Leitz Macro-Elmar R and "A Pentax Lens"

[scsambrook]

I've recently bought two lenses, neither of which I really needed but both of which were "priced to go" (i.e. cheap). One is a Leitz 100mm f4 Macro Elmar R (4 elements) and the other is a Pentax lens of roughly similar focal length with 7 elements. I can't use the Leitz lens on my K10D and I can't use the Pentax on my Lumix, so what follows isn't a comparison in any meaningful sense. The pictures just show the sort of images each lens will produce with hardly any manipulation. Similar "wide" apertures and subject distances, both sections of the original files.

Leitz lens on Lumix G1: (click on pic for better view)


Pentax lens on K10D: (click on pic for better view)


I like them both, although the M4/3 file loses out a bit to the APS file. If Leitax adapters weren't so expensive I'd be inclinded to get one and see how the Macro Elmar does on the Pentax.

Is the Leitz lens "better"? Only 4 elements as opposed to 7 remember. . . Does it have better "bokeh" and the famous "painterly" qualities Leitz lenses are famous for? Well, even if it does, the Pentax lens surely gives it a run for its money in these two pics - even though it's a 160gram el cheapo plastic 35-80 AF kit lens that rattles when you shake it and can be bought for the price of two burgers in MacDonalds. Using the images for "slide shows" on the family TV you certainly can't tell much difference. Makes you think, eh?

[DR.JUAN]

Like Leica rendering.

Although the 7 elements suppose to give better borders and bokeh, but with Leica always the IQ is great.

Vote for Leics.

[Oldhand]

I have had a very similar experience with a plastic Nikon lens in the same focal length.
The Nikon AF Nikkor 35-80 f4-5.6D gives amazing results - always more than I expect.
I'll post some images tomorrow if it won't be considered de-railing the thread.
OH

[scsambrook]

OH - yes please do show some, it'll be interesting to see them here.