Can I catch Confirmation Virus from a Old Leica Lens?

[Ralf11]

I was doing some reading about the old pre-Asph leica lenses recently, and it struck me that there are a number of parallels to audiophile products:

 

- there was a lot of argument about whether these lenses really did render differently

 

- then more arguments on what the mechanism was if they did...

 

- and finally, numerous claims that they did and while not as accurate, it was more pleasing to the eye

 

[marce]

LOL, seen those sort of arguments and many regarding the quality of the bokeh.

I judge a picture on its merits not what it was taken on...

[Ralf11]

I actually think there is something about Leica lenses, and not just the old ones that sell for $4,000 to $9,000 either.

 

I use the 'cheap' Panasonic-Leica lenses on my m43 cameras (one was only $300 used) and they do seem to render differently - on landscapes the clouds look real special.  Maybe distortion but eu-optic distortion...

 

It seems there are 3 effects going on:

 

1. Bokeh effects, as you mentioned (esp. avoidance of 'ring' or donut shapes)

2. micro-contrast

3. Leica "Glow" - which is clearly due to spherical aberrations in the old lenses and the effects on highlights

 

Interestingly, the modern trend in lens design is to make them razor sharp all the way across even in corners, and more accurate.

[Archimago]

Wouldn't the analogy with lenses in audio be more like different microphones and their special quality? Some might add a special warmth to voices... Others capture instruments better.

 

A Telefunken mic shootout like this one for example as a modern sonic equivalent of pixel peeping lens performance?

 

Or maybe the classic sound of Neumann M49s used in capturing Kind of Blue as an example of sentimental favourites?

[sandyk]

4 hours ago, Archimago said:

Wouldn't the analogy with lenses in audio be more like different microphones and their special quality? Some might add a special warmth to voices... Others capture instruments better.

 

A Telefunken mic shootout like this one for example as a modern sonic equivalent of pixel peeping lens performance?

 

Or maybe the classic sound of Neumann M49s used in capturing Kind of Blue as an example of sentimental favourites?

Archimago

 Please check your PMs

Alex

[lucretius]

14 hours ago, Ralf11 said:

I use the 'cheap' Panasonic-Leica lenses on my m43 cameras (one was only $300 used) and they do seem to render differently - on landscapes the clouds look real special

 

 You realize that these lenses are not made by Leica (https://www.fdtimes.com/2016/01/09/panasonic-lens-factory-tour/)?

[Ralf11]

They are made to Leica spec. and inspected by Leica.  In exchange Leica gets sensor/body help from Panasonic - not always to the same extent as the rebranded LX100 tho.

[lucretius]

2 hours ago, Ralf11 said:

They are made to Leica spec. and inspected by Leica.  In exchange Leica gets sensor/body help from Panasonic - not always to the same extent as the rebranded LX100 tho.

 

Panasonic says that quality assurance is certified by Leica. I take that to mean that Leica "approved" Panasonic's QC procedures.  I highly doubt that Leica inspects the production lenses.  Also, since Leica derives license revenue from Panasonic, how strict are they with the specs?  

[Ralf11]

Leica designs are used - that's the important thing

 

I've seen no issues with QC, nor heard about them

[gmgraves]

On 1/29/2020 at 5:15 PM, Ralf11 said:

I was doing some reading about the old pre-Asph leica lenses recently, and it struck me that there are a number of parallels to audiophile products:

 

- there was a lot of argument about whether these lenses really did render differently

 

- then more arguments on what the mechanism was if they did...

 

- and finally, numerous claims that they did and while not as accurate, it was more pleasing to the eye

 

Depends on whether your talking an Elmar 50mm f:3.5 or a Summilux 50mm f:1.4.😏

[lucretius]

4 hours ago, Ralf11 said:

Leica designs are used - that's the important thing

 

I've seen no issues with QC, nor heard about them

 

There appears to be general agreement (though this could be wrong) that the lenses are designed and produced by Panasonic but the designs are submitted for approval to Leica with respect to their optical characteristics and manufacturing tolerances. Hence, Panasonic-Leica lenses are required to meet a set of demanding quality standards established by Leica but are otherwise the result of Japanese optical manufacturing excellence.  Does this make sense?

[gmgraves]

43 minutes ago, lucretius said:

 

There appears to be general agreement (though this could be wrong) that the lenses are designed and produced by Panasonic but the designs are submitted for approval to Leica with respect to their optical characteristics and manufacturing tolerances. Hence, Panasonic-Leica lenses are required to meet a set of demanding quality standards established by Leica but are otherwise the result of Japanese optical manufacturing excellence.  Does this make sense?

I dunno about Panasonic, but a number of years ago, Leica was partnered with Minolta. Leica made most of their prime lenses, but Minolta made their zoom lenses and the parts for the Leica SLR. What Minolta shipped to Leica was only the glass. Leica made the lens mechanicals and assembled the lenses and aligned them to Leica specifications. Not to mention that Leica used a different, and proprietary lens mount from that which Minolta used. Minolta also supplied the “innards” of the Leica SLR camera, but Leica re-machined the mechanical parts to closer tolerances, and put them in a camera body that they designed and built in-house. 
The funny thing is that even though Minolta supplied the glass for the 70-210mm zoom lens (for instance),  the Leica version always outperformed the Minolta version of the same lens simply because Leica’s mechanicals and alignment of the individual elements was that much more precise. Of course one paid for that precision (probably still do) as the Leica version was thousands of dollars while the Minolta version was mere hundreds.

[Ralf11]

3 hours ago, lucretius said:

 

There appears to be general agreement (though this could be wrong) that the lenses are designed and produced by Panasonic but the designs are submitted for approval to Leica with respect to their optical characteristics and manufacturing tolerances. Hence, Panasonic-Leica lenses are required to meet a set of demanding quality standards established by Leica but are otherwise the result of Japanese optical manufacturing excellence.  Does this make sense?

 

where did you hear that?

[lucretius]

3 hours ago, Ralf11 said:

 

where did you hear that?

 

Photography groups (past).  Topic used to come up once in a while.  See https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/56864515.  Note the following quotes from Panasonic:

****

"Panasonic is responsible for the design and manufacture of Leica brand lenses, but it is all subject to approval of Leica before the lens can be commercialized."

 

"The proposed design is submitted to Leica, who then advises on changes. The process is repeated numerous times until Leica finally approves the design."

 

"The difference in lens performance and manufacturing tolerance is very clear as between the Lumix and Leica branded lenses. In addition to high MTF levels, coma aberration and distortion are held to a very strict standard at Leica. Once those standards have been cleared by Leica, Panasonic must then clear Leica’s very stringent manufacturing standards. Only after all of those hurdles have been cleared, will a lens be approved by Leica."

****

[lucretius]

This may also interest you:

 

Leica D-Lux 7 Made in China:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/61968594

[accwai]

On 1/30/2020 at 2:15 PM, Ralf11 said:

I actually think there is something about Leica lenses, and not just the old ones that sell for $4,000 to $9,000 either.

 

I use the 'cheap' Panasonic-Leica lenses on my m43 cameras (one was only $300 used) and they do seem to render differently - on landscapes the clouds look real special.  Maybe distortion but eu-optic distortion...

Would it be possible to post some examples for the benefit of us not so advanced?

 

Quote

 

It seems there are 3 effects going on:

 

1. Bokeh effects, as you mentioned (esp. avoidance of 'ring' or donut shapes)

2. micro-contrast

3. Leica "Glow" - which is clearly due to spherical aberrations in the old lenses and the effects on highlights

 

Interestingly, the modern trend in lens design is to make them razor sharp all the way across even in corners, and more accurate.

 

 

So does this have Leica glow or not?

 

On 1/30/2020 at 4:05 AM, marce said:

[...] I judge a picture on its merits not what it was taken on...

 

Would 17+" of carbon ceramic and 10 pistons in a caliper be worthy of consideration then?

 

[Ralf11]

here are some examples (old Leica lenses & mostly portraiture):

 

https://www.artphotoacademy.com/the-leica-look/

 

 

lucre - I like to get information form more accurate sources than photo groups on the internet

[lucretius]

13 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

lucre - I like to get information form more accurate sources than photo groups on the internet

 

Did you even click on the links? The first one contained links to sources, i.e. Panasonic and Leica.

[jabbr]

There are entire forums where these issues are debated. 
 

my 2p:

 

Pre-digital, I used Leica M for wide-normal and Canon for tele. The rangefinder works great for wide. AF works great for tele/sports.

 

The M6 with the old lux 35/1.4 was very very compact — easy to walk around all day. In contrast, the new 35s with AF etc are gigantic! It’s an ergonomics issue. 
 

In contrast the R line never really did it for me. My Canon 200/1.8 is an exceptional portrait lens that doubles as a high speed indoor sports lens.

 

All these lenses work great on my Sony A7r3 w adapters 😉 Still can’t beat the ergonomics of the M6.

[accwai]

On 2/1/2020 at 3:54 PM, Ralf11 said:

here are some examples (old Leica lenses & mostly portraiture):

 

https://www.artphotoacademy.com/the-leica-look/

 

You mean like these?

 

 

 

 

On 2/2/2020 at 10:24 AM, jabbr said:

In contrast the R line never really did it for me.

 

So would these be acceptable?

 

 

 

Quote

My Canon 200/1.8 is an exceptional portrait lens that doubles as a high speed indoor sports lens.

 

Oh yes, the Great Whites are totally awesome!

 

 

Quote

There are entire forums where these issues are debated.

 

Personally I'd much rather see examples than debates. They say a picture is worth a thousand words. But that's just me.

[marce]

I use Sigma and Nikon, the new Sigmas (art series) are nice.😁

[gmgraves]

On 2/1/2020 at 9:45 AM, accwai said:

Would it be possible to post some examples for the benefit of us not so advanced?

 

 

So does this have Leica glow or not?

 

 

Would 17+" of carbon ceramic and 10 pistons in a caliper be worthy of consideration then?

 

Ah, Lamborghinis. The Hoodlum’s Ferrari

[gmgraves]

10 hours ago, marce said:

I use Sigma and Nikon, the new Sigmas (art series) are nice.😁

I used to use Nikon F series for essentially my entire adult life. I started with an F and culminated with F4 and a bag full of Nikkor lenses for years until digital took over. Then I changed over to Nikon digital bodies. About two years ago a friend of mine showed me his new Canon SX60 with a non-detachable lens that went from 21 mm to 1330 mm equivalent (optical) continuous zoom. Wow! No more bag full of lenses to haul around. I have never looked back and am generally very pleased with the result.

[marce]

6 hours ago, gmgraves said:

I used to use Nikon F series for essentially my entire adult life. I started with an F and culminated with F4 and a bag full of Nikkor lenses for years until digital took over. Then I changed over to Nikon digital bodies. About two years ago a friend of mine showed me his new Canon SX60 with a non-detachable lens that went from 21 mm to 1330 mm equivalent (optical) continuous zoom. Wow! No more bag full of lenses to haul around. I have never looked back and am generally very pleased with the result.

I am looking at going the same way, a major operation has left me not as strong as I use to be and lugging a full frame and lenses round has lost its appeal.

[gmgraves]

6 hours ago, marce said:

I am looking at going the same way, a major operation has left me not as strong as I use to be and lugging a full frame and lenses round has lost its appeal.

When you get to the point that you always decide to not take your camera gear along with you when you go out because you don’t want to lug it around, then that’s when these SLR-like non-interchangeable lens digital cameras start looking really attractive. I can shoot stills, H-D video and have every focal length from ultra wide angle to super telephoto at the touch of a button!