Leica R lenses on Canon 20D

[darcy_lorimer]

I am trying to come up with a good cost effective solution to

producing digital photos. I have an R4, R7 bodies and a number of R

lenses.

 

The R8/R9 option plus the digital back is out of consideration due to

the cost of the digital back.

 

Many have reported the use of R lenses on a Canon digital body such

as the 20D. This is a cost effective option, except I have heard of

focussing defects in some Canon bodies (particularly the 10D) where

the focus point on the finder is not the same as at the image sensor,

resulting in out of focus images. This problem has been reported in

particular with respect to the use of R lenses on the 10D. Anyone

know if this problem has been addressed or is present in the 20D?

Will using the R lenses stopped down mitigate this problem?

 

The other option I am considering is the purchase of a 35mm digital

film scanner such as the Nikon LS 5000 LED, which costs about the

same as the Canon 20D body. Is this a good alternative (considering

the overall quality of the final image)? Of course, this requires the

purchase of the film and processing, and then the time required for

scanning (which can be extensive).

 

And finally, I am confused about the capability of digital vs that of

film. Some are saying that an 8 or 10 Megapixal CCD is capable of a

higher resolution than a R lens can produce. Is this true? Or is a

fine grain film still capable of a higher resolution than the CCD's?

 

Thanks in advance for any input. This is a great forum.

[andrew robertson]

A "cost effective solution" would include Canon EF lenses and not Leica R lenses.

 

Most EF lenses are optically really good and are a lot less money than R lenses.

[malcolm_tentt]

Expect the torch-weilding mob to come by soon chanting and burning you in effigy. Can't speak the truth here, oh no.

[doug herr]

An older film scanner will cost considerably less than either the 20D or LS 5000. The photos I've posted here and on my website are scans made with the old Polaroid SprintScan 4000, which is now selling for about $200 used. Add a fresh copy of VueScan and an image editing program (GIMP is free) and you're all set. The SS4000 scans are good for prints up to 11" x 14" easily, and on a well-executed slide the scans are good to 16" x20".

[lutz]

Get the 350D - even more cost effective. R lenses are fine. Focussing is not an issue if you get one of Rachael Katz' custom screens. Eventually you will want add an EOS compatible AF Zoom lens to go along with your Leica primes. I did...

[jerry_lehrer]

Lutz-- Whois Rachael Katz and how does one contact her about screens?

 

Jerry

[andrew robertson]

A while ago I posted a small pricing exercise on R vs. EOS.

 

The long and short is that you can get an EF kit for 1/4th the price of an R kit, for equivalent

focal lengths and apertures.

 

Even noted Leica expert Erwin Puts is impressed with EOS lenses.

[Uhooru]

Andrew, I think he already has R lenses.

[andrew robertson]

I would hope so.

 

Otherwise the 'cost effective' part of the equation goes right out the window.

[dougfromtumwater]

Andrew, do you use a Leica R or M?

[andrew robertson]

No. I have used M equipment, but decided on buying an R-D1 and C-V lenses instead of an

M and M glass.

 

But 'tumwater' is one of my favorite words.

[dougfromtumwater]

Tumwater is a nice town. It used to be the home of Olympia Beer years ago. A picture of the Deschutes river falls with it's "tumbling water" was in the logo underneath the horseshoe.

[jim_doty]

As a happy user of a Canon 20D camera this may seem strange, but I would suggest you get a good film scanner as a way to jump into digital. The Polaroid SS4000 scanner (recommended above) is a really good scanner that will allow you to print nice enlargments from high quality 35mm film (up to 12x18 inches for a very well executed slide). The Nikon film scanners (including the V or LS 5000) are excellent. I made my initial jump to digital with a Polaroid scanner and it was a good way to get my feet wet.

 

Scanning is a bit of an art and you will get better as you gain experience. Scanning does take some time.

 

If and when the time comes that you decided you really NEED or WANT a digital body, you can decide if it is worthwhile to put your R lenses on a Canon body - or go another route.

 

Jim

[lutz]

Here's the link to <a href="http://www.keoptics.com/">Rachael Katz' site</a>. While her screens may appear pricey, they're worth it and so is her outstanding customer service.

[darcy_lorimer]

I am a bit confused as to why a focussing screen change (I assume for the Canon 20D) would cure the focus problem. Does the new screen move the plane of focus to match that of the CCD? Please understand that the focus problem is a defect and not acceptable by users (or Canon).

 

I really don't want to buy more lenses, since I have an adequate assortment of R lenses. I can see buying some AF lenses for convenience, since using the R lenses removes a lot of the automation features of the digital SLR body.

 

So is it the general consensus that a scanned 35 mm slide or negative is as good as a digital image made with a 20D? Or am I going to give up something with the scanner?

[andrew robertson]

The defect you speak of is really extremely rare.

 

If you do find it, Canon will fix your camera.

[ambientlight]

D'Arcy, I struggled with this same issue, but with Leica M, so the lens compatibility was not an issue because M glass can't be used on an SLR, and the Epson R-D1 was just too expensive for what you get. I found images that I shot with the Canon 20D with their 28 1.8 (comparable to 44mm with the 20D 1.6 crop) lens to be as good overall quality as I could get scanning a negative shot with Leica MP with 50 1.4, The 28 1.8 is not Canon's best glass, but it is small and fast - a lot of the Canon premium L glass is huge. The time and cost that it takes to get the Leica images to a digital format is considerable, so I decided that I could not invest that much time when I could just click the shutter on the Canon. I shoot mostly black and white, but I found that I could shoot digital color and get beautiful B&W by mixing channels in Photoshop, plus all the color information was available if I decided to use it in the future. I love the quality and feel of the Leica, but time is the big issue for me. Good luck!

Bill Bowdren

[claude_batmanghelidj]

Doug,

 

How would that scanner connect to my Mac Mini? I have read it has a Scuzzy

connection, my Mac has firewire and usb. I like the idea of scanning film do get digital

results, you get the best of both worlds that way.

 

Regards,

 

CB

[doug herr]

Claude, I used a firewire-to-SCSI converter for the scanner on my Blue&White G3 before I got the SCSI card installed.

[nemeng]

<i>The defect you speak of is really extremely rare.<br>

If you do find it, Canon will fix your camera.</i><p>

 

Unforutnately a friend's experience has been otherwise. He sent the camera twice to the local (Australian) Canon Distributor, and they sent it back both times saying "there is no problem, the camera focus is in spec".<p>

 

It wasn't. At f-stops wider than f5.6 the focus on the chip was completely different to that seen in the viewfinder (meaning lots of portrait shots with the face out and only the person's hair in focus!)<p>

 

As for using R lenses on an DSLR EOS, FWIW I have a v.detailed topic on it in the Leica FAQ I maintain, at:<p>

 

<a href="http://nemeng.com/leica/002f.shtml">

http://nemeng.com/leica/002f.shtml</a><p>

 

(Very easy to find via Google. Eg. search for "leica r eos".)

[lutz]

You'll absolutely need a split-focus/microprism screen on a DSLR to get a chance to focus manual primes. DSLRs with their minuscule viewfinders are meant to work with AF lenses. Composition and the feedback of the AF diodes is all you can reliably check on their screens. Once you start trying to focus a manual lens on them you're _lost_. So, unless the 20D reported on is a (rare-case) lemon with its viewfinder completely off, it is much more likely that the person who tried to focus a manual prime on it was just not able to correctly do so because of the aforementioned reason. (I know what I'm talking about... ;-) Rachael Katz' screens make _all_ the difference necessary to focus your R lenses (or whichever brand of manual primes - I'm using Zuikos these days) on a DSLR. Period.<p>

As for the scanner vs. DSLR issue - the long answer is spread over hundreds of threads down in the archives. My short answer is: If you _need_ digital because its _much_ faster and because you need to shoot _a lot_ (which makes it cheaper, presto) then get a DSLR. If you have tons of negs and slides and plan to go on shooting film and just want to _ocassionally share_ some of your pics digitally, then get a scanner. Cheers.

[john_jovic]

In reverse order. Leica R lenses have far higher resolution than an 8MP camera. Some of the images I've shot on a 1dsmk2 are close to the full resolution of a top R lens but I still think you would get bit more out of Velvia 50.

 

I think scanning is a poor option for several reasons but mainly because of the time it would take. Digital, even at it's worst, is still much better than any iso 400/800 film so digital still has some inherent benefits for low light work. Although film has its own inherent benefits too so if you are after the character of a specific film then scanning it may be the best option for you.

 

I use a 10D, 20D and 1dsMk2. There is absolutely no point using the R lenses on the 20D because in my experience it is almost impossible to focus it accurately. I have tried and failed. I have also tried to have my 20D recalibrated to suit the R lenses but was told buy the top local Canon authorised repairer in Melbourne (but not Canon themselves) that this can not be done because of hardware/software interactions between the lenses. Basically you can only recalibrate a Canon camera to suit another Canon lens.

 

I've used Leica lenses on a 1dsMk2 where they excell because of the combination of accurate viewfinder and high image quality, but forget it on the 10/20D. As an example, when I focus my R 180/2.0 on the 20D at a distance of about 20 metres it is out of focus by about 5 metres! When I use my R 35/1.4 on the 20D at about 10 metres it is out of focus by about 1 to 2 metres.

 

Regards

JJ

[andrew robertson]

Andrew, that's when you move up to the management and complain there.

[joseph_wisniewski]

D'Arcy - "I am a bit confused as to why a focussing screen change (I assume for the Canon 20D) would cure the focus problem. Does the new screen move the plane of focus to match that of the CCD?"

 

The big focus problem with the Canons is in the AF system a misalignment of the secondary mirror or the AF sensors (and it's pretty rare) or a problem with the AF firmware in the camera. To have the screen disagree with the main sensor would be an alignment error with the main mirror, and that's simpler, more robust hardware, so a problem is really rare, indeed.

 

The new screen will give you focusing aids, like a split image. This is good because the 20D screen has none, and it's rather small. And the AF focus indicator doesn't operate on Canons when they're using manual focus lenses, so you can't use the "electronic rangefinder" like you can on a Nikon or Pentax.

[darcy_lorimer]

Thanks to everyone for the constuctive input. I will probably be doing mostly macro close focus work of electronic circuitry modifications, so the comments about low light suitablity hit home. I tried some tests with my 100 mm F4 R macro lens (and the R7) on these cicuits, and found I would have to use very slow shutter speeds and wide apertures, even with ASA 400 film. The digital solution would provide more sensitivity with an effective ASA speed of 1600 to 3200. I know I could get brighter lights, but I am currently stuck with the existing lighting conditions.

 

So the film option is increasingly less desirable. The digital camera body solution also offers a quick way to check the final image and correct for any needed changes which would take days or weeks with film. I guess I could always get that Canon 100mm F2.8 macro lens (almost halfway there if you buy a Novoflex adapter) and/or one of the aftermarket focussing screens.

 

Thanks again for the great feedback.