Leica-M mount lenses on EPIC

[Jiri Vrozina]

Jacek, you always like to rain on the Leica parade. Next you'll be telling us it's stupid to fantasize about S lenses on Epic, because they are not designed or suited for that format/sensor

In terms of the 21mm, you work with lenses on a professional level, so I'd tend to believe your analysis. I think I was going off some DP Review and Diglloyd reviews I read last year.

But now that I'm looking at the charts, I see what you mean. However, seems that some level of distortion at 21mm/f1.4 is inevitable ... you're saying that it's worse than other
fast lenses at this focal length?

I believe you, and stand corrected if that's the case, just curious ....

Well good luck with that Adapter Anthony anyway....
Since You already own set of Leica still lenses I understand.
But personally i would spend money on affordable PL primes or Nikon G/new Zeiss ZF glass.

 

[Jiri Vrozina]

Jiri,

don't fool yourself with all that crap and false statements about the lenses in general, need education promptly, take any summer school where you can get it...

Listen Sanjin,
I have been Cameraman for 27 years, Your "summer school" is better left for People who are as unskilled in Cinematography as You are...

 

[Jacek Zakowicz]

Jacek, you always like to rain on the Leica parade. Next you'll be telling us it's stupid to fantasize about S lenses on Epic, because they are not designed or suited for that format/sensor

In terms of the 21mm, you work with lenses on a professional level, so I'd tend to believe your analysis. I think I was going off some DP Review and Diglloyd reviews I read last year.

But now that I'm looking at the charts, I see what you mean. However, seems that some level of distortion at 21mm/f1.4 is inevitable ... you're saying that it's worse than other
fast lenses at this focal length?

I believe you, and stand corrected if that's the case, just curious ....

If you read ken rockwells review (on the Nikkor 24mm f1.4) and get to the bottom when he compares the Nikkor to the Leica it is very clear which lens is better performance wise. I can't quote him here (without his permission) but even the first sentence in the Introduction section is self-explanatory.....
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/24mm-f14.htm

 

[Jiri Vrozina]

Jacek,
if they bothered to read, I send them the same link a day ago...

 

[charles lim yi yong]

We can shout Master Prime all day, but seriously those are not lenses which you use for personal use. I will just rent them when the budget permits.
However, when weight becomes an issue, pound for pound nothing can quite match the 50 and 35 leica M summilux /f1.4 ASPH glass It's definately punching way over above it's weight class, like a Manny Pacquiao.
It's lean and mean. like a RED EPIC - Roar.

Now I just hope (and praying!) that Space CAM sorts out their thing with RED before my mount arrives.


About the leica S - I am very curious!

 

[AnthonyFlores]

Yes Yiri, and also Jacek - but you guys are also putting a lot of emphasis on the wide end. Yes, it's important but let's not ignore the great Leica M and R performers from 35mm and up

 

[Jacek Zakowicz]

Unfortunately the 35mm f1.4 M lens won't work on Epic either....
But the 50 will so you can start there.....:thumbup1:
But there again- there are a lot of great 50mm fast lenses out there....

 

[Erich Ocean]

I thought focuss falloff was a function of focal length and aperture and not dependent on the lens make, no?

Since no one answered, I thought I'd chime in. Focus falloff is lens-dependent, and differs between brands. That's one reason why all of these conversations about these cheap SLR lenses and how "sharp" they are completely miss the point. Their out of focus regions look **terrible**, and the transition between focus and out of focus is truly nasty. Not a problem for stills, but in motion, it is.

Cinema glass cares just as much about the focus rolloff as being in focus. SLR lenses don't even consider it (and rightly so).

(Note: when people talk about the "Cooke look", they're implicitly referring to the focus rollof. Any idiot can make a sharp lens.)

 

[Jacek Zakowicz]

Since no one answered, I thought I'd chime in. Focus falloff is lens-dependent, and differs between brands. That's one reason why all of these conversations about these cheap SLR lenses and how "sharp" they are completely miss the point. Their out of focus regions look **terrible**, and the transition between focus and out of focus is truly nasty. Not a problem for stills, but in motion, it is.

Cinema glass cares just as much about the focus rolloff as being in focus. SLR lenses don't even consider it (and rightly so).

(Note: when people talk about the "Cooke look", they're implicitly referring to the focus rollof. Any idiot can make a sharp lens.)

With all due respect Erich I've never heard about that other than reading in marketing brochures and I had worked for a lens manufacturer for 8 years....
And I'd love to be that idiot that makes sharp lenses:emote_couch:

 

[Erich Ocean]

With all due respect Erich I've never heard about that other than reading in marketing brochures and I had worked for a lens manufacturer for 8 years....
And I'd love to be that idiot that makes sharp lenses:emote_couch:

No need to take my word for it! It's easy to prove this for yourself with an off-the-shelf software ray tracer.

Here's how: take two different lens designs of the same focal length and aperture. Fire the exact same rays at the frontmost lens element of each, then note where the rays land on the 'sensor' and what their size is (circle of confusion). Rays originating from the plane of focus will land, more or less, at the same spots for each lens, as expected. This is because both lens designs are trying to put the plane of focus, well, in focus.

But rays from the out of focus regions will not land at the same place, or with the same sizes. How they differ as the origin of the rays move away from the plane of focus is one aspect of what makes one lens design look different from another.

UPDATE: Another, even easier thought experiment is to observe that bokeh varies from lens design to lens design. Some of this is a result of the shape of the aperture, but even among lenses with identically shaped apertures, the bokeh differs. Why? If, as you seem to be saying, lens are identical when they are out-of-focus, this is a curious thing indeed!

We tend to think of the 'bokeh' as just the extremely out-of-focus parts of the image, but the truth is that lens designs begin to differ almost immediately as they slip out of focus. In fact, logically, this has to be the case! Otherwise, where would you draw the line where two lens designs differ in the bokeh? 5 feet out of focus? 10 feet? 50 feet? Just the "really blurry stuff"? Nope. The differences start immediately.

Hope this helps!

 

[charles lim yi yong]

I am going to refuse to say anything more about leica lens (how I like the m), I am not here to convince anybody about what I use and how I use it. I think the main focus here to have the option of using leica m on RED epic. mainly the 50mm that's all to it.

 

[Jiri Vrozina]

Yes Yiri, and also Jacek - but you guys are also putting a lot of emphasis on the wide end. Yes, it's important but let's not ignore the great Leica M and R performers from 35mm and up

Anthony,
how about NIKON Long Lenses-after all ,size matters :seeya:

 

[Ketch Rossi]

Anthony, remember it is RED we are talking about it here, so you never really know what is awaiting at the end of that tunnel...


Bob, great Shots!!

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

Guys,

discussion here get in a wrong way and I'm afraid that this tread is gonna be closed soon if this continues.

Hopefully we are not here in a kind of "Eltern Kindergarten" and by the title of the tread should discuss a topic

about certain technical possibility (strictly limited focal lens range with carefully mount usage) to get several Leica-M lenses on EPIC.

If somebody would like to discuss about Nikon glass on EPIC then should open its own tread.

Also we are simultaneously discussing about opportunity to swap a several super lightweight Leica M lenses

that also are made by Zeiss (ZM) and Cosina Voigtlander M and not only about expensive Leica lenses.

BTW, mentioned Nikon G 24mm f/1.4 is by Ken Rockwell:

"This Nikon 24mm f/1.4 is a big and heavy lens. As you can compare at Nikon wide zooms, at 618g

and taking 77mm-filters, this 24mm is as big and as heavy as a professional wide zoom."

That means it is not belong to the category of lightweight super-fast lenses like a Leica M 24mm f/1.4 (weight 500g).

About Leica m 24mm f/1.4 and Leica M 21mm f/1.4 read more here in the article by Erwin Puts, a Dutch photographer>>>

Also you can compare MTF between Leica M, Nikon G and Canon EF lenses wide open @ f/1.4 at the picture below:

 

[Ron Goodman]

SpaceCam Leica M Mount Status

SpaceCam Leica M Mount Status

Thanks for all the interest. We knew we were on to something with this concept. The production version of the mount is being submitted to Red for approval and we hope to receive word on this very shortly. In the meantime we have tested a number of lenses on the Epic and the imagery is staggering! One must understand the whole concept of uncompromised optical design as opposed to "retrofocusing" lenses developed to clear flip-up or rotating mirrors to appreciate the advantage that these lenses enjoy. Yes, the number of lenses are limited at this stage because of clearance issues behind the mount. We hope this also may be addressed in the future. At this time the following lenses can be mounted.
35mm Summarit F2.5, 50mm Noctolux F.95, the Tri Elmar 16-18-21 used at 20 and 21mm and all lenses whose rear element does not extend past the rear-most bayonet tangs. The other attraction of the Leica M front is that this will be the shortest back flange distance possible and there are adapters Leica M to just about any interesting full frame 35mm still lens out there, so in effect all these lenses can be Leica M mount lenses.

 

[Ron Goodman]

Slight problem...we never said Red had approved this mount. We are submitting it to Red for approval.

 

[CJ Roy]

With knowing the good people at SpaceCam for several years now, I'm sure that the mount was just a misunderstanding of Red's approval procedure and there was no malicious intent behind it.

The good thing is, is that there's a market and possibility for such a mount on the Epic, unlike other cameras.

 

[Marc Fisher]

After shooting Leica M and R for some 30 years - moving from MF film to Hasselblad H3D II 39 for stills ( the one you almost bought Ketch!) I now have an S2-P with the 70 S lens.

The lenses are very good...especially for the format.

Here is a capture that I recently posted in the Off Track listings:

An Epic S Leica mount would be fabulous. It is one of the few cameras that would make use of the S lens quality. Count me in if it occurs.

Bob

+1
I am lucky to own both M and S Glass - although was considering selling my S2 system. Will keep the S lenses (70mm & 35mm) at least for now just in case this mount appears...
There is something magical about the way the S70mm draws. Sadly the menu system/controls of the S2 don't work for me - but the glass is second to none. I haven't seen the Summilux-Cs in action yet though, but I own and use daily fast Leica, Nikon & Canon glass and in terms of how they render - I place them in this order with Leica way ahead. On a price/performance basis Nikon wins for me. BTW - the Nikon 200mm f2G is also exceptional - and probably the closest in my eye to Leica.
The 0.95 Nocti on an Epic would be phenomenal in theory - but wide open its a bugger to focus without a splitscreen, even with the smaller sensor of the Epic (vs M9) it would be challenging, although hopefully do-able. It rarely sits on my M9 due to the weight, but when it does it creates magic....

 

[Ron Goodman]

The Noctolux 50mm F.95 is fairly easy to focus for static subjects. The challenge will occur with close and randomly moving targets. The best setup for the M Series lenses would be to employ lens drives and scale the controls to obtain fine adjustments. The Noctolux is amazingly sharp wide open and across the entire Epic sensor. The challenge was to find an urban setting that was dark enough to obtain proper exposure at 800 ASA and 1/48th second. We finally found it in the shadows of a dimly lit parking lot.

Ron
SpaceCam Systems

 

[AnthonyFlores]

The Noctolux 50mm F.95 is fairly easy to focus for static subjects. The challenge will occur with close and randomly moving targets. The best setup for the M Series lenses would be to employ lens drives and scale the controls to obtain fine adjustments. The Noctolux is amazingly sharp wide open and across the entire Epic sensor. The challenge was to find an urban setting that was dark enough to obtain proper exposure at 800 ASA and 1/48th second. We finally found it in the shadows of a dimly lit parking lot.

Ron
SpaceCam Systems

Nice Ron. Can you share any of the images?