Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Japanese Camera Mfr Lenses of the 60s and 70s
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Tue Oct 30, 2012 12:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Oreste wrote:
...and I could say something about the British class system, but I won't.....


Feel free. If it is true then us Brits will have already thunk it AND said it.


PostPosted: Tue Oct 30, 2012 12:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
skida wrote:
The single most important thing in photography is the image. Everything else is just cars and petrol.


Well said.

I'm no expert in economics but there is a term to describe the Leica appeal:

Quote:
The snob effect: preference for goods because they are different from those commonly preferred; in other words, for consumers who want to use exclusive products, price is quality


I'm not a sports photographer, but I bet there are a few people on this forum that can offer some pictures of moving objects that can astound too and not necessarily using a Leica. Smile


PostPosted: Tue Oct 30, 2012 12:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
The outstanding things in that picture aren't the color (though its nice), or the resolution (which isn't really visible unless one pixel-peeps), or in fact much else to do with a lens. Its well-composed, captures a moment that is incredibly hard to capture, and is correctly focused which is very difficult to do under the circumstances - target in rapid motion THROUGH the DOF, extreme telephoto, small DOF, etc. This was taken with great skill and luck.

The very last factor in this success it seems to me was the lens. With the same skill and luck this identical picture could have been taken with a typical cheap Japanese third party 400mm lens and we wouldn't know the difference. A bit of CA wouldn't ruin it, nobody but a pixel-peeper would notice.

There ARE pictures which would be ruined with a bit of CA, but not this one.

Which gets to the heart of the matter really; for the most part the equipment only needs to be just good enough; the rest is in the photographers hands.


PostPosted: Tue Oct 30, 2012 12:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
luisalegria wrote:
Which gets to the heart of the matter really; for the most part the equipment only needs to be just good enough; the rest is in the photographers hands.


I think I might have this tattooed on my backside to show to gear snobs Wink


PostPosted: Tue Oct 30, 2012 12:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
luisalegria wrote:
Which gets to the heart of the matter really; for the most part the equipment only needs to be just good enough; the rest is in the photographers hands.


I agree wholeheartedly with what you say about that photograph, but I have quoted the above because that is what I was trying to say in my rambling post above.


PostPosted: Tue Oct 30, 2012 12:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
luisalegria wrote:
The outstanding things in that picture aren't the color (though its nice), or the resolution (which isn't really visible unless one pixel-peeps), or in fact much else to do with a lens. Its well-composed, captures a moment that is incredibly hard to capture, and is correctly focused which is very difficult to do under the circumstances - target in rapid motion THROUGH the DOF, extreme telephoto, small DOF, etc. This was taken with great skill and luck.

The very last factor in this success it seems to me was the lens. With the same skill and luck this identical picture could have been taken with a typical cheap Japanese third party 400mm lens and we wouldn't know the difference. A bit of CA wouldn't ruin it, nobody but a pixel-peeper would notice.

There ARE pictures which would be ruined with a bit of CA, but not this one.

Which gets to the heart of the matter really; for the most part the equipment only needs to be just good enough; the rest is in the photographers hands.


You are aware then how difficult this was to do, especially with a 560mm lens. Thanks! But there is something essential in this lens design: the push-pull focussing system, which allows one to follow fast-moving objects superbly, and this 'trombone' fosussing system is unique to Leica, so far as know.




PostPosted: Tue Oct 30, 2012 1:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Quote:
And credit is always an option

You over stepped the mark with this suggestion... Laughing but you are right for a Pro to use finance it makes business sense because it is related to his Job...for me (A non Pro) I would have to weigh up whether credit is necessary.
My brother bought a Leica snap shot P&S camera for that very reason to take snap shots of his family,why did he buy Leica because to him it was the brand name...he new nothing of its abilities.For me I also invest in camera gear to take photos of my family/the world around me...for me that has the greater value of memories more so than a cameras value that will sit on a shelf.I wish Leica produced something that would make the images last for ever...that would be worth buying!

I think my point is we are all forgetting about why we use cameras and lens.Is it surely not to capture a moment in time first and then secondly through trial and error find the equipment that does this best for each of us...now this is where it gets very personal and comes down to our opinions/experiences and to a certain degree our expectations.
I personally don't buy for "investment", I buy to use and explore each lenses qualities...I do research to find out what are considered the "good" lenses or cameras.It does not matter too me about the maker it just has to fit into my budget and yes I would stretch my budget for that extra special lens...but $800-$1600 is not value for money for me.

I love your photo mainly for the subject matter,composition there is nothing that I can see that speaks of the lenses extra quality.Now you must understand I am fairly ignorant of the finer points,technical aspects of photography......I am in photography because I enjoy it.I gather this is why you bought Leica in the first place to take photos?

PS I live in what is called an exotic location and yet I still take photos within my "means"... Laughing Your last answer seems to tell me its more about the money and status than the actual use of the Leica camera/lens.I don't begrudge you that POV but if that is your main point on using Leica its not a good reason/selling point for me to buy it.Please forgive me if I have misunderstood/misread your last reply.


PostPosted: Tue Oct 30, 2012 1:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
mo wrote:
Quote:
And credit is always an option

You over stepped the mark with this suggestion... Laughing but you are right for a Pro to use finance it makes business sense because it is related to his Job...for me (A non Pro)
My brother bought a Leica snap shot P&S camera for that very reason to take snap shots of his family,why did he buy Leica because to him it was the brand name...he new nothing of its abilities.For me I also invest in camera gear to take photos of my family/the world around me...for me that has the greater value of memories more so than a cameras value that will sit on a shelf.I wish Leica produced something that would make the images last for ever...that would be worth buying!

I think my point is we are all forgetting about why we use cameras and lens.Is it surely not to capture a moment in time first and then secondly through trial and error find the equipment that does this best for each of us...now this is where it gets very personal and comes down to our opinions/experiences and to a certain degree our expectations.
I personally don't buy for "investment", I buy to use and explore each lenses qualities...I do research to find out what are considered the "good" lenses or cameras.It does not matter too me about the maker it just has to fit into my budget and yes I would stretch my budget for that extra special lens...but $800-$1600 is not value for money for me.

I love your photo mainly for the subject matter,composition there is nothing that I can see that speaks of the lenses extra quality.Now you must understand I am fairly ignorant of the finer points,technical aspects of photography......I am in photography because I enjoy it.I gather this is why you bought Leica in the first place to take photos?

PS I live in what is called an exotic location and yet I still take photos within my "means"... Laughing Your last answer seems to tell me its more about the money and status than the actual use of the Leica camera/lens.I don't begrudge you that POV but if that is your main point on using Leica its not a good reason/selling point for me to buy it.Please forgive me if I have misunderstood/misread your last reply.


Yes, you have. I use Leica only for its photographic properties. In fact, when I am out and about and strangers start getting 'nosy' and start asking about my equipment, I try to change the subject, shoo them away, or move. Again, I have spent less on equipment than most people have on beer. Borrowing for large purchases is certainly reasonable, especially when the purchase is one that has good durability.

Last edited by Oreste on Tue Oct 30, 2012 1:34 am; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Tue Oct 30, 2012 1:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I am a beer drinker and I have to say that $800 would have been more than enough for my last two (or more) years consumption, and it has probably cast me about $20 in coffee, just to be able to keep up with this thread.


PostPosted: Tue Oct 30, 2012 1:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
skida wrote:
I am a beer drinker and I have to say that $800 would have been more than enough for my last two (or more) years consumption, and it has probably cast me about $20 in coffee, just to be able to keep up with this thread.


Well you don't drink much beer then! LOL


PostPosted: Tue Oct 30, 2012 1:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Sorry for the misunderstanding..

I guess that's it in a nutshell ...you are out taking photos with the camera gear that you love. Cool am I to assume that you don't buy any more Leica gear and only have what you bought the first time around...ie you have escaped the dreaded LBA disease?


PostPosted: Tue Oct 30, 2012 1:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Novoflex had a very similar system with interchangable lens heads, etc.

There were other systems intended for that purpose. Some other German makers like Astro, Piesker and Kilfitt had special designs with rack&pinion focusing using a long crank that did about the same thing too. I used a couple of these in the past.

In the end its a matter of what you can get used to. In my case what works for me is to pre-focus where I expect things to go, and wait for the right moment to press the shutter - giving a lead time for shutter lag. Not that I was ever very good at this sort of photography.


PostPosted: Tue Oct 30, 2012 1:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
mo wrote:
Sorry for the misunderstanding..

I guess that's it in a nutshell ...you are out taking photos with the camera gear that you love. Cool am I to assume that you don't buy any more Leica gear and only have what you bought the first time around...ie you have escaped the dreaded LBA disease?


My gear is sufficient for my needs and I do not expect to accrue any more. I have bought and sold a few pieces over the years but I am now settled on what I need.


PostPosted: Tue Oct 30, 2012 1:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
luisalegria wrote:
Novoflex had a very similar system with interchangable lens heads, etc.

There were other systems intended for that purpose. Some other German makers like Astro, Piesker and Kilfitt had special designs with rack&pinion focusing using a long crank that did about the same thing too. I used a couple of these in the past.

In the end its a matter of what you can get used to. In my case what works for me is to pre-focus where I expect things to go, and wait for the right moment to press the shutter - giving a lead time for shutter lag. Not that I was ever very good at this sort of photography.


Yes, Novoflex and Leica worked together on some pieces.


PostPosted: Tue Oct 30, 2012 1:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
luisalegria wrote:
Novoflex had a very similar system with interchangable lens heads, etc.

I love it; I don't use it enough as it's a bit of a pita lugging it around and I really need to put more practice time in on it, but it was remarkable how rapidly I got to grips with its useage. Once I'm mobile again and get things sorted I wil make an effort to get out and about with the kit.
One thing I never have been able to find out - there 's a filter drawer that's empty at the moment and I wondered if there's supposed to be a plain optically flat filter in there for default use. I know some mirror lenses use that system.


PostPosted: Tue Oct 30, 2012 1:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
We have a distaste for fanboyism on this forum and I think this thread has used up our allowance.

Someone who spends so much money on his Leica gear is just as free to tell the rest of us how much he likes it as someone who collects Vivitar. My suspicion, though, is that the Leica fanboys quite often have an inner guilty feeling and have a need to justify to themselves why they spent so much. If it makes them feel better then it's OK with me, but it makes boring reading for others. What I can't abide, and what we don't allow, are the ones who rubbish other gear without knowing anything about it, and this thread has seen way too much of that attitude.

I don't see anything wrong with deciding to spend a lower proportion of your disposable cash on cheaper gear if you can get the enjoyment out of it that you seek. You don't need to buy Leica to do that, and with less money spent you don't need to worry so much about your investment. I spend more on musical instruments than I do on photography and far, far more than I spend on beer and coffee, and I'm glad to say I don't feel the need to justify or gloat about that. Let's cut it out please.


PostPosted: Tue Oct 30, 2012 3:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
So what about those Japanese lenses?


PostPosted: Tue Oct 30, 2012 4:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
1. If a user uses Leica lenses exclusively (because the other brands are simply not good enough), then how would that user know how superior a particular 500-600mm lens is without having ACTUALLY used another brand himself/herself to compare apples with apples??

In other words, how would that user know how unique that lens ACTUALLY is?



2. You decide to get a Leica. A friend decides to get a Canon. You want a similar array of lenses. You have the same disposable income, same saving/spending capacity, so you save for each camera.
You friend buys:
Canon 5D Mk III
24mm F1.4L
50mm F1.2L
100mm F2.8L macro
400mm F5.6L
Total = about $8500
Takes him about 6 months to save and buy.

You get:
Leica M10
24mm F1.4 Summilux
50mm F1.4 Summilux
90mm F2.5 Summarit
(will buy the other lens later)
total = about $18500
Takes about 14 months to save and buy.

Who takes the best photos for the first year?


PostPosted: Tue Oct 30, 2012 5:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
dnas wrote:
1. If a user uses Leica lenses exclusively (because the other brands are simply not good enough), then how would that user know how superior a particular 500-600mm lens is without having ACTUALLY used another brand himself/herself to compare apples with apples??

In other words, how would that user know how unique that lens ACTUALLY is?



2. You decide to get a Leica. A friend decides to get a Canon. You want a similar array of lenses. You have the same disposable income, same saving/spending capacity, so you save for each camera.
You friend buys:
Canon 5D Mk III
24mm F1.4L
50mm F1.2L
100mm F2.8L macro
400mm F5.6L
Total = about $8500
Takes him about 6 months to save and buy.

You get:
Leica M10
24mm F1.4 Summilux
50mm F1.4 Summilux
90mm F2.5 Summarit
(will buy the other lens later)
total = about $18500
Takes about 14 months to save and buy.

Who takes the best photos for the first year?



Very Happy Very Happy Very Happy

Impeccable logic.

On a much more humble level, I think I have a more cost effective option that I enjoy using very often:

Kiev-II 1957 - 40ukp
Carl Zeiss Jena Sonnar 1.5/50 - 43ukp

Leica equivalent would I guess be:

M3 - 600ukp (approx)
Summarit 1.5/50 600ukp (approx)

Maybe the Leica is better, but is it over 1100ukp better?

Or maybe I can compare one of my other favourite shooting outfits that gives me a more modern look than the vintage Kiev/Sonnar:

Kiev-4AM 1982 - 19ukp
Helios-103 - 21ukp (copy of 1979 Summicron 2/50)

I guess the equivalent Leica would be:

M3 - 600ukp (approx)
Summicron 2/50 1,000ukp (approx)

I dunno, maybe I'm stupid but surely the differences in quality between the pictures my 40 quid Kiev/Helios combo produce and what I would be able to get if I forked out 1600 quid on a Leica setup are smaller than those that the choice of film, quality of developing and scanning and a whole bunch of other technical factors have?

I get a lot of joy from using my Kiev and Helios or the older one with the Sonnar and I really doubt I'm missing much by not spending a large sum of money to switch to a Leica.

Anyways, I find the results from my Kiev/Helios very pleasing, even with my diy kitchen sink c41 development:



Last edited by iangreenhalgh1 on Tue Oct 30, 2012 5:17 am; edited 2 times in total


PostPosted: Tue Oct 30, 2012 5:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
So, what does everyone think of the Super Takumars? I recently got my first one, a 50 1.4, and have now purchased the 135 prime complete and am eyeing a superb specimen of the 28mm 3.5 complete. I think I may have a collecting problem with these lenses.


PostPosted: Tue Oct 30, 2012 5:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
They have an excellent reputation for both very good optics with high resolution and very high mechanical quality, nice brass helicoids, they last a long time although you may see some yellowing in the 1.4/50 due to the lanthanum glass, but if you live somewhere sunny you can cure it by sticking it on a windowsill. If you are using it on digital the slight yellow cast won't be enough of an issue anyways.


PostPosted: Tue Oct 30, 2012 7:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
mackeral wrote:
So, what does everyone think of the Super Takumars? I recently got my first one, a 50 1.4, and have now purchased the 135 prime complete and am eyeing a superb specimen of the 28mm 3.5 complete. I think I may have a collecting problem with these lenses.


Stop drinking beer and you'll be ok Wink

Taks are great. Beautful to look at, pleasant to use, and highly capable of producing excellent pics.
My favorite in the line up (among the ones that I own) is the 1.9/85.


PostPosted: Tue Oct 30, 2012 8:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
mackeral wrote:
So, what does everyone think of the Super Takumars? I recently got my first one, a 50 1.4, and have now purchased the 135 prime complete and am eyeing a superb specimen of the 28mm 3.5 complete. I think I may have a collecting problem with these lenses.



Well I only have the M42 ones..........my 55 f1.8 and 135mm f3.5 give you more chance of pop and are sharp but not that little bit extra of being razor sharp. And the 35mm f3.5 is a "must have" because of it's cheap price and results, it's sharp except my one has a weakness in that it is not very sharp close up, so a Flek 35mm is better but erm more expensive.


PostPosted: Tue Oct 30, 2012 10:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
mackeral wrote:
So, what does everyone think of the Super Takumars? I recently got my first one, a 50 1.4, and have now purchased the 135 prime complete and am eyeing a superb specimen of the 28mm 3.5 complete.


very good lenses all!
note that the successor to the Super Takumars, the S-M-C ( Multi Coated Takumars ) have the same optical formula and full metal body but superior coating.
and that earlier Preset and Auto Takumars are very attractive with strong characters and lovely, smaller bodies

mackeral wrote:
I think I may have a collecting problem with these lenses.


not an uncommon problem Wink
e.g see the lenses I use: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/collections/72157604973031858/


PostPosted: Tue Oct 30, 2012 1:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
dnas wrote:
1. If a user uses Leica lenses exclusively (because the other brands are simply not good enough), then how would that user know how superior a particular 500-600mm lens is without having ACTUALLY used another brand himself/herself to compare apples with apples??

In other words, how would that user know how unique that lens ACTUALLY is?



This particular lens, with the sliding focus thumb-button, is unique (there is a 400mm version too). I have used other long lenses, of course. This particular lens (along with the 400mm) has a combination of design features which I find compelling:

1) Light weight
2) Breaks apart for portability
3) Outstanding sharpness and exceptionally high contrast and colour saturation (because it's not a telephoto, but a telescopic design)
4) Quick focussing action, no twisting, just push and pull

All these things together set this lens apart. I am always amazed at the quality of the images.







Last edited by Oreste on Tue Oct 30, 2012 2:21 pm; edited 2 times in total
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
Page 8 of 9