Leica M on Dragon in 2016

[paulcurtis]

I've read as many threads about this as possible but haven't quite found the definitive answer yet.

With DSMC 2 and the dragon sensor (specifically the ScarletW) what are the restrictions with the Leica M mount. I understand these are physical restrictions. I see in past threads that some lugs have been cut off on a voightlander 35mm to fit but i don't know if that's still the case?

I have a large range of voightlander glass that I would love to use on a ScarletW.

Is there a definitive distance from the mount to the sensor glass? Or is there an issue of some lenses not fitting because of other reasons?

I'd appreciate any pointers or heads up here...

many thanks
Paul

 

[David Battistella]

Check out the Leica M mount on the red.com website. It lists the M Lenses you can use. Because M lenses are rear focusing some wider ones can not be used because they come in contact with the mount.

David

 

[paulcurtis]

Check out the Leica M mount on the red.com website. It lists the M Lenses you can use. Because M lenses are rear focusing some wider ones can not be used because they come in contact with the mount.

David

Thanks David, i did look for that but there is no listing there. Perhaps i have the wrong page (i'm looking at the mount details in the shop).

Also i have a bunch of voightlanders rather than Leica own brand, hence wondering if there's some information a about the physical restriction, then i can measure and work out for myself what may or may not work?

thanks
Paul

 

[David Battistella]

From this page.

http://www.red.com/store/products/dsmc-al-leica-m-mount

THis statement.

TECH SPECS

Due to mechanical limitations, M series lenses with rear elements that project beyond the rearmost face of the lens’ bayonet lugs are not compatible with this lens mount. Attempting to mount a lens with projecting rear elements could result in damage to the lens, mount, or brain.

 

[Josh Wilkinson]

From the threads I've read *most* 35mm+ should work. Some in the 28mm range work, wider than that is pretty much SoL.

Most of the pictures online are inaccurate, just be sure to test and return if necessary.

I can confirm the the Voigtlander 40mm works great, that's the widest I own atm.

 

[Alberto Guglielmi]

If you are in LA, I have a Leica M mount you can borrow to try. Just PM me. Basically if the lens internal element protrudes past the mount, then it might touch the sensor.

 

[Mike P.]

I think RED missed an opportunity with the DSMC2 redesign; should've recessed the interchangeable mount a few mm deeper (so it could accommodate e-mount or m43 mount), and then just used a pass-through shim to make it backwards compatible with the DSMC1 mounts.... There's nothing in there but a gap, and it would've increased lens compatibility across the board (could've gotten rid of gate shadow and highlight streaking too).


...Plus, speedboosters are awesome.

 

[Naim Sutherland]

I think RED missed an opportunity with the DSMC2 redesign; should've recessed the interchangeable mount a few mm deeper (so it could accommodate e-mount or m43 mount), and then just used a pass-through shim to make it backwards compatible with the DSMC1 mounts.... There's nothing in there but a gap, and it would've increased lens compatibility across the board (could've gotten rid of gate shadow and highlight streaking too). Plus, speedboosters are awesome.

Big time.

 

[paulcurtis]

Thanks to everyone for the input.

Yes i think Red missed an opportunity here, the M glass is wonderful, especially the wide stuff and also for one man bad shooting and small spaces the lenses are good to focus with as well, it's a very intimate connection with your subject. I ask simply because i use a lot of the glass already on Sony A7sII and even shooting 4K RAW off a FS700 with M glass. I'm at home doing that.

I thought a lot of PL glass also protruded way back from the mount, is that not the case?

Also it's possible to use Contax lenses, with a CY to M mount and then use a helicoid M to E mount to be able to get super close focus on a wide range of SLR lenses. There's a lot of fun to be had messing with all of this creatively. I don't know whether there are any third party mounts?

But at the end of the day, the 21mm f2.8, the 15mm f.45, the 12mm f5.6 which are all awesome lenses look like they won't fit because the rear elements do go beyond the mounting lugs of M Mount. That's a shame. I'd need to focus on perhaps the contax 18mm and 15mm as wide options.

It's weird, i shoot a lot on APS-C with 12mm, gives an awesome fov (about 18mm full frame). I have a SW on order, i think that will take it's merry time, so there's no rush. Until of course i can afford the Weapon.

cheers
Paul

 

[Steven Dean]

Posted this elsewhere, but will repost here, it pertains to my testing on Epic Dragon, which of course varies physically from Weapon, but for me, it was not the problem of clearing the OLPF, but the image issues... I would be curious to see if the results were different on the Weapon vs the Epic Dragon. Note that I personally deem many of these lenses "unusable," but if you are heading towards the lower resolutions, you may be happy with them. This is only a sampling of 4 lenses in the vast M mount stable, and there may very well be some gems out there - I wish I could test a larger cross section. There also may even be sample variation between lenses as well, that could have an effect on performance, but I doubt there is much of a difference between samples in the higher end Leica range.

I have had poor results in the way of purple/magenta, as well as focus smearing in corners on the Epic Dragon with the following lenses:


28mm Summilux ASPH - 4k WS was useable for me, nothing over that because of purple/magenta, as well as focus smearing in the corners. I really felt like this lens felt softer across a larger portion of the image, excluding the center, even stopped down. Cleared the OLPF.

35mm Summilux ASPH FLE - 4k WS was useable for me, nothing over that because of purple/magenta, as well as focus smearing in the corners. Cleared the OLPF, with a modification to the plastic bezel that holds the OLPF glass in.

50mm Summilux ASPH - 5K WS was acceptable for me nothing over that because of purple/magents, as well as focus smearing in the corners. This lens was not as bad as the 28, and 35mm Summilux, but the less than stellar results were more surprising, since generally, over 50mm was considered "safe." On the Scarlet MX, the 50mm Summilux ASPH was stellar - I don't know if this was because of the 4k crop, or dealing with the mechanics of that camera, I suspect the crop. Cleared the OLPF.

75mm APO - Had no notable problems with this lens. Cleared the OLPF.

If shooting 4k WS content, some of these lenses could be used, but I would definitely want to do more testing. To me, no 6k, pretty much means that I am not going to use them, but that is just me.

I have held onto my M mount, just in case... I would love to hear that the Weapon cures some of these ailments, but I doubt it - these are a result of the close flange distance, and the fact that Leica utilizes micro lenses on the M240 sensor to deal with this, as well as software correction - I suspect. I really, really wish that the 28 Lux would work, this is the "best" lens that I have ever owned, or the 50 Lux ASPH for that matter. Somebody prove me wrong please.

Weapon MG will be arriving soon, and will definitely test on that, and post results, but don't have high hopes.

 

[Karim D. Ghantous]

I don't like to say this, because it otherwise would make no sense, but the Leica SL could be the compromise that would suit you best. The problem is that it only does 4K S35 or FF HD.

OTOH, the Sony A7s plays nicely with almost all M mount lenses, and does 4K FF. Sony also makes more dedicated cinema cameras which can accept M lenses with an adapter, but I'm not that familiar with them. So if lens choice is very important, perhaps a Leica or Sony body would be the better option.

 

[joey richey]

phil did a lot of testing a while back if you search for it here on RU.

i use my noctilux on dragon(epic) at 6K, as it doesn't have the "fins" to protect the rear element like the wider glass for the M system. as mentioned earlier, you have to shoot around things that will induce fringing(like high frequency subject matter), especially purple. this fringing exists on the M8, M9, M240 and SL also, but can be softened with lens profiling and software adjustments.

since its a special lens design, the smearing that many experience on the 35 and 50 lux isn't quite as apparent on the noctilux, especially when shooting shallow (which is what the lens was designed for). the 35 lux non-fle doesn't smear quite as much, and the 35 lux spherical looks beautiful as well. my experience is that anything under 35 is really not usable due to the rear elements protruding design.

i hope to read here someday how M glass looks magical on the WPN. its such beautiful glass and I'm sure many would love to use it in their r3d work.

 

[paulcurtis]

Using Lecia M isn't a fixed requirement, it's a nice to have and an added bonus if they worked. I use them on A7sII, FS700 RAW and so on without issue. Both of these have very short flange distance although i don't know how that compares to Dragon. The issue with the colours and smearing affects all sensors to a greater or lesser degree, even the Leicas. I remember some serious brown stuff hitting the fan a few years back as Leica moved to digital. You only just have to follow the Ursa Mini at the moment to see this problem in it's full magenta glory.


Over time there's been a combination of sensor design changing and also the Lens manufacturers changing. So the A7sII works better that previous Sony sensors and also voightlander have a mark III for their 15mm which works a lot better on digital than previous generations of that lens - with the same distances. Perhaps Dragon is better than before on this front, maybe not.

I was just tempted by the idea that perhaps the SW could replace my stills some of the time too. Easier for a single camera in a backpack. But it's not a showstopper. For me the Red is more a workflow advantage than straight image quality - i know how to get the best out of what i have but the overheads of workflow add up to quite a difference especially on a proper shoot.

I'd love to hear from anyone who's actually tried the VM lenses, especially the 15mm MKIII.

cheers
Paul

 

[Serge Polevitzky]

Steven (or anyone else, please jump in) --



I have a Zeiss ZM (Leica-M Mount) 35mm f/1.4 & have measured the M-Mount Bayonet Depth (seems to be about 6.5mm) and the projection from there to the end of the lens
(this seems to be about 6.0mm, for a total of 12.5mm, but there is at least .5mm 'statistical error' in all these measurements).

 

[Serge Polevitzky]

... are, sorry, accidentally hit [TAB]

OK, on an Mg Weapon did the previous measuring. Anyone (from RED included !) care to vouch that there is xx.y mm clearance before lens meets OLPF. The ZM 35mm f/1.4 has received very good reviews. If it 'fits' -- then the question is 'does it smear or purple or go super-soft, etc.).. But first, does the ZM protrude too far ?

Tx,
Serge

 

[Steven Dean]

Got my Weapon MG this week - first thing that I did was throw the M mount on, and mount the 28 LUX. Didn't do any exhaustive testing, but I can verify that the same issues exist (at least with the 28 Lux), on Weapon that did on Epic Dragon (purple, etc.), at least at 6k. I figured that this would be the case, so no real surprise. I will test my other lenses at some point this week, but figure the results will be similar to my Epic D findings...

Serge - I just measured the 28 Lux - the distance from the end of the bayonet to the end of the element is approximately 5mm (no issues with hitting the OLPF). I sold my 35 Lux FLE in order to finance the 28, so I can no longer test that. There were issues with the 35 FLE hitting the OLPF (I had to modify the OLFF to make it fit). Don't quote me on this, but I seem to remember the 35 measuring at least 6mm from bayonet to the end of the rear element. If you can figure out the exact measurement for the 35 FLE, that may be a good baseline for you. Also - the OLPF mod was pretty simple, but of course, do so at your own risk...

 

[Karim D. Ghantous]

This may be of interest:

http://www.slack.co.uk/leica-m-resolution.html

Leica quietly introduced new versions of three of their most popular lenses earlier this year:

35 mm f2 summicron Asph: with extra aperture blades
28 mm f2.8 Elmarit Asph: with an improved optical formula
28 mm f2 Summicron Asph: with an improved optical formula
All three lenses have Leica's improved, screw in lens hoods.

I tested all three of the new lenses in Autumn 2015, culminating in a big comparative test in Venice between the new and old lenses on three different cameras (a Leica M(240), a Sony A7 mark ii and the Leica SL).