LEICA SERIE 5.5 NDx1 13026 GERMANY

[k-hawinkler]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

My LEICA APO-TELYT-R 1:4/280 came with the following filter:

 

LEICA SERIE (sic) 5.5 NDx1 13026 GERMANY

 

What is the purpose of this filter with optical density of 0.0, 100% transmittance, and no f-stop reduction?

[Michael Geschlecht]

Hello K-H,

 

The 180/2 which is the 280/4's contemporary has equivalent filters both front & back specifically to protect the lens elements inside of them. Perhaps the same here.

 

I would think Douglas Herr would know. He likes this lens.

 

btw: I would guess that is a reallly flat piece of glass. On both sides. Probably coated also. Likely single coated: Violet or Brown. Not multi: Green.

 

Best Regards,

 

Michael

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[k-hawinkler]

Hi Michael,

 

Thanks for the feedback. Yup, Douglas Herr indeed works miracles with that lens.

I am asking as I want to track down the cause for and possibly avoid these unwanted ghosts in the upper part of the image:

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Sony NEX-7 + Leica APO-TELYT-R 280 mm f/4

[lars_bergquist]

The small series filter in the filter drawer is there because that drawer is the most convenient place for any filter. Many long tele lenses use this arrangement, because a front-mounted filter would be very large, or even impossible.

 

This means however that a filter must always be in place, because it is actually part of the lens computation. It is a lens element. So even if a filter effect is not wanted, a clear filter must always be in place. Trying to use the lens without one would do things to sharpness.

 

The reflections remind me of the ones we sometimes got with the M8 and a UV/IR filter when there were strong point light sources. The Apo-Telyt has a permanently mounted plane protective filter in front of the actual first element, which is said to be quite soft. Does the lens also have an ordinary screw-thread E77 filter? If not, I guess that pp work is the only way out.

 

The old man from the Age of the Y filter

Edited August 26, 2012 by lars_bergquist

[k-hawinkler]

Hi Lars,

 

Many thanks for your illuminating explanations.

So I better not remove the SERIES 5.5 NDx1 filter.

 

Indeed, the lens also has an additional internal thread for screw-in type filters E 77.

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-wiki.en/index.php/280mm_f/4_APO-Telyt-R

However, I didn't use an E 77 filter when I took that image.

 

So, it looks like I am stuck with more careful pp work.

Thanks again.

[k-hawinkler]

Well, here is the same view, but different light, and different camera and lens:

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Nikon D800E + Leitz Telyt 280 mm f/4.8

 

Maybe next step is to compare both lenses on the NEX-7 with its considerably higher pixel density in the approximately same light?

[lars_bergquist]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

K-H, that reflection effect depended a lot on the strength and placement of those light sources. As you can see, they are less intense in the second picture. There, there is one very strong point light to the left and low, that looks quite suspicious.

 

You will probably only see the effect in really extreme situations, like this one:

.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[Michael Geschlecht]

Hello Lars,

 

Nice photo.

 

That must have been a really freezing room. Those red & blue people look so cold I would think they could hardly move.

 

Best Regards,

 

Michael

[lars_bergquist]

Yes Michael, they were frozen stiff – at room temperature.

 

A Swedish female sculptor made this installation with modern style variants of the Chinese 'tomb warriors'. Below is one example …

 

The old man from thye Mao Dynasty

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[k-hawinkler]

Hi Lars,

 

Thanks again for your feedback. I greatly appreciate it.

 

So, I went back to the same spot at night and shot both the APO-TELYT-R 280 mm f/4 and Telyt-V, version 3, 280 mm f/4.8 on the Sony NEX-7.

I observed these ghostly spots only in the photos taken with the APO-TELYT-R 280 mm f/4. Here are some examples:

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

These are crops from the following image:

 

Sony NEX-7 + Leica APO-TELYT-R 280 mm f4. Please, notice the ghostly spots in the upper part of the image.

 

Same image, after clean up with PS CS6

 

For comparison:

 

Sony NEX-7 + Leitz Telyt-V, version 3, 280 mm f4.8. No ghostly spots in the upper part of the image at all. In post-processing I tried to match up the colors with the previous images.

 

Full resolution versions of the previous three panoramic images can be found here: 2012-08-26 NEX-7+Telyt 280 mm - winklers' Photos

 

One final observation:

 

If one points the Sony NEX-7 + Leica APO-TELYT-R 280 mm f4 system at approximately but not exactly the same spot,

then the ghostly images can change in appearance and move to a different location.

So, these ghostly blemishes are definitely not part of the object being photographed, but are created inside the camera-lens system.

 

Of course, for a 20 or 30 second exposure at night one catches all sort of different things, like head and tail lights of moving cars,

changing traffic lights from red to green, airplane lights in the sky, or even meteor streaks.

So, these things I would like to exclude from this discussion. Thanks.

 

BTW, it is actually quite interesting to observe all the activity live through and amplified by the EVF.

The human eye is just such a marvelous organ and can easily keep up with the changes.

[lars_bergquist]

Well, K-H, my green spots were not parts of the installation either. In both cases, we have internal reflections created inside the total optical system. In my case, that included (of course) the UV/IR filter.

 

So I suspect that your reflections are created by courtesy of the permanent, plane protection filter in front of the front lens. We cannot (or should not) remove it, so it remains speculation. Fortunately, we have better tools than ever for cleaning the picture up.

 

Ye olde manne from the Wet and Dark Age

[Robert_M]

K-H,

 

You could try taking an image without the series 5.5 filter in place. It may cause some aberations in the image quality, as Lars has pointed out. But it would test if the reflections are from that filter. Also, do you have another series 5.5 filter you could try in place (which may or may not have different anti-reflective coating)?

 

Another interesting test to try: Photograph the Moon on a clear night with the Moon in the center of the photo and then with the Moon in the outer edge of the field. The contrast between the bright Moon and the dark sky is very high. The Moon surface is as bright as daytime Sun light on Earth. Although it is not a point source, the Lunar edge is a high contrast transition and there should be ghosting in this condition also.

 

Regards,

[k-hawinkler]

K-H,

 

You could try taking an image without the series 5.5 filter in place. It may cause some aberations in the image quality, as Lars has pointed out. But it would test if the reflections are from that filter. Also, do you have another series 5.5 filter you could try in place (which may or may not have different anti-reflective coating)?

 

Great points. I will try those things.

 

With regards to another Leica Series 5.5 Filter.

What would make sense to get for use on my NEX-7 provided it is available?

 

I do have a 77 mm UV and circular polarizer filter that the lens takes.

Maybe that would change the problem? For worse?

 

 

Another interesting test to try: Photograph the Moon on a clear night with the Moon in the center of the photo and then with the Moon in the outer edge of the field. The contrast between the bright Moon and the dark sky is very high. The Moon surface is as bright as daytime Sun light on Earth. Although it is not a point source, the Lunar edge is a high contrast transition and there should be ghosting in this condition also.

 

Regards,

 

 

I took images of the recent Super Moon with NEX-7 + APO-Telyt-R 280 mm f4 and APO-Extender-R 1.4x and 2x.

Maybe there is something interesting upon closer inspection? We'll see.

[k-hawinkler]

K-H,

 

...

 

Another interesting test to try: Photograph the Moon on a clear night with the Moon in the center of the photo and then with the Moon in the outer edge of the field. The contrast between the bright Moon and the dark sky is very high. The Moon surface is as bright as daytime Sun light on Earth. Although it is not a point source, the Lunar edge is a high contrast transition and there should be ghosting in this condition also.

 

Regards,

 

 

Hi Robert,

 

Thanks again for the excellent suggestions.

 

So, the idea is to use the recent Super Moon in a clear sky and correct to extreme (over)exposure to force reflections inside the NEX-7 + APO-Telyt-R 280 mm f/4 system. I am now displaying five pairs of images.

 

The first image in each pair is an OOC JPG, only reduced from 6000x4000 to 960x640 pixels.

So it's easy to see how far an image was overexposed.

 

The second image in a pair is derived from .ARW files and processed in an extreme way to make minute features visible.

 

Here goes (in a very wide browser window, a pair of images is displayed on one line, not one above the other):

 

 

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Interesting! How about that?

This method seems to prove something.

There certainly is ghosting.

 

On the next clear night with a bright moon I should repeat the test but without the Series 5.5 filter inside the lens.

Edited August 29, 2012 by k-hawinkler

[lars_bergquist]

I doubt very much that the reflections are caused by the internally mounted fiter. But a trial would not hurt (unless you would have an unnecessary outlay for a second Series 5.5 filter).

 

Ye olde manne, now dry and enlightened

[k-hawinkler]

I doubt very much that the reflections are caused by the internally mounted fiter. But a trial would not hurt (unless you would have an unnecessary outlay for a second Series 5.5 filter).

 

Ye olde manne, now dry and enlightened

 

 

Hi Lars,

 

Thanks. If it's not the internal filter, then it has to be something else.

So, IIRC your primary candidate was the flat plate at the far end of the lens.

There are also the 77 mm threads as you pointed out. I have filters for that.

Shouldn't using of an extra 77 mm filter then make the problem worse?

(I wonder whether I got the "Shouldn't" right?

Please, refer to http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/barnacks-bar/251751-i-could-care-less.html)

 

Thanks again for your help.

Edited August 29, 2012 by k-hawinkler

[jaapv]

Adding another double plane surface to the front of the lens will quadruple the chance of reflections.

I used this lens for years and never noticed this flare tendency, but then I must confess I never took night shots with specular highlights in it. It is not the first use of a medium fast tele that springs to mind

In general it is quite flare resistant.

[k-hawinkler]

Hi Jaap,

 

Thanks for the explanation. But why not capture such a scene?

My excuse, I was inspired by a fellow named Rembrandt and his painting The Nightwatch.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/28/The_Nightwatch_by_Rembrandt.jpg/1229px-The_Nightwatch_by_Rembrandt.jpg

[jaapv]

Rembrandt used a 280/4.0?

 

It is just that this type of lens does not strike me as particularly useful for nighttime landscape shots.

The moon, yes, but a bit short.

No harm meant, just an observation.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Robert_M]

K-H,

 

I think this was a useful test. If I understand the pairs of images correctly, the only difference between each pair is to move the Lunar image off axis. Is that correct?

 

If that is the case, then I see that the ghosting is masked on-axis. As you move off-axis, the ghost image separates symmetrically from the lens optical axis and is roughly the same size. Wouldn't that indicate that the ghosting is off a flat (or near flat) surface? If the ghosting came off a curved lens surface, then one could expect the ghost image size to be different than the image size. I don't know the lens element layout in this lens. (I'll have to go look that up). Are there any flat lens surfaces? If not, then the best guess of ghosting is from the flat, internal S5.5 filter.

 

Can't wait to see what happens w/o that S5.5 filter in place. If you have deep pockets, there is a polarizing filter mechanism for that lens which fits into that S5.5 slot. There is currently one up for offer on ebay (at several bills!). If it is a "cir-P" filter, then putting it into the system backwards (ie circular site facing out rather than in) will eliminate reflections. You can demonstrate this holding such a filter up to a mirror and looking through it. Held the correct way, you can see back through it. Holding it backwards, it will be black.

 

RM