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

Leica M Mount Lenses. Can you identify what lens was used?
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sun Dec 29, 2013 9:22 am    Post subject: Leica M Mount Lenses. Can you identify what lens was used? Reply with quote
Hi Guys,

Perhaps like many photographers i'm always looking for that wow lens where the images stand out against using other lenses. As a result I have accumulated quite a few lenses. Leica lenses are said to have their own 'Leica Look' and so do Zeiss ZM lenses with their '3D Pop'. Voigtlander lenses vary more but can also look very nice. I use the lenses on my Leica M9 and Voigtlander Bessa R3A.

So, here is the challenge.

Can you tell me if this photo is:

Q1) Taken on?

A: 35mm B&W Film
B: Digital

Q2) What lens was used?

A: Leica Summilux ASPH 50mm f1.4
B: Leica Summicron 50mm f2 v5
C: Zeiss ZM Sonnar 50mm f1.5 C
D: Zeiss ZM Planar 50mm f2
E: Voigtlander Nokton 35mm f1.2 ASPH ii
F: Voigtlander Nokton 40mm f1.4
G: Jupiter 3 50mm f1.5 (Sonnar Clone)


Film or Digital? by MatthewOsbornePhotography_, on Flickr


PostPosted: Sun Dec 29, 2013 10:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I never get these right but here we go Smile

B: Digital
G: Jupiter 3 50mm f1.5 (Sonnar Clone)


PostPosted: Sun Dec 29, 2013 11:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
You could have used just about any 50mm lens, the lens itself is a minor factor and almost all 50mm lenses are more than good enough.

Nice shot BTW.


PostPosted: Sun Dec 29, 2013 11:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Stopped down, processed, downsized, sharpened ... what do you want to hear?

Last edited by Bille on Sun Dec 29, 2013 10:53 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Sun Dec 29, 2013 11:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
B: Digital

D: Zeiss ZM Planar 50mm f2


PostPosted: Sun Dec 29, 2013 1:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
it's impossible you will get same result with any lens on this shoot.


PostPosted: Mon Dec 30, 2013 12:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Ooh look I've got a whole bunch of expensive lenses that will go on my Leica.

Its almost impossible to tell. The photo shown here is in low resolution and tiny. We are just guessing.


PostPosted: Mon Dec 30, 2013 12:41 am    Post subject: You don't actually 'Need' expensive Leica lenses.. Reply with quote
Pontus wrote:
I never get these right but here we go Smile

B: Digital
G: Jupiter 3 50mm f1.5 (Sonnar Clone)


Good guess Pontus, you are indeed correct. As many of you correctly stated it is almost impossible to say what Leica M mount lens was used as the lens was stopped down.

I think the easiest 2 lenses that is was not was the Leica Lux ASPH 50 and Zeiss ZM Planar 50. Both are clinally sharp and as you can see from the image it has a more filmic look to it obtainable from the 1930s Sonnar design (ZM Sonnar 50 and Jupiter 3) but also from the Cron 50 from my experience. I liked this less polished almost film look of this photo hence this post.

I wanted to show that although the expensive Leica lenses are nice when you need sharp results using the lens at their widest aperture such as available light Leica wedding photography, in the studio any lens stopped down will perform just as well. It sounds obvious but many Leica photographers stop their Leica lenses down whether in the studio, for street photography or landscapes. As a result it means you don't actually 'need' the expensive Leica lenses that you think you do!

I might try my Industar 52mm f2.8 next time to see how it compares.


PostPosted: Mon Dec 30, 2013 1:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
If you ask a gymnast to go for a jog you might not get much of an idea what she can do.


PostPosted: Mon Dec 30, 2013 8:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
uhoh7 wrote:
If you ask a gymnast to go for a jog you might not get much of an idea what she can do.


Don't worry I have had the gymnasts pirouetting already, i'm just seeing what else she can do

Here is an example below, Leica M9 + Leica Summicron 50mm f2 v5 wide open ambient light only

Thanks to everyone who contributed to the thread

Happy New Year!

Matt


Leica Summicron 50 by MatthewOsbornePhotography_, on Flickr


PostPosted: Mon Dec 30, 2013 8:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
That outdoor shot is great, beautiful model!!


PostPosted: Mon Dec 30, 2013 8:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I should try the lottery next Smile

Love that last picture btw!


PostPosted: Mon Dec 30, 2013 8:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
MatthewOsbornePhotography wrote:


Leica Summicron 50 by MatthewOsbornePhotography_, on Flickr


She reminds me so much of my ex-girlfriend... if I do not knew better I almost will say they are sisters!


PostPosted: Mon Dec 30, 2013 9:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Edited

Last edited by bernhardas on Tue Apr 26, 2016 10:57 am; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Mon Dec 30, 2013 9:13 am    Post subject: Leica M9 + Cron' 50 Reply with quote
bernhardas wrote:
Normally I quite like flare, but here the nasty flare on the right seems to draw my view away from the model.
I am not sure that it really adds something.

A version with tighter crop ( even Portarit orientation) would be more to my taste.


Thanks. I like flare hence posting this but most were without. Here is a tighter crop one for now and i'll dig out a similar one without flare later


Leica Cron 50 by MatthewOsbornePhotography_, on Flickr


PostPosted: Mon Dec 30, 2013 9:34 am    Post subject: Re: You don't actually 'Need' expensive Leica lenses.. Reply with quote
MatthewOsbornePhotography wrote:
(...) and as you can see from the image it has a more filmic look to it obtainable from the 1930s Sonnar design


You did your best to eliminate any lens character. Try a similar shot with any modern 50mm lens, process similarly and you wont see any difference.


PostPosted: Mon Dec 30, 2013 10:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Matthew's shown us some remakably pretty young ladies in pleasantly tasteful poses but, to be cruelly honest, the ones with flare could be used as "knocking material" to denigrate whatever lens/camera/film/sensor combination had been used to produce them.

Oh dear, that does seem a bit churlish. Although the pictures are really very nice Wink


PostPosted: Mon Dec 30, 2013 11:38 am    Post subject: Re: You don't actually 'Need' expensive Leica lenses.. Reply with quote
MatthewOsbornePhotography wrote:
Pontus wrote:
I never get these right but here we go Smile

B: Digital
G: Jupiter 3 50mm f1.5 (Sonnar Clone)


Good guess Pontus, you are indeed correct. As many of you correctly stated it is almost impossible to say what Leica M mount lens was used as the lens was stopped down.

I think the easiest 2 lenses that is was not was the Leica Lux ASPH 50 and Zeiss ZM Planar 50. Both are clinally sharp and as you can see from the image it has a more filmic look to it obtainable from the 1930s Sonnar design (ZM Sonnar 50 and Jupiter 3) but also from the Cron 50 from my experience. I liked this less polished almost film look of this photo hence this post.

I wanted to show that although the expensive Leica lenses are nice when you need sharp results using the lens at their widest aperture such as available light Leica wedding photography, in the studio any lens stopped down will perform just as well. It sounds obvious but many Leica photographers stop their Leica lenses down whether in the studio, for street photography or landscapes. As a result it means you don't actually 'need' the expensive Leica lenses that you think you do!

I might try my Industar 52mm f2.8 next time to see how it compares.


Just about every ~50mm lens produced in the last 70 years is clinically sharp stopped down. In fact, it's been hard to find a lens that isn't sharp when stopped down since the introduction of the Rapid Rectilinear over 140 years ago.

All you're seeing with the J-3 is a little uncorrected spherical aberration, hence the look.

No-one 'needs' expensive Leica lenses, just some people feel like they are a better photographer if they have them.

There are tons of ~50mm lenses that are sharp wide open, many of them very cheap, that's not a unique selling point of Leica.


PostPosted: Mon Dec 30, 2013 12:49 pm    Post subject: Re: You don't actually 'Need' expensive Leica lenses.. Reply with quote
Edited

Last edited by bernhardas on Tue Apr 26, 2016 10:57 am; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Minolta Rokkor-PF 1.7/50, Minolta MD 1.7/50, Konica Hexanon 1.8/50 & 1.7/50, KMZ Zenitar M2s 2/50, Topcon RE Auto Topcor 1.8/58, just off the top of my head. However, there are quite a lot of lenses that are sharp wide open but don't look that sharp due to less than perfect corrections at that aperture. One good example is the Pancolar 1.8/50, it is sharp wide open but residual aberrations mask that somewhat.


PostPosted: Mon Dec 30, 2013 6:23 pm    Post subject: Re: You don't actually 'Need' expensive Leica lenses.. Reply with quote
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:


There are tons of ~50mm lenses that are sharp wide open, many of them very cheap, that's not a unique selling point of Leica.


Hi Ian, yes sorry I did not intend it to sound like every lens is soft wide open except Leica. The Zeiss ZM Planar for one is very sharp from those I own.

Apologies to anyone not feeling the flare shot.

I thought I better give my Leica Lux ASPH 50 a fair chance in the studio so today I shot with it wide open for the whole shoot. Here is a sample at f1.4. I enjoyed using it at f1.4 and it reminds me a little of my Nikkor 50mm f1.2 AI-s on the D800. One of my favourite portrait lenses.


Leica Lux 50 by MatthewOsbornePhotography_, on Flickr


PostPosted: Mon Dec 30, 2013 6:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I happen to like that flare shot quite a bit. Technique has to be pulled off just right for it to be effective, though, which you did and it is.


PostPosted: Mon Dec 30, 2013 8:40 pm    Post subject: Voigtlander Nokton 35mm f1.2 ASPH ii Lens Flare Reply with quote
frenched wrote:
I happen to like that flare shot quite a bit. Technique has to be pulled off just right for it to be effective, though, which you did and it is.


Thanks

Here is one from today to keep the lens flare theme going. I like this one but the flare maybe not to everyones taste.

Leica M9 + Voigtlander Nokton 35mm f1.2 ASPH ii

Model Taran, Ambient light only


Leica Fashion by MatthewOsbornePhotography_, on Flickr


PostPosted: Tue Dec 31, 2013 12:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
. . . However, there are quite a lot of lenses that are sharp wide open but don't look that sharp due to less than perfect corrections at that aperture. One good example is the Pancolar 1.8/50, it is sharp wide open but residual aberrations mask that somewhat.


Ian - I'm maybe a bit slow on the uptake today because I can't quite figure out how a lens can be sharp but not actually look sharp. Help the slow and aging, please Smile


PostPosted: Tue Dec 31, 2013 1:16 am    Post subject: Re: Voigtlander Nokton 35mm f1.2 ASPH ii Lens Flare Reply with quote
MatthewOsbornePhotography wrote:
I like this one but the flare maybe not to everyones taste.


Good, but this one's a bit too hot. I like the bright prism effect of the first one. Just me.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2