Thank you!! I shoot many Leica m lenses on my various sony cameras. I can watch these comparisons all day!! MORE MORE MORE. Sony g master vs Leica. Etc. AWESOME!!!
Other benefit of using Sony is that we have autofocus adapters for m lenses, not lightning fast like native lenses but fast enough and accurate enough for portraits
The issue of M glass on Sony MLC is only with lenses having focal length of 35 mm and shorter. What can happen with adapted wide angle lenses is a steeper refraction angle at the corners of the sensor leading to blurriness and unsharpness. This is not always the case though - rule of thumb is the bigger the rear lens element the more likely you won't have issues - for example faster wide lenses normally work well. Not so much with wider f/2.8 or f/4.0 lenses!
All good lenses are corrected to render flat. A thick sensor stack bends that plane, hence focus shift (more like focus bending). The problem with his test is all 3 photos are roughly center focused with edge fall off. So you would never see that effect. Adapted lenses are awesome for portraits for this very reason. They can bring a sense of 3D pop. Try center focusing something that has a uniform plane of view across the frame, like a landscape, and center focus and the mid field will be unsharp, let alone the corners. This is the problem Leica tried to negate with thinner sensor stacks (the M8 was dramatically flat and it still the sharpest digital sensor I have ever seen) because the digital M was supposed to cross with film lenses (unlike Nikon who just told us to buy new lenses). All lenses bend the focus plane a little bit, that is why people obsessed with corner sharpness in reviews (and why modern aspherical lenses are so amazing for that purpose). Adapted lenses exaggerate this and it's a problem even with adapted SLR lenses. For $400 you can get your Sony modded by Kolari with a very thin sensor stack. If you like focusing with an EVF (I agree its much easier) and want to use legacy glass, this is the solution. That said, a rangefinder is it's own wonderful experience and method of seeing the world.
Hi sir. What you mean with 'thick' sensors? Are talking about the microlens design that leica m cameras have? All digital sensor are by themselves flat so I ask you
Hi, I had the same problem with my m10, so I decided to sell it and I bought Sony a7riii and wow the difference is noticeable, sharper photos, with my 35 summilux lens, So I decided to use my Leica MP film for street photography or personal photos, and my sony a7riii for more specific photos when I want better resolution and sharpness. In my personal opinion, digital leicas are not as good as analog cameras. if you want to feel the true analogexperience better invest in an analog Leica camera.
I’ve been using adapted M lenses on my Sony bc I wanted a couple compact, high quality lenses. Punching in (without peaking) is how I’ve checked for focus and it works great, though annoying to compose with zooming in and out. I’ve not actually used a rangefinder to know how it would compare, but I’m really interested to try sometime. The best adapted experience I had was with a Fuji xpro3 because the OVF rangefinder gives you a small zoomed overlay for focusing while still allowing you to see the whole frame for composing. Side note - the thicker sensor on the Sony does smear the edges of the image a bit- but the center should be two sharp.
I think an important issue is timing the shot. Are adapted lenses just as fast to shoot as native lenses on each camera. Adapted leica lenses are viewed in stop down mode so some focus peaking is more challenging. Does the Sony using adapted lenses focus as fast or faster than the M10. Is it better to use scale focusing or focus-peaking and if focus peaking can you half-depress the shutter to turn off the magnification. To me that is usually the issue when you have a button dedicated to focus peaking - one has to depress the button to focus peak and then press the button again for full frame viewing which loses valuable time in creating the image. This might lead to the decisive moment passing before you can take the picture (not to mention any shutter lag inherent in the camera system.
The thicker sensor stack only comes into play below 35mm as the ray angles get more extreme. Ultrawides look better on a M, but a 50mm will be fine on the Sony.
No, it also effects the focus plane of standard lenses. It's not nearly as dramatic as wides and color fringing though, and with center focused portraits with focus falloff (which is all of these test photos) you wouldn't ever see it. Even my Leica M 240 had edge smearing with a 21mm f4 lens.
The real difference for Leica glass on Lecia body vs Sony body is not shown here at all, though. It's the corners. Corner smear/smudge can be *significantly* worse on Sony. It's always worse, but sometimes it's like a totally different lens- often taking stopping down to F5.6 or even F8/F11 to clean up. For what and how you've shot here, the real drawbacks of using Leica glass on Sony are totally irrelevant. FWIW. Hard video to make, though. I've used both systems quite a bit and shooting the same subjects the same way ranges from complicated to damn near impossible. Getting "show this full res to strangers" level clarity while shooting a kid is not a fun task! I do love my M body for taking kid photos in general, though. It's a really fun training exercise lol. Anyway, nice video. Really helps people not cash out on Leica if they don't need to. It's one of those things you *really* gotta want it and know what's coming.
The M mount glass looks very good on my Sony A7RV. However, it does not record the aperture which is a little bit annoy. You will also need to assign one of your Sony custom buttons to focus peaking.
@@ericrjennings oh ok. I thought you mentioned peaking when referring the the M10. Since you used the RF, you still found that the Sony was better for critical focus then? That makes sense since it’s magnified in tight.
Leica has better color science and contrast than Sony imo. I like what comes out of my M11 with 35mm Summicron than I do with with the lens on my A73. Color and rendering is all about personal preference, thanks for doing the comparison.
Thats for sure but they claim above sony a7 iv we have a new color science and A7C II is one exemples so I'm curious about this case. I have always thought it makes no sense using adapted lenses but right now I only have leica lenses and no leica cameras.
Thank you!! I shoot many Leica m lenses on my various sony cameras. I can watch these comparisons all day!! MORE MORE MORE. Sony g master vs Leica. Etc. AWESOME!!!
Other benefit of using Sony is that we have autofocus adapters for m lenses, not lightning fast like native lenses but fast enough and accurate enough for portraits
wait what? we can autofocus the m-lenses??
@@adamjohariUsing an adapter like the ones from techart.
The issue of M glass on Sony MLC is only with lenses having focal length of 35 mm and shorter. What can happen with adapted wide angle lenses is a steeper refraction angle at the corners of the sensor leading to blurriness and unsharpness. This is not always the case though - rule of thumb is the bigger the rear lens element the more likely you won't have issues - for example faster wide lenses normally work well. Not so much with wider f/2.8 or f/4.0 lenses!
Based on first look I liked the colors and contrast of the Leica shots more. Of course like you said, easy to edit in post.
All good lenses are corrected to render flat. A thick sensor stack bends that plane, hence focus shift (more like focus bending). The problem with his test is all 3 photos are roughly center focused with edge fall off. So you would never see that effect. Adapted lenses are awesome for portraits for this very reason. They can bring a sense of 3D pop.
Try center focusing something that has a uniform plane of view across the frame, like a landscape, and center focus and the mid field will be unsharp, let alone the corners. This is the problem Leica tried to negate with thinner sensor stacks (the M8 was dramatically flat and it still the sharpest digital sensor I have ever seen) because the digital M was supposed to cross with film lenses (unlike Nikon who just told us to buy new lenses).
All lenses bend the focus plane a little bit, that is why people obsessed with corner sharpness in reviews (and why modern aspherical lenses are so amazing for that purpose). Adapted lenses exaggerate this and it's a problem even with adapted SLR lenses.
For $400 you can get your Sony modded by Kolari with a very thin sensor stack. If you like focusing with an EVF (I agree its much easier) and want to use legacy glass, this is the solution. That said, a rangefinder is it's own wonderful experience and method of seeing the world.
Hi sir. What you mean with 'thick' sensors? Are talking about the microlens design that leica m cameras have? All digital sensor are by themselves flat so I ask you
@reeosva the glass stack on the sensor is thicker
Hi, I had the same problem with my m10, so I decided to sell it and I bought Sony a7riii and wow the difference is noticeable, sharper photos, with my 35 summilux lens, So I decided to use my Leica MP film for street photography or personal photos, and my sony a7riii for more specific photos when I want better resolution and sharpness. In my personal opinion, digital leicas are not as good as analog cameras. if you want to feel the true analogexperience better invest in an analog Leica camera.
I’ve been using adapted M lenses on my Sony bc I wanted a couple compact, high quality lenses. Punching in (without peaking) is how I’ve checked for focus and it works great, though annoying to compose with zooming in and out. I’ve not actually used a rangefinder to know how it would compare, but I’m really interested to try sometime. The best adapted experience I had was with a Fuji xpro3 because the OVF rangefinder gives you a small zoomed overlay for focusing while still allowing you to see the whole frame for composing.
Side note - the thicker sensor on the Sony does smear the edges of the image a bit- but the center should be two sharp.
another perk not mentioned here is the adapter also allows for macro shots as well. I use it on my a7s first gen and love the look.
Agree. Major benefit to using an adaptor on a Sony
can you recommend which adapter to buy?
I think an important issue is timing the shot. Are adapted lenses just as fast to shoot as native lenses on each camera. Adapted leica lenses are viewed in stop down mode so some focus peaking is more challenging. Does the Sony using adapted lenses focus as fast or faster than the M10. Is it better to use scale focusing or focus-peaking and if focus peaking can you half-depress the shutter to turn off the magnification. To me that is usually the issue when you have a button dedicated to focus peaking - one has to depress the button to focus peak and then press the button again for full frame viewing which loses valuable time in creating the image. This might lead to the decisive moment passing before you can take the picture (not to mention any shutter lag inherent in the camera system.
The thicker sensor stack only comes into play below 35mm as the ray angles get more extreme. Ultrawides look better on a M, but a 50mm will be fine on the Sony.
No, it also effects the focus plane of standard lenses. It's not nearly as dramatic as wides and color fringing though, and with center focused portraits with focus falloff (which is all of these test photos) you wouldn't ever see it.
Even my Leica M 240 had edge smearing with a 21mm f4 lens.
Incorrect. Check out Phillip Reeves reviews- he has hundreds of examples zoomed in well past full res. It's very present at all focal lengths.
The real difference for Leica glass on Lecia body vs Sony body is not shown here at all, though. It's the corners. Corner smear/smudge can be *significantly* worse on Sony. It's always worse, but sometimes it's like a totally different lens- often taking stopping down to F5.6 or even F8/F11 to clean up. For what and how you've shot here, the real drawbacks of using Leica glass on Sony are totally irrelevant. FWIW.
Hard video to make, though. I've used both systems quite a bit and shooting the same subjects the same way ranges from complicated to damn near impossible. Getting "show this full res to strangers" level clarity while shooting a kid is not a fun task! I do love my M body for taking kid photos in general, though. It's a really fun training exercise lol.
Anyway, nice video. Really helps people not cash out on Leica if they don't need to. It's one of those things you *really* gotta want it and know what's coming.
What do you achieve by using Leica glass on Sony that you could not get in P+P?
Is there a point in doing this?
May I ask what lens adapter you’re use ?
so there is no different betwen sony and leica high end lenses in term of quality and rendering?
when i use it on my sony camera
Thank you! It would be great to see how it does on the edges. But Ìm also surprised how well the sony is doing!
Very hellpful. Thanks for taking time to do this.
Flat pictures on sony...
The M mount glass looks very good on my Sony A7RV. However, it does not record the aperture which is a little bit annoy. You will also need to assign one of your Sony custom buttons to focus peaking.
How would it fucking know the aperture of a manual lens with no electronics
So, you used the EVF for the Leica? How would the Rangefinder focusing have compared?
I used rangefinder focusing on this video. I’ve used the evf on the m10 in the past.
@@ericrjennings oh ok. I thought you mentioned peaking when referring the the M10. Since you used the RF, you still found that the Sony was better for critical focus then? That makes sense since it’s magnified in tight.
Yes. The M10 magnifies too but the Sony is better at applying the peaking
Leica has better color science and contrast than Sony imo. I like what comes out of my M11 with 35mm Summicron than I do with with the lens on my A73. Color and rendering is all about personal preference, thanks for doing the comparison.
Thats for sure but they claim above sony a7 iv we have a new color science and A7C II is one exemples so I'm curious about this case. I have always thought it makes no sense using adapted lenses but right now I only have leica lenses and no leica cameras.