leica M series lenses, here's a list of Leica M lenses from the Leica website - http://en.leica-camera.com/photography/m_system/lenses/

And here are all the same lenses listed (as out of stock) at B&H-

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?atclk=Mount+Type_Leica+M&ci=8423&N=4288584243+4293920262

Going by the pictures there, and assuming it's the extra length of the back element that's the problem, it looks to me like these lenses would fit the Epic/Scarlet -

50mm f/0.95 Noctilux-M http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/586190-REG/Leica_11_602_50mm_f_0_95_Noctilux_M_Aspherical.html

50mm f/1.4 Summilux M http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/332585-USA/Leica_11891_50mm_f_1_4_Summilux_M.html
50mm f/1.4 Summilux M - Silver http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/459618-USA/Leica_11892_Normal_50mm_f_1_4_Summilux.html

35mm f/2.5 Summarit-M http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/520349-REG/Leica_11_643_35mm_f_2_5_Summarit_M_Manual.html
50mm f/2.5 Summarit-M http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/520350-USA/Leica_11_644_50mm_f_2_5_Summarit_M_Manual.html
75mm f/2.5 Summarit-M http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/520351-USA/Leica_11_645_75mm_f_2_5_Summarit_M_Manual.html
90mm f/2.5 Summarit-M http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/520352-USA/Leica_11_646_90mm_f_2_5_Summarit_M_Manual.html

50mm f/2.0 Summicron M http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/86059-USA/Leica_11826_50mm_f_2_0_Summicron_M.html
75mm f/2.0 APO Summicron M http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/378040-USA/Leica_11637_75mm_f_2_0_APO_Summicron.html
90mm f/2.0 APO Summicron M http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/162726-USA/Leica_11884_90mm_f_2_0_APO_Summicron.html

135mm f/3.4 APO Telyt M http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/162727-USA/Leica_11889_Telephoto_135mm_f_3_4_APO.html

But these wouldn't fit -

21mm f/1.4 Summilux-M http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/586191-USA/Leica_11_647_21mm_f_1_4_Summilux_M_Aspherical.html
24mm f/1.4 Summilux-M http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/586206-USA/Leica_11_601_24mm_f_1_4_Summilux_M_Aspherical.html
35mm f/1.4 Summilux-M http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/720355-USA/Leica_11663_35mm_f_1_4_Summilux_M_Aspherical.html

35mm f/2.0 Summicron M http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/134723-USA/Leica_11879_35mm_f_2_0_Summicron_M.html
35mm f/2.0 Summicron M Chrome http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/134722-USA/Leica_11882_35mm_f_2_0_Summicron_M.html
28mm f/2.0 Summicron-M http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/214061-USA/Leica_11604_Summicron_M_28mm_f_2_0_Lens.html

28mm f/2.8 Elmarit-M http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/461972-USA/Leica_11606_28mm_f_2_8_Elmarit_M.html

18mm f/3.8 Super-Elmar-M http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produ...1649_18mm_f_3_8_Super_Elmar_M_Aspherical.html
21mm f/3.4 Super-Elmar-M ASPH http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/798854-REG/Leica_11145_Super_Elmar_M_1_3_4_21mm_ASPH.html
24mm f/3.8 Elmar M http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/586192-REG/Leica_11648_Wide_Angle_24mm_f_3_8.html

16-18-21mm f/4 Tri-Elmar-M http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/461971-USA/Leica_11642_Tri_Elmar_M_16_18_21mm_f_4_Asph.html

As Jarred stated earlier, it's mostly the wider lenses that don't fit. Unfortunately that includes a lot of the higher quality lenses too.

Something to think about perhaps.

Yes exactly!

Thanks for putting that togther that really helps

Cheers,

Eric

Ron Goodman · Nov 9, 2011

Good List! The Tri Elmar 28-35-50mm will also fit and can be a very useful lens. The problem with the high performance short Summiluxes and Elmars really mean that alternatives must be found and prepared for use....this is our quest.

Eric Lange · Nov 9, 2011

Ron Goodman said:
We have been studying the problems associated with shallow ray angles on the peripheries of the Epic sensor, cover glass and filter window for over a year now. Briefly the smaller sensor size mitigates fall-off and fringing as compared to the Leica M9 sensor and the problems seem to be generally less that anticipated. There is no easy way to evaluate performance of these lenses other to look at the image itself.

insert:

Yes exactly you have to see what one is willing to put up with or may be for most applications not visible at all or is in fact perfectly fine.

We have conducted many tests just this way and have modified certain lenses to fit into the dreaded "cave" leading to the filter window. On the wide end to date, we have seen wonderful results from the rectilinear Voightlander 12mm F5.6 Heliar with center performance rivaling some Leica M Glass. We continue to examine lenses for potential modification and use on the Epic and we have identified several other very interesting candidates. We will keep the "community" posted.

Insert: That would be fantastic, will make formal contact etc.

As an interesting aside, a few years ago I designed a successful viewfinding system utilizing a very low light digital camera that looked at the image being focused on the surface of 35mm film as it was exposed in the gate of a camera. This necessitated an angled and perspective-changing optical path. We encountered major fall off problems of course, but surmised that this mainly came from the cover window plate on the sensor itself. This was then removed carefully and the fall-off disappeared completely....wouldn't recommend this procedure here though!!

So I’m guessing you guys can take apart let's say a very low distortion Zeiss 35 mm biogon with some protruding elements, take the glass out, and machine down the metal components so that it can fit into that rectangular “socket”/ dreaded cave of the EPIC/Scarlet-X? (without too much interference)...?

What you say about the reflection of the cover glass and IR filter is very apt. I know for example on some large format Aerial surveying cameras that some folks remove the IR filter and instead put an IR filer on the FRONT of the lens. This makes photogrammetric calibration much more reliable and accurate. I think some people find having a dark green filter on the front of the lens rather disconcerting.
Thanks for the Heads up about the Voightlander lenses. Normally I would have written them of as sort of old world uncoated lenses from yesteryear. I guess I am completely wrong and need to give them serious consideration.

So what’s behind that front bulk head..?? I imagine there is a smidge of room for a slightly larger sensor in the future?

Do you think there is any realistic chance of having that square flange or bulk head modified (with a recess) in any way or is it much more sensible to machine the lenses down do you think?

Thank you so much for sharing your technical expertise and experiences. Unfortunately I have to go right now will check in later and no doubt contact you (formally) in good time.

Cheers,

Eric

Eric Lange · Nov 9, 2011

I think the optical relay idea might be an interesting way to unlock the potential of shorter focal length M type lenses. For example Biogons typically have substantially fewer elements as compared to cinematic primes, so some sort of lens relay might work…using a pair of achromatic doublets? I.e. you fit to the camera a special optical adapter/extension tube that will allow you to use wider angle M glass? Such an adapter could potentially re-project the rays from a new exit pupil and new effective rear nodal point so the rays in essence have a longer throw and hence less oblique rays hitting the sensor. But now that has me scratching my head thinking that maybe this is a re-invented mish-mash of the basic retro focal idea with various lens elements out of correct order? Worth consulting the experts on this one.

Maybe there is an old dusty lens “relay” sitting on some one’s shelf from yester year to already accomplish this?

E

...

This seems to be (conceptually) sort of the idea…

Might also find out what RED (Pro) Primes can do for one...(now there's a concept)...

http://www.letusdirect.com/half-inch-ff-relay.html

Ron Goodman · Nov 9, 2011

Eric...very astute observations..thank you. The relay optic idea though defeats the beauty of these lenses and is a step back to giant retrofocus lenses that predominate the industry. Less glass, nodal point at the same distance from the focal plane as the focal length ...simple perfection and Leica viewfinder camera lenses are testament to this approach. Less is more.

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

DSMC Leica M Mount

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

REDuser Sponsor

Well-known member

REDuser Sponsor

Banned

REDuser Sponsor

Well-known member

REDuser Sponsor

Well-known member

Well-known member

Attachments

REDuser Sponsor