Any experience using M glass on the 907X? I tried on an X1D and I’m curious as to whether the result would be any different. I’m hoping for some improvement in how wideangles perform, but given it’s the same sensor as the X1D that might be wishful thinking. Appreciate feedback from anyone who have tried this out.
The GetDPI Photography Forum
Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
Leica M on 907X
- Thread starter sincurves
- Start date
In the “Fun with...907x” thread I think Godfrey has posted some with the 907x and M-lenses. I’ve seen some Instagram as well if you search the “#907x” hashtag.
As op noted, it’s the same sensor, so I’d be surprised if there were any differences between the X1D and 907x in terms of M lens performance, but perhaps someone with actual experience can chime in
As op noted, it’s the same sensor, so I’d be surprised if there were any differences between the X1D and 907x in terms of M lens performance, but perhaps someone with actual experience can chime in
Godfrey
Well-known member
I've tested a few M-mount lenses on the 907x ... Don't have an X1D but they can't be any different in performance there since the sensor is identical. I've not done much actual shooting with these lenses beyond the tests for basic compatibility and coverage. I have a fairly eclectic collection of M-mount lenses...
Voigtländer HyperWide 10mm f/5.6 Aspherical ::
Lens hood causes vignetting that needs to be cropped. Even cropped, a good deal more FoV than the XCD 21,
and quite sharp right to the corners.
Voigtländer Color-Skopar 28mm f/3.5 ::
Significant color shifting across the field. Light fall off towards the corners and edges, correctible to some degree.
usable for B&W only.
Leica Summilux 35mm f/1.4 (v2, 1972) ::
Not tested.
Pentax-L 43mm f/1.9 Special ::
Corner vignetting, needs to be cropped. Otherwise excellent for square crop.
Leica Summicron-M 50mm f/2 (current) ::
Not tested.
Leica Summarit-M 75mm f/2.4 (current) ::
Not tested.
Minolta M-Rokkor 90mm f/4 (1973) ::
Not tested.
Leica Hektor 135mm f/4.5 (M-mount, 1960) ::
Very small amount of corner darkening. Rangefinder cam actuator causes vignetting that must be cropped.
Otherwise, remarkably good performance.
The reason for various lenses not being tested is that I either have an XCD lens which is so similar there's no point to adaptation or that I have Hasselblad V system lenses that work perfectly full frame on the sensor and require the same compromises in adaptation (accessory mount adapter, eshutter only) as the Leica lenses. For example, in the 75 to 90 range, well, I have Hasselblad Planar 80 and Makro-Planar 120 lenses, why bother with using a Leica lens when I know the Hasselblad lens is going to work better? An XCD 45P obviates any similar focal length Leica lens (35-50mm), the 28 and 10 mm options bracket the XCD 21mm FoV nicely.
I've also tested a few Leica R lenses. In general, they perform better than M lenses on this sensor and provide some additional capabilities (less vignetting, closer focusing, macro capability, etc), and I tend to use them in preference to the M lenses of the same focal length if I'm adapting a lens. The ones of them I've used a bit are the Macro-Elmarit-R 60mm f/2.8, Summicron-R 90mm f/2, Macro-Elmar-R 100mm f/4, Elmarit-R 135mm f/2.8, and Elmar-R 180mm f/4 (with and without 2x Extender-R).
I've played the adaptation game for years now with a large range of cameras. By and large, the winners and jewels in adaptation are few and far between; lenses designed and tailored for the modern digital sensor camera bodies tend to work better even against "by the MTF tests" superior performers in many cases. And Hasselblad's V system and XCD lenses are so good overall, to me, that overall there's very little point to adapting a 35mm FF lens to the 33x44 sensor if I have either of the Hasselblad lens series options already. The reasons for doing so are specific qualities that you can't get otherwise, or you simply have the Leica lens at hand and don't want to spend the money for a native lens at the moment for whatever reason.
G
Voigtländer HyperWide 10mm f/5.6 Aspherical ::
Lens hood causes vignetting that needs to be cropped. Even cropped, a good deal more FoV than the XCD 21,
and quite sharp right to the corners.
Voigtländer Color-Skopar 28mm f/3.5 ::
Significant color shifting across the field. Light fall off towards the corners and edges, correctible to some degree.
usable for B&W only.
Leica Summilux 35mm f/1.4 (v2, 1972) ::
Not tested.
Pentax-L 43mm f/1.9 Special ::
Corner vignetting, needs to be cropped. Otherwise excellent for square crop.
Leica Summicron-M 50mm f/2 (current) ::
Not tested.
Leica Summarit-M 75mm f/2.4 (current) ::
Not tested.
Minolta M-Rokkor 90mm f/4 (1973) ::
Not tested.
Leica Hektor 135mm f/4.5 (M-mount, 1960) ::
Very small amount of corner darkening. Rangefinder cam actuator causes vignetting that must be cropped.
Otherwise, remarkably good performance.
The reason for various lenses not being tested is that I either have an XCD lens which is so similar there's no point to adaptation or that I have Hasselblad V system lenses that work perfectly full frame on the sensor and require the same compromises in adaptation (accessory mount adapter, eshutter only) as the Leica lenses. For example, in the 75 to 90 range, well, I have Hasselblad Planar 80 and Makro-Planar 120 lenses, why bother with using a Leica lens when I know the Hasselblad lens is going to work better? An XCD 45P obviates any similar focal length Leica lens (35-50mm), the 28 and 10 mm options bracket the XCD 21mm FoV nicely.
I've also tested a few Leica R lenses. In general, they perform better than M lenses on this sensor and provide some additional capabilities (less vignetting, closer focusing, macro capability, etc), and I tend to use them in preference to the M lenses of the same focal length if I'm adapting a lens. The ones of them I've used a bit are the Macro-Elmarit-R 60mm f/2.8, Summicron-R 90mm f/2, Macro-Elmar-R 100mm f/4, Elmarit-R 135mm f/2.8, and Elmar-R 180mm f/4 (with and without 2x Extender-R).
I've played the adaptation game for years now with a large range of cameras. By and large, the winners and jewels in adaptation are few and far between; lenses designed and tailored for the modern digital sensor camera bodies tend to work better even against "by the MTF tests" superior performers in many cases. And Hasselblad's V system and XCD lenses are so good overall, to me, that overall there's very little point to adapting a 35mm FF lens to the 33x44 sensor if I have either of the Hasselblad lens series options already. The reasons for doing so are specific qualities that you can't get otherwise, or you simply have the Leica lens at hand and don't want to spend the money for a native lens at the moment for whatever reason.
G
Have used M lenses on an X1D. The key is that you expect to crop. You have latitude to slice off the top and bottom, off the sides, or some of both.
The Summilux 50 aspherical has surprisingly little vignette.
The Summilux 35 pre-aspherical vignettes heavily.
The Summicron 50 version v is in between these two.
Plus:
Different rendering characters than XCD, which I happen to like.
Compact.
If you already have them, you save $$$$.
Many of them open wider than XCD lens of matching focal length.
Minus:
Electronic shutter issues: banding under some lights, unusable if much motion going on.
Maybe:
Manual focus, fine with me, maybe not with you.
Summicron 50 version v example
The Summilux 50 aspherical has surprisingly little vignette.
The Summilux 35 pre-aspherical vignettes heavily.
The Summicron 50 version v is in between these two.
Plus:
Different rendering characters than XCD, which I happen to like.
Compact.
If you already have them, you save $$$$.
Many of them open wider than XCD lens of matching focal length.
Minus:
Electronic shutter issues: banding under some lights, unusable if much motion going on.
Maybe:
Manual focus, fine with me, maybe not with you.
Summicron 50 version v example
Here’s an analysis I posted a while ago testing 21 Leica M lenses on the CFV-II-50c back:
Test results: which of 21 Leica M lenses will cover the Hasselblad X or Fuji GFX sensor?
Here are results of testing 21 Leica M lenses for their ability to cover the medium format 44x33 mm sensor of a Hasselblad X camera. I used a CFV-ii-50c back set to electronic shutter, a 907x, and a Novoflex LEM to HAX adapter, but I assume that these results will hold for other camera systems...
www.getdpi.com