Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Dragon + Leica M lenses - Whats your favorite leica m lens with Dragon??

Any of you M + EPIC combo guys care to share some images, very curious about the IQ myself and how the EPIC, or better yet the DRAGON looks/feels with modern M glass...is it sharp, too sharp, smooth, does the leica look translate. I am sure its all good but before making a plunge I should do myself a service and make a test. Got some shots Phil?
 
Agreed. Please post back.
Very curious to get more discussion about these.
 
Chad Lancaster said:
Who shoots with M lenses on their dragon a lot? I'd love to pick your brain for a minute
Click to expand...

Give me a couple of weeks, and I will be doing some testing... Starting with the 35mm Summilux FLE, and the 50mm Summilux ASPH - after that, time to acquire a 24mm Summilux.

I have shot with the 35 Lux ASPH FLE, and the 50 Lux ASPH extensively on the M240, and these are far and away the best lenses that I have ever laid my hands on. The 35 Lux FLE does exhibit some nasty CA (purple fringing) in certain situations when shooting high contrast/back lit subjects, but other than that, this is my favorite lens. I have used the 50 Lux ASPH with the Mysterium X sensor with excellent results (some of the best OOF rendering in a lens IMO, and super sharp, yet still smooth). Both of these lenses create an almost unbelievable three dimensional quality.

Exciting times - this is what I have always wanted in a camera/lens combo, and it will be nice being able to share lenses between my Dragon, and M240. I think that I have figured out a follow focus solution for the tiny M lenses as well...
 
For stills, the very basics are that the M240 is going to give you more pixels and the Dragon more dynamic range. Frankly, I would ditch the M240 and put the M Lenses on a Sony a7r. That's what I did. The M Lenses that are compatible look excellent on the Dragon though. Doing focus pulls for film on them is another matter.

Are you taking the issue of flash sync for stills into consideration?
 
Phil Holland said:
What I can say is at the moment the Leica Summilux-M 21mm f/1.4 didn't play nice due to the unique and extreme light angles it pushed out. It's a lens not exactly design for this system.
Click to expand...

In my own experimenting as well as reports I've seen from others this is the case with numerous M-mount lenses, even very moderate-aperture ones, from Zeiss, Leica, and Voigtlander, at focal lengths as long as 35 (and occasionally longer) on the A7r (which I personally sold pretty quickly due to major shutter vibration issues) and to a lesser extent the A7 I still use. Supposedly this is largely due to the optical thickness of the filter stack (obviously these lenses were designed for no filter stack). The problem apparently even exists on the M240 even though it has a very thin filter stack (though Leica includes ACR-like correction profiles which hide this and in the process bake manipulations into raw files, something I dislike).

It'd be interesting to know the thickness of Dragon's, especially if Red is still considering a FF35 sensor that would push further into the corners and make these issues more apparent.
 
Timothy Jones said:
Steven, how does the Dragon compare with the M240 for shooting stills?
Besides being a lot bigger is it as good or better image quality in your opinion?
Thanks,
Tim
http://tjphoto.tumblr.com
Click to expand...


My Scarlet is currently being upgraded to Epic Dragon, so I won't know for probably a week, or two, but I will report back as soon as Dragon is in my hands.


Augusto Giachino said:
For stills, the very basics are that the M240 is going to give you more pixels and the Dragon more dynamic range. Frankly, I would ditch the M240 and put the M Lenses on a Sony a7r. That's what I did. The M Lenses that are compatible look excellent on the Dragon though. Doing focus pulls for film on them is another matter.

Are you taking the issue of flash sync for stills into consideration?
Click to expand...


Augusto - When I was first contemplating the M240, I looked into the A7r, but the corner color shading on wider lenses makes it a no go for me, not to mention I love shooting with a rangefinder, and of course the build quality on the M240 is in a league of it's own. It would be extremely difficult for me to go from the M240 to a Sony after using the M for a year now. For me personally, the only benefit that I would see from the A7r is the low light ability, but the M240 is no slouch there, and is plenty for my needs atm.

I am not really planning on making the Dragon a replacement for stills, other than in a studio situation possibly, though it will be nice to be able to pull printable frames from a motion stream. I have even enlarged, printed, and exhibited, stills from my Scarlet with excellent results, and I know the Dragon sensor will be on another level.

As far as pulling focus is concerned - I cobbled together a solution with the 50 Lux ASPH on my Scarlet (which is a fairly tiny lens), and am working on a more elegant solution right now. I am also one of those people that pulls for myself %99.9 of the time, and easily did that with the 50 Lux - with, and without a FF. Of course, the tiny M lenses will be too much to deal with for some, and some will not consider it a "professional" solution for "film," but that is not me. These will be the only lenses in my kit for quite a while, save for the 100mm APO R. I was using the Leica R 28-90, and 21-35 - I sold those in order to reach for the Epic Dragon upgrade. I will definitely miss the 28-90, but it increased nearly $3000 in price over the 3 years that I had it, and became a commodity in the end that allowed me to jump to Epic D. As awesome as the 28-90 was for me, the M lenses excite me even more, even if there are some issues to deal with as far as size.
 
Well - got my Dragon today, and I am a little heartbroken - the Leica M 35mm Summilux ASPH FLE will not focus to infinity, it is hitting something, and I don't want to force it. I am not sure if this is a new occurrence with the interchangeable OLPF (because I see Phil's image on the first page is this very lens). This really puts me in a bind since I sold my R lenses to upgrade to Epic Dragon, and planned on using my M lenses on it - I was especially excited about the 35 Lux. Strangely, my 24mm Elmar works without a hitch. Disappointed for sure - not RED's fault, I took a gamble...

Phil - were you able to focus to infinity with the 35mm Lux FLE when you tested it?
 
Last edited:
Steven Dean said:
Well - got my Dragon today, and I am a little heartbroken - the Leica M 35mm Summilux ASPH FLE will not focus to infinity, it is hitting something, and I don't want to force it. I am not sure if this is a new occurrence with the interchangeable OLPF (because I see Phil's image on the first page is this very lens). This really puts me in a bind since I sold my R lenses to upgrade to Epic Dragon, and planned on using my M lenses on it - I was especially excited about the 35 Lux. Strangely, my 24mm Elmar works without a hitch. Disappointed for sure - not RED's fault, I took a gamble...

Phil - were you able to focus to infinity with the 35mm Lux FLE when you tested it?
Click to expand...


ho dear
 
Steven Dean said:
Well - got my Dragon today, and I am a little heartbroken - the Leica M 35mm Summilux ASPH FLE will not focus to infinity, it is hitting something, and I don't want to force it. I am not sure if this is a new occurrence with the interchangeable OLPF (because I see Phil's image on the first page is this very lens). This really puts me in a bind since I sold my R lenses to upgrade to Epic Dragon, and planned on using my M lenses on it - I was especially excited about the 35 Lux. Strangely, my 24mm Elmar works without a hitch. Disappointed for sure - not RED's fault, I took a gamble...

Phil - were you able to focus to infinity with the 35mm Lux FLE when you tested it?
Click to expand...

There are many variations of the 35mm Summilux-M that have different protrusion sadly, meaning it's the wild west out there. I tested a very, very new one some time ago. FYI, I purchased a Voigtlander 35mm f/1.2 and had the rear fins removed so it mounted "easier" into the port.
 
Phil Holland said:
There are many variations of the 35mm Summilux-M that have different protrusion sadly, meaning it's the wild west out there. I tested a very, very new one some time ago.
Click to expand...

Hmmm, well that 35mm that you have pictured on the first page on the right is the very lens that I own, and is the "very, very new one." It is many times referred to as the 35mm Summilux FLE (floating element). Wondering - did you shoot with it, or just mount to see if it would fit? For me, it fits at close focus, and will go through most of it's focus range, but falls short of reaching infinity.
 
Steven Dean said:
Hmmm, well that 35mm that you have pictured on the first page on the right is the very lens that I own, and is the "very, very new one." It is many times referred to as the 35mm Summilux FLE (floating element). Wondering - did you shoot with it, or just mount to see if it would fit? For me, it fits at close focus, and will go through most of it's focus range, but falls short of reaching infinity.
Click to expand...

I focused each lens from CF to INF. The small plastic frame that surround the OLPF (port bushing) is likely touching it near infinity. Some lenses can bump into that. The 35mm I tested did not. However, some scrapped by and you can feel it hitting. Some lenses can be modified. Some are just way out of bounds anyways for design or optical reasons.
 
Phil Holland said:
I focused each lens from CF to INF. The small plastic frame that surround the OLPF (port bushing) is likely touching it near infinity. Some lenses can bump into that. The 35mm I tested did not. However, some scrapped by and you can feel it hitting. Some lenses can be modified. Some are just way out of bounds anyways for design or optical reasons.
Click to expand...




Yeah, it is hitting the rectangular area that has the two bolts securing the OLPF to the housing (it clears the circular area) - not sure why your copy worked, and mine doesn't, but you might want to change your information on that first page there - the lens that the OP was referring to and that you stated worked, in fact does not fully work.

I made some pretty heavy monetary decisions on that very lens pictured working (35mm Summilux FLE), which is my own fault in the end for taking the gamble, but I can confirm that the current 35mm Summilux does not focus to infinity, and maybe some others can be saved from making the same mistake - that lens costs $5150. I use it on my M240 as well so acquiring it was not for naught, but I would have definitely made some different decisions if your post didn't exist.

As far as I can tell, there is an approximate 1 millimeter difference between the protrusion length of the current 35mm Summilux, and my 24mm Elmar (which works).
 
Last edited:
Steven Dean said:
Yeah, it is hitting the rectangular area that has the two bolts securing the OLPF to the housing (it clears the circular area) - not sure why your copy worked, and mine doesn't, but you might want to change your information on that first page there - the lens that the OP was referring to and that you stated worked, in fact does not fully work.

I made some pretty heavy monetary decisions on that very lens pictured working (35mm Summilux FLE), which is my own fault in the end for taking the gamble, but I can confirm that the current 35mm Summilux does not focus to infinity, and maybe some others can be saved from making the same mistake - that lens costs $5150. I use it on my M240 as well so acquiring it was not for naught, but I would have definitely made some different decisions if your post didn't exist.

As far as I can tell, there is an approximate 1 millimeter difference between the protrusion length of the current 35mm Summilux, and my 24mm Elmar (which works).
Click to expand...

Heya Steven, bummer about the 35mm Summilux not fitting.

I could be wrong, but I think that problematic rectangular part of the OLPF is the flare guard that was changed a little bit with the introduction of the interchangeable OLPF's ( changed to counter the flare shadow problem that had arisen). Which is to say, the newer OLPF's aren't exactly the same thing Phil tested the M-mount lenses with back in May.

Also, if you have a closer look at that rectangular part of the current interchangeable OLPF you'll notice it's actually just a thin sheet of plastic, with a wider open area behind it that drops down to the more solid part of the unit that the glass OLPF filter is actually connected to. Which means, it can be cut away...

Just saying.

It's a five thousand dollar lens that could take priceless pictures, versus a two hundred dollar replaceable bit of plastic. If forcing it didn't work, I'd start cutting. But that's just me. :smiley:
 
Les Hillis said:
Heya Steven, bummer about the 35mm Summilux not fitting.

I could be wrong, but I think that problematic rectangular part of the OLPF is the flare guard that was changed a little bit with the introduction of the interchangeable OLPF's ( changed to counter the flare shadow problem that had arisen). Which is to say, the newer OLPF's aren't exactly the same thing Phil tested the M-mount lenses with back in May.

Also, if you have a closer look at that rectangular part of the current interchangeable OLPF you'll notice it's actually just a thin sheet of plastic, with a wider open area behind it that drops down to the more solid part of the unit that the glass OLPF filter is actually connected to. Which means, it can be cut away...

Just saying.

It's a five thousand dollar lens that could take priceless pictures, versus a two hundred dollar replaceable bit of plastic. If forcing it didn't work, I'd start cutting. But that's just me. :smiley:
Click to expand...


Les - that is exactly my plan, just need to figure out the best way to do it... I figure I need about 1mm, or so, 2 mm tops. I am borrowing a Dremel from a friend, and may use that, not sure yet (obviously need to try to control debris), but I am going to give it a go this weekend - it is absolutely worth it to get that lens to work at infinity. I threw her on briefly today, and she is gorgeous.

If anyone has any suggestions on how to best remove a millimeter, or two, from plastic, I am all ears.
 
Others would know more about it than me, but I'd recommend against using any kind of grinder, like a Dremel for example, figuring it'd be easier to deal with flakes of plastic rather than dust. I think a scalpel or similar really sharp pointed blade would be better. Easier to control and go slow, only removing as much of the plastic as you have to.

You'd have to look closer at it yourself to be sure, but I don't think there's enough thickness in those upper and lower obstructing horizontal parts of the OLPF holder to actually grind away a millimeter off their front surface. That would be another reason to go straight to cutting them away instead.

Obviously, removing the whole interchangeable OLPF unit from the camera and covering up the actual glass of the OLPF would probably be good idea.

Also, depending on your lenses specific shape and size (eg. if it's rounded off at the edges), it's possibly the full diameter of the rear lens element, or more precisely the metal around it, that needs to be accommodated. Which could mean removing several millimeters of the plastic down and up in a semi-circle towards those two screws in the horizontal center of the OLPF holder. There might not even be enough room for that before you hit the screw heads themselves, so you definitely need to make some precise measurements before you decide to proceed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top