What didital camera with M lenses

<p>I have several brand spanking new, unused Leica M lenses, but not getting the rangefinder thing.</p>

<p>What are my (non Leica) options for digital camera bodies that will enable me to get some use for these lenses</p>

<p>Epson RD-1; Epson ED-1/s<br /> <br /> camera bodies are no longer made; have a 1.6x crop factor; are only 6 megapixel; uses a common SD card up to 2 gigs; uses a common camcorder battery; has a Leica M mount; it is a rangefinder body; it has a LCD display too.<br /> <br /> It is pricey compared to another 6 megapixels camera like a dslr or P&S camera!<br>

<br /> I think your only options are an Epson RD-1; or Leica M8 series or new Leica M9. None are low in cost when new.<br>

With adapters one has the world of 4/3's cameras; I will let another with more knowledge comment about these camera bodies!</p>

<p>tony,<br>

there is another option unless you are into using superwide lenses. the mirrorless micro-fourthird cameras from panasonic and olympus would allow you to use the m lenses with an adaptor. they would be cheaper than the epson with higher pixel count. the only problem would be the crop factor of 2x.</p>

<p>You can put them on a Micro 4/3 body like the Panasonic G1/GH1, Panasonic GH1, or the Olympus EP-1. These all have a 2X crop factor.</p>

<p>You can buy an adapter here and see some pics of what the setups look like.</p>

<p>http://www.cameraquest.com/adp_micro_43.htm</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Epson RD-1; Epson ED-1/s</p>

</blockquote>

<p>If he's "not getting the rangefinder thing," how are these going to help him?</p>

<p>If they're the right lenses you could use them with adapters on a variety of other cameras...for instance I use 90mm Elmarit and 135mm Elmar heads with a Visoflex focus mechanism and a Leica M->Nikon mount on my Nikon DSLR. and with a Nikon-> Canon FD adapter on my Canon T-90. The rest of the shorter focal length lenses will mount via adapters on DSLRs but won't infinity focus. The longer telephoto lenses (400/6.3 et al) can be mounted with adapters of various sorts to many cameras as well. But in general, they're meant for a specific mount to flange distance which is shorter than most DSLRs.</p>

<p>If you are not using them on film, you are probably better off selling them and buying a bunch of good SLR equipment. You can use some on micro 4/3rds, but only really 35mm and up. In m4/3rds, that means they are all telephotos -- a 35mm has the angle of view of a 70mm lens on film or the M9. Also, they are much softer on micro 4/3rds in the edges than they are on film or with the M8/M9. The micro 4/3rds cameras do not have micro-lenses to compensate for the off-axis light that most of the wide angle M lenses exhibit. As such, they are very sharp in the center, but can get really bad at the edges. I most cases, the dedicated micro 4/3rds lens is sharper and easier to use.</p>

<p>It takes a long time for a reflex user to get the rangefinder thing. I suggest you get a Leica body and give it a chance. I got my first Leica M around 1990 after 26 years of using reflex and view cameras. It took me quite a while to even get used to loading it, and it must have been a few years before I got to prefer it to a reflex. The results are definitely better because of less shutter and no mirror vibration. If you don't want to do that, the best course of action would be to sell the lenses and get a different system. I just got 3 Zeiss lenses for my Nikons. I shoot film and digital with them. I prefer the results to the Leica lenses, which are a bit sharper, but not as beautiful tonally in B&W. And it helps but is not the deciding factor, that they cost less. In last night's 35mm film printing session it was very clear that the Zeiss lenses are my preference. Itis almost like comparing the Rodenstock S lenses to the Schneider L lenses. The Zeiss and Schneider lenses tend towards a brooding Germanic feeling like the beginning of Beethoven's ninth. The Leica and Rodenstocks are a bit sharper and more contrasty.</p>

<p>To clarify, the Panasonic Micro 4/3 bodies are the G1 and GH1 which are very similar (looks like an SLR but has an electronic viewfinder, the GH1 has video) and the newer GF1 which looks like a point and shoot but does have an optional electronic viewfinder that slides into the hot shoe. The Olympus EP-1 is similar to the GF1.</p>

<p>When you say you are "not getting the rangefinder thing" what do you mean exactly? That you don't like how you focus and compose an image using a rangefinder? Or perhaps that Leica rangefinders are too expensive so you won't be getting one. Cosina / Voigtlander makes much cheaper film rangefinders.</p>

<p>Other than the M8 and M9, there is no digital camera that can do justice to the fine M lenses that you have. You will get better results by selling then and buying dedicated lenses for any DSLR that you might consider. Mounting the M lenses on a Panasonic G1 or any other compatible camera will give you a 2x crop factor, or some other variation, I'm not sure that is what you want from your M stockpile.</p>

<p>When you say you are "not getting the rangefinder thing" what do you mean exactly?<br>

<br /> I guess Jeff's take is the requirement cannot be a rangefinder; thus a Leica RD-1 or Leica M8 or M9 is out.<br>

<br /> It is not clear to me if "not getting the rangefinder thing" means one does not undertstand (ie get) the rangefinder thing; or one does not want to (get) a rangefinder thing.<br>

<br /> One could go back 50 years ago an use a Leica M lens on a Bolex 16mm camera for home movies; or say 70 years go an use a LTM Leica lens on a 16mm cine camera too; via an adapter.<br>

<br /> since this question is about digital bodies ; if the requitement is not a rangefinder then one has either a 4/3's camera; or a homemade one.</p>

<p>I like to utilise characteristics of certain lenses, the Noctilux interests me. I originally bought 3 for an effects rig about 6/7 years ago. They were incredibly different from one lens to another. I sold two, bought an MP and sent the Nocti and body to Leica MK to be matched (none of the lenses were scale accurate. <br>

The interest of the Nocti is its out of focus character, to judge this on a film camera pre shot requires of course an SLR which isn't going to happen for obvious reasons, my next best solution therefore is to shoot digital which at least gives me the option to review and fine tune if necessary.<br>

I have several other new leica lenses that I've not used, though I expect these to be 'too good', I like flaws, quirks, character....<br>

I was unaware of these smaller format (sensor) options mentioned, tyhanks for those....but I'm looking for a full frame digital camera other than the M9.... I'd rather not spend £4k just to shoot some tests if there is another option. </p>

<p>Any thoughts?</p>

<p>Tony; for full frame digital requirement you are currently stuck with either a new Leica M9; or going back to a film body with an M flange and scanning; if you want a "full frame" digital image.<br>

<br /> Leica rangefinder lenses have a way shorter flange to film/sensor distance than a 35mm slr; an adapter will not give one infinity focus.<br>

<br /> What intended camera format are you looking to sort/test/cheery pick Leica M lenses for? Does it have to be full frame?<br>

<br /> Full frame knocks out the M8 or RD-1 digital bodies.<br>

<br /> It is not clear what you are testing; illumination falloff; resolution; out of focus effects; focus shifts; etc.<br>

<br /> Out of focus effects do not required a digital capture; a dumb M body and Fuji C41 and drugstore process and scan at 1300 dpi will show out of focus looks. For subtle focus shifts a highend scan is required.</p>

<p>I want full frame to retain the shallow DoF of the Noctilux and utilise the vignette. Looks like its an M9 then.....MP to Ebay. Shame the M9 wont be the same sort of investment </p>

<p>Which will be the crop factor of a c-mount 16mm movie lens on the G1?</p>

<p>Thanks<br>

luisrq</p>

<p>I think G1 is a 4/3's camera; thus a 18 x 13.5 mm sensor size.<br>

`The camera aperture for a regular 16mm cine camera is 0.404 by 0.295 inches; ie 10.26 by 7.49mm<br>

16mm cine is a smaller format than 4/3's; unless one is shooting a super closeup a 16mm c mount lens normally will not cover a 4/3s sensor.</p>

<p>I think G1 is a 4/3's camera; thus a 18 x 13.5 mm sensor size.<br>

`The camera aperture for a regular 16mm cine camera is 0.404 by 0.295 inches; ie 10.26 by 7.49mm<br>

16mm cine is a smaller format than 4/3's; unless one is shooting a super closeup a 16mm c mount lens normally will not cover a 4/3s sensor.</p>