Is it possible to use goggled M lenses on the SL

sleepyhead

Well-known
Local time
10:29 PM
Joined
May 24, 2005
Messages
1,681
Dear SL owners,

I'm curious if lenses such as the 135mm Elmarit-M can be used on the SL, or does the camera grip interfere with the goggles?

Thanks in advance for your answer!
 
I don't have an SL...

I can see it fitting once it's on, but getting it on could be an issue, maybe. But then you'd have the goggles hanging there ready to catch. I would think you'd be better off getting the R mount version. Same optics as far as I know.
 
If they mount without interference and focus , pics will be fine.

You can always remove the head and use the short focus mount for visoflex. I would not remove goggles as they may not get back on properly.
 
If they mount without interference and focus , pics will be fine.

You can always remove the head and use the short focus mount for visoflex. I would not remove goggles as they may not get back on properly.

A BIG THANKS for this information Ronald.

I forgot that the head is removable on this lens. I would prefer to keep things simple since I don't own any Leica R lenses, but would like to use the SL to breath some new life into some of my M lenses that I have struggled with over the years on rangefinder-focusing cameras. lenses such as this Elmarit-M and the 75mm Summilux. I think they're both gonna be well balanced on the SL (which is not in my hands yet).
 
A BIG THANKS for this information Ronald.

I forgot that the head is removable on this lens. I would prefer to keep things simple since I don't own any Leica R lenses, but would like to use the SL to breath some new life into some of my M lenses that I have struggled with over the years on rangefinder-focusing cameras. lenses such as this Elmarit-M and the 75mm Summilux. I think they're both gonna be well balanced on the SL (which is not in my hands yet).

I own a SL and use a stack of three Leica adapters to mount a chrome Visoflex 65/3.5 Elmar on the SL. I'm pretty sure this sequence of adapters would work for you.

I also owned a version 2 75 Lux. IMHO the bigger M-lenses are well suited on the SL. I prefer using "R" lenses and I own a 50 Lux-R "E60" and a 35 Lux-R 3 cam. The 35 Lux-R 3-cam is the same size/E67 filter size of the 80 Lux so it is a big lens, but it balances well on a SL.

Tonight I'll record the part numbers of the Leica adapters that I stack to accomodate M, R and Visoflex lenses. A bonus is that with a Novaflex Nikon F-mount adapter I can use the Noctilux F1.2 lens profile with the M-mount Leica adapter for my Noct-Nikkor 58/1.2.

The Nikon and Leica manual focus SLR glass I prefer over M-glass because of ergonomics and close focus ability.

Don't make the mistake of thinking that a SL is a M replacement, but think of it as more of a SLR replacement. Not sure if this works for you. YMMV.

Cal
 
Hi Cal

Thanks for your reply to my question. I'm not sure what you mean by "a stack of three Leica adapters". (But I have ZERO experience with Visoflex stuff or Leica R lenses.) My preference is to keep things as simple as possible and see if I can un-screw the head of my Elmarit-M 135/2.8 and (hopefully) only have to buy one Visoflex focusing mount for it to use on the SL with M Mount adapter.

While I realize that the SL probably won't be able to replace my M9, I do plan to use it exclusively with manual focus 28mm to 135mm Leica M lenses until I can afford an M10 to compliment the SL. Then I may begin to slowly acquire an auto-focus lens or two for the SL. I am a little concerned about the body size, not so much by the weight. I have no plans to use any SLR lenses with the SL (a own 2-3 Pentax M42 Takumars in the 35 to 105mm range, that's it - and I don't want to acquire more stuff...)

I have a strong preference for wrist straps over shoulder straps - do you have a recommendation for a strong/secure wrist strap for the SL. I use Gordy leather straps on my M cameras, but if I understand correctly, the lugs on the SL require a different kind of strap.

Any advice is appreciated - THANKS.


I own a SL and use a stack of three Leica adapters to mount a chrome Visoflex 65/3.5 Elmar on the SL. I'm pretty sure this sequence of adapters would work for you.

I also owned a version 2 75 Lux. IMHO the bigger M-lenses are well suited on the SL. I prefer using "R" lenses and I own a 50 Lux-R "E60" and a 35 Lux-R 3 cam. The 35 Lux-R 3-cam is the same size/E67 filter size of the 80 Lux so it is a big lens, but it balances well on a SL.

Tonight I'll record the part numbers of the Leica adapters that I stack to accomodate M, R and Visoflex lenses. A bonus is that with a Novaflex Nikon F-mount adapter I can use the Noctilux F1.2 lens profile with the M-mount Leica adapter for my Noct-Nikkor 58/1.2.

The Nikon and Leica manual focus SLR glass I prefer over M-glass because of ergonomics and close focus ability.

Don't make the mistake of thinking that a SL is a M replacement, but think of it as more of a SLR replacement. Not sure if this works for you. YMMV.

Cal
 
Hi Cal

Thanks for your reply to my question. I'm not sure what you mean by "a stack of three Leica adapters". (But I have ZERO experience with Visoflex stuff or Leica R lenses.) My preference is to keep things as simple as possible and see if I can un-screw the head of my Elmarit-M 135/2.8 and (hopefully) only have to buy one Visoflex focusing mount for it to use on the SL with M Mount adapter.

While I realize that the SL probably won't be able to replace my M9, I do plan to use it exclusively with manual focus 28mm to 135mm Leica M lenses until I can afford an M10 to compliment the SL. Then I may begin to slowly acquire an auto-focus lens or two for the SL. I am a little concerned about the body size, not so much by the weight. I have no plans to use any SLR lenses with the SL (a own 2-3 Pentax M42 Takumars in the 35 to 105mm range, that's it - and I don't want to acquire more stuff...)

I have a strong preference for wrist straps over shoulder straps - do you have a recommendation for a strong/secure wrist strap for the SL. I use Gordy leather straps on my M cameras, but if I understand correctly, the lugs on the SL require a different kind of strap.

Any advice is appreciated - THANKS.

S-H,

For me the SL made sense because I have Nikon and Leica SLR glass as well as M-glass. It made sense for me to have the SL T-mount to M-mount to use Leica M-mount wides. To use "R" glass I stack a "R" to "M" adapter on top of the "T" to "M" adapter. To utilize a Visoflex lens I have a Visoflex to "R" adapter, and to mate to the SL a Visoflex lens like your 135 head requires a focusing heliocoil and the set of three adapters: Viso to "R"; "R" to "M;" and lastly a "M" to "T."

The biggest advantage of the SL is to use SLR glass because of the close focus abilities. Also the SL is kinda sized ergonomically to feel like a SLR.

As for wrist straps go I offer no advice, but I utilize a Nikon AH-4 Handstrap baseplate so I can hang the SL vertically like a M5, which allows me better mobility and also offers better protection of the lens and body.

My SL with the 50 Lux-SL AF lens weighs 5 1/4 pounds not compact like a M10. The 50 Lux really nails the focus and is highly accurate. The latest firmware got rid of the porky slow AF, so don't believe the early reviews of prototype lenses with old firmware. It is no lie that this lens is big, but it is a performer.

Leica lent me a 24-90 zoom for NYC Fashion Week two years ago. This lens is really remarkable. The highly developed in lens image stabilization allowed me to get these what I call "Circus Shots." that were just playing around. I was shooting at 400 ISO but at night in NYC. I opened up the aperture and took these night shots at 1/8th, 1/12 and 1/20 second expecting blurry impressionist like images, but was surprise when I downloaded the files and viewed them on my EIZO. The IS system in this lens is like a gyro and the images were tack sharp. This is a crazy lens.

For me the big advantage is being able to utilize all my small format glass on the SL. Also the SL derived much of its performance and design from the Leica "S" medium format DSLR. Seems like the M10 adopted the processor and other things from the SL. I'm just saying the SL and M10 share a lot and it is pretty hard to justify both. In your case because you are not SLR centric the M10 might be a better camera for you. In my case the SL is the better camera.

Like I said, the SL really is not a M-body replacement, but a substitute for a DSLR that allows easy focusing of manual focus small format lenses.

Also if you need autofocus, then you need the SL. BTW it seems like the 35 Cron and 75 Cron that will be released will be a lot smaller than my 50 Lux. E67 filter size verses E82 on the 24-90 and 50 Lux. BTW the 50 Lux and 24-90 are almost the same weight and size, meaning heavy and huge.

Don't disregard the severe weatherproofing on the SL body and lenses. Not sure if this is of value to you. For me it is a big deal.

Cal
 
Hi Cal

Thanks for your reply.

OK, I get it now regarding the stacking of adapters. I think that since I will only have the "M to T" adapter (i.e., I will be missing 3 of the 4 components needed to mount the optical head of the 135mm f/2.8 on the SL body), I will park this idea for the time being.

I will focus on using my 75/1.4 and 50/1.0 M lenses on the SL for the time being, and then take things from there depending on how I get along with the camera.

Cheers


S-H,

For me the SL made sense because I have Nikon and Leica SLR glass as well as M-glass. It made sense for me to have the SL T-mount to M-mount to use Leica M-mount wides. To use "R" glass I stack a "R" to "M" adapter on top of the "T" to "M" adapter. To utilize a Visoflex lens I have a Visoflex to "R" adapter, and to mate to the SL a Visoflex lens like your 135 head requires a focusing heliocoil and the set of three adapters: Viso to "R"; "R" to "M;" and lastly a "M" to "T."

The biggest advantage of the SL is to use SLR glass because of the close focus abilities. Also the SL is kinda sized ergonomically to feel like a SLR.

As for wrist straps go I offer no advice, but I utilize a Nikon AH-4 Handstrap baseplate so I can hang the SL vertically like a M5, which allows me better mobility and also offers better protection of the lens and body.

My SL with the 50 Lux-SL AF lens weighs 5 1/4 pounds not compact like a M10. The 50 Lux really nails the focus and is highly accurate. The latest firmware got rid of the porky slow AF, so don't believe the early reviews of prototype lenses with old firmware. It is no lie that this lens is big, but it is a performer.

Leica lent me a 24-90 zoom for NYC Fashion Week two years ago. This lens is really remarkable. The highly developed in lens image stabilization allowed me to get these what I call "Circus Shots." that were just playing around. I was shooting at 400 ISO but at night in NYC. I opened up the aperture and took these night shots at 1/8th, 1/12 and 1/20 second expecting blurry impressionist like images, but was surprise when I downloaded the files and viewed them on my EIZO. The IS system in this lens is like a gyro and the images were tack sharp. This is a crazy lens.

For me the big advantage is being able to utilize all my small format glass on the SL. Also the SL derived much of its performance and design from the Leica "S" medium format DSLR. Seems like the M10 adopted the processor and other things from the SL. I'm just saying the SL and M10 share a lot and it is pretty hard to justify both. In your case because you are not SLR centric the M10 might be a better camera for you. In my case the SL is the better camera.

Like I said, the SL really is not a M-body replacement, but a substitute for a DSLR that allows easy focusing of manual focus small format lenses.

Also if you need autofocus, then you need the SL. BTW it seems like the 35 Cron and 75 Cron that will be released will be a lot smaller than my 50 Lux. E67 filter size verses E82 on the 24-90 and 50 Lux. BTW the 50 Lux and 24-90 are almost the same weight and size, meaning heavy and huge.

Don't disregard the severe weatherproofing on the SL body and lenses. Not sure if this is of value to you. For me it is a big deal.

Cal
 
Hi Cal

Thanks for your reply.

OK, I get it now regarding the stacking of adapters. I think that since I will only have the "M to T" adapter (i.e., I will be missing 3 of the 4 components needed to mount the optical head of the 135mm f/2.8 on the SL body), I will park this idea for the time being.

I will focus on using my 75/1.4 and 50/1.0 M lenses on the SL for the time being, and then take things from there depending on how I get along with the camera.

Cheers

S-H,

I think you will find that the bigger M-lenses (75/1.4 and 50/1.0) will balance well on a SL. I had a 50 Lux-M ASPH and the lens seemed too small. The SLR glass (50 Lux-R, Nikon 58/1.2 Noct-Nikkor) had the advantage of close focus.

The SL is very well suited for fast glass and narrow DOF. Very-very easy to nail the focus, and also quick to focus. I find myself exploiting F1.4 and F1.2 a lot more than in the past.

There is a complaint that Leica did not make the SL smaller. It is not as small as a Sony A7 or A9, but is sized right for SLR glass. With a 75 Lux or Noct it would be a very wonderful rig. Kinda makes one want to shoot wide open all the time. 1/8000 top shutter speed is a huge asset when shooting wide open for sharpness.

Expect the weight of your rig to be Pro DSLR'ish but maybe a bit more compact. I'm sure that your rig with that glass would feel very solid. Weight is your friend and there is a reason why sniper rifiles are heavy. If you are building a rig to exploit shooting wide open with shallow DOF the SL I think is a great choice.

Cal
 
Hi, just to follow up, my SL arrived a couple of days ago. Still getting to know it obviously, but I’m happy to report that my Mandler 135mm f/2.8 M lens with goggles mounts on the camera just fine. The goggles clear the grip with room to spare, in fact room for my fingers between the grip and the goggles too. The lens looks a wee bit silly on the camera, but should be a good solid package to shoot with.

I’m happy.
 
Back
Top