Leica... which are the one??

amoebahydra · Joined: 28 Apr 2009 Posts: 115

I used a lot of Leica glasses, 39 Leica R lenses and 48 Leica rangefinder lenses. Each of them has unique character and you have to know them well for optimal use.

I do not agree lenses produced by ELCAN (Ernest Leitz CANada)are inferior, in fact, many of ELCAN lenses are excellent for their use and many of them are my favorite ELCAN's optical design team was lead by legendary Walter Mandler and ELCAN market cover both Military and commercial sector. It is probably one of the first optic companies using computer for optical design since 70'. Some of its excellent products like ultrafast Elcan 1:1/90 for military and Noctilux 1:1/50 for the civil market, stereo lenses of Stereo Elmar 35 and 33mm, Apo-Telyt 1:3.4/180 with images of excellant sharpness originally built for military contract and subsequently produced for commercial use, and many others.

ELCAN design lenses based on figure of merits which not entirely based on MTF only. Many of Walter Mandler's products have characteristics image quality variable according to different aperture value and give another dimension for image control to photographer. Example of these characteristics like variable contrast in accordance to radial position that give 3D feeling to the photo, gradual transition of out-of-focus blur to give pleasing bokeh etc.

Attila · Expire: 2025-11-18

Orio · Expire: 2012-12-04

I have Canada and Wetzlar lenses and can not find differences.

Leica lenses are all very good, some of them are the best there is - but not all of them are the best like Leica diehards say.

Overall I find it very inane to state superiority of a brand over another brand. One should go with what pleases him and can afford. I was as happy photographing with low end lenses as I am now that I can afford better ones.

Every good lens brand has it's "fingerprint". With "good lens brand" I mean brands that make their own lenses, not those that market generic lenses rebranded - for instance there are so many brands that marketed the same Tokina or Tomioka lenses that you can not expect to find a brand identity in those brands.
WHile instead, brands like Nikkor Takumar Leica Contax Zuiko have their own consistent fingerprint.
Some of them have changed their fingerprint a bit over time: Leica lenses of the first generations were dreamy wide open and super sharp stopped down, and with moderate contrast, while Leica lenses of the second generations have become sharper wide open and with harder contrast.
Nikkor lenses have moved from the rich, soulful character of the pre-AI lenses, to the more exact, supersharp character of the AIS lenses.
Other brands have been more consistent, for instance western Zeiss lenses have maintained the same fingerprint through their various incarnations (Contax rangefinder to Contarex and Contaflex to Contax to Z line)

All the lenses of the best brands will render great pictures in the range from moderate wide (28mm) to moderate tele (135mm)

More differences surface in the super wide lenses (24mm and shorter) and in the long tele lenses (200mm and longer).
There, even between best brands you can see there is a gap. For instance, Western Zeiss super wides are noticeably better than the other brands' super wides; and Leica, NIkon and Canon long teles are noticeably better than the other brands' long teles.

If you are interested about the Leica R lenses, here's a short overview of the models that I have used:

Elmarit-R 35mm f/2.8 last version:
great lens, sharp wide open, I find it perfect for wide angle portraits if you are into the genre.

Summicron-R 50mm f/2 last version:
dreamy wide open (although not as much as the first version accoridng to reports), super sharp stopped down

Macro-Elmarit-R 60mm f/2.8:
It has become one of my favourite lenses. It's not as sharp as my Makro-Planar 100, but it's sharp enough, and it's size, weight, and 1:2 enlargement are ideal for my use, as often I don't need to enlarge as much as 1:1 and I can appreciate the smaller size of the Leica 60 Macro lens. At infinity it is decent but in my opinion is not as good as floating element macro lenses are.

Elmarit-R 90mm f/2.8 last version:
I think this is maybe the best of Leica R lenses. Unbelieavable skin tones, unmatched sharpness. I recommend it heartily

Summicron-R 90mm f/2 last version:
Not my favourite of Leica R lenses. It has probably the most "3D" of all Leica R lenses. But you pay for it with a mediocre sharpness in my opinion. Some people may like it this way for portraits. I personally keep feeling like I always miss detail. I choosed to sell it and keep the ELmarit-R 90

Elmarit-R 135mm last version:
Sharp wide open, incredible performer. Very recommended

ELmarit-R 180mm f/2.8 last version:
Lightweight (for what a full metal lens can be...) and compact.
More than enough sharp, not as sharp as the 90 and 135 Elmarits, but more than enough, and with an excellent "3D" rendition

Apo-Telyt-R 180mm f/3.5
Super compact, lightweight, and so sharp wide open that it can split hair in two. It was born as a US Navy military lens, and it shows. A winner.

aoleg · Joined: 22 Feb 2008 Posts: 1387 Location: Berlin, DE

Orio,

That's very useful information about Leica lenses. Thanks a lot for sharing!

my_photography · Expire: 2016-12-25

Good intro and impartial info from the thread on Leica.

Orio,
Didn't realise you were a Leica user. I always thought you were Zeiss all the way.

wildlightphoto · Joined: 06 Sep 2008 Posts: 66 Location: Sacramento USA

There are some good Leica lenses, some great Leica lenses and a few that are OK but not much more.

In my personal experience:

60mm Macro: very good to excellent sharpness at all distances, excellent bokeh, color saturation and flare resistance.

90mm Summicron-R: Good sharpness, becoming excellent at moderate apertures, bokelicious backgrounds, good flare resistance and color saturation. Severe field curvature when used with extension tubes.

100mm APO: brilliant optical performance, focussing from near to infinity is a chore because of the very very long focus throw.

135mm f/2.8 (old): good at full aperture, excellent sharpness at moderate apertures. Creamy bokeh good color saturation, needs to be well-shaded or it will flare. Very heavy, close focus limit isn't impressive.

180mm f/4 Elmar: tiny, lightweight, good but not great optical performance. Flares readily.

180mm f/2.8 APO-Elmarit-R: exceptionally sharp at full aperture, excellent bokeh, color saturation and flare resistance.

250mm f/4 (late): adequate, not much more than that.

280mm f/4 APO: diffraction-limited at full aperture, good bokeh, brilliant saturated colors, good close-focus limit, excellent handling. My favorite lens. Use it with the 1.4x APO-Extender and it's still an amazing performer.

400mm and 560mm f/5.6 for Televit rapid-focus grip: they were the cream of the crop in their day, but that was 1965. Leave these for the collectors.

400mm and 560mm f/6.8: excellent central sharpness, falling off toward the edges. No visible light fall-off, moderate field curvature, light weight, excellent flare resistance and color saturation. Their greatest strength is the push-pull focusing action, which with practice is quick, intuitive and precise.

75-200mm f/4.5: good performance for a 1980s zoom. It's not 1980 any more. 75% of these were rejected by Leitz QC and returned to Minolta.

80-200mm f/4: a bit of light fall-off at the widest apertures, otherwise I can't find fault with this lens: excellent sharpness, bokeh, color saturation, and flare resistance, and much more robust than the 75-200mm f/4.5 and the front doesn't rotate when focusing so you can use polarizing filters easily.

Whether any of these is 'worth it' is a personal valuation. IMHO the best bargains among the ones I've used are the 60 Macro, 80-200mm f/4 and the 400mm and 560mm f/6.8. The last one I'd sell if I were destitute is the 280mm f/4 APO.

Orio · Expire: 2012-12-04

Keysersoze27 · Expire: 2012-12-24

Just a little info......

Leica = (Lei)tz (Ca)mera

ChrisLilley · Joined: 01 Jan 2008 Posts: 1767 Location: Nice, France

wildlightphoto · Joined: 06 Sep 2008 Posts: 66 Location: Sacramento USA

ChrisLilley · Joined: 01 Jan 2008 Posts: 1767 Location: Nice, France

amoebahydra · Joined: 28 Apr 2009 Posts: 115

I have a set of them...two lens heads and three focusing modules

kansalliskala · Expire: 2016-12-30

aargh now the pictures coming here again .. can't come to this forum for days Very Happy

estudleon · Joined: 15 May 2008 Posts: 3754 Location: Argentina

PaulC · Joined: 23 Dec 2008 Posts: 2318

Leica R lenses are more affordable if you want to mount them on a DSLR and I believe some of the later R lenses are identical in design to the M series.

The Summicron-R 50 (late version) is often quoted as being one of the finest lenses ever made.

Perhaps there is one point worth adding: for some obscure reason, Leica named its lenses according to their apertures not according to their design. A Summicron is an f2 lens, a Summilux is and f1.4, but the name tells you nothing about the optical design. So an early Summicron and a late one may have little in common.

They are great lenses, of course, and work perfectly well as manual lenses on a top-end full-frame DSLR, but their origin is as a newsman's camera, not as a studio one. The cameras are small, light, easy to use, great for grabbing a shot... but the neg is still only 35mm

estudleon · Joined: 15 May 2008 Posts: 3754 Location: Argentina

PaulC · Joined: 23 Dec 2008 Posts: 2318

It's an old and rather sterile debate, Rino, but, yes, I think a Canon 5D - let alone a 5D MkII - can knock the socks off most 35mm films. Years ago, when it was a big talking point, there were tests done that suggested that consumer 35mm films achieved resolution equivalent to about 4MP. If I remember correctly, Velvia 50 was rated at about 8MP in 35mm.

Medium format film is something else altogether.

What matters in the end is what pleases you, but if you want very high resolution I think a high-end DSLR or a medium or large format camera will serve you best. Major stock agencies will tell you the same thing.

estudleon · Joined: 15 May 2008 Posts: 3754 Location: Argentina

PaulC · Joined: 23 Dec 2008 Posts: 2318

I don't know how far down the range you go before 35mm starts outperforming the digital cameras but I do remember it was a very hotly argued topic at the time the 6.3MP Canon 300D/10D cameras came out and I reckon they may have been on a par with common consumer films.

Attila · Expire: 2025-11-18

hexi · Expire: 2011-11-18

estudleon · Joined: 15 May 2008 Posts: 3754 Location: Argentina

The question is abstract for me when I think about where I can see the images.

If I see them thru my monitor, by internet, the IQ is reduced a lot. So, where can I see them and catch the real quality of the images?

Paper? chemical? Digital? Is the same for B&W than for color images?

PaulC · Joined: 23 Dec 2008 Posts: 2318

estudleon · Joined: 15 May 2008 Posts: 3754 Location: Argentina

I saw a lot of pics 40 x 30 cm taken by Canon L and Leica M lenses in exhibitions and they were very, very good ones (Salgao in example). For my eyes, and for the jury too. Specially in B&W

Attila · Expire: 2025-11-18

I did talk about pictures what I saw on monitors longer distance is harder part than closer one. For example I got pretty good result with cheap film in closer range at infinity distance I got good result only with sharpest slides like Velvia , Provia. At closer range my 5MPX Olympus E-1 perform very well at longer distance result is pretty crap.