Film Lens vs Digital Lens

[jferebee]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

My first thread here was seeking help choosing a lens for a M6. Thanks to all who responded. I ended up renting a Leica 50MM f/2 & 35MM f/2. I liked the 35MM best for street & landscape. Both were wonderful when I did my part but the 35MM was easier for me to zone focus and framing the shot.

 

My question now is do I need to spend large amounts on the newer lenses? It seems, from what I read, that the M9 may benefit by the newer lenses but not as much for film. Another way to ask, will it be apparent to me that the IQ is better with the newest available?

 

I value the views of those of you that actually own and use both the new and not so new with film and would appreciate a little more advice before writing the check.

[jaapv]

:confused:Leica does not build specific lenses for digital or film. I don't know what you read but the M9 performs stellar on older lenses and newer lenses do equally well on film. The choice is determined by the look you want in your image, not by the recording medium.

Image quality is a given on all Leica lenses. Many of us have an eclectic mix of lenses, old and new.

If I want a precise rendering I'll take my Summilux 50 asph, if I take a romantic portrait I might prefer my 1954 Summarit 5 cm 1.5

Edited July 26, 2012 by jaapv

[Advertisement]

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

[TomB_tx]

All of my Leica lenses are from before 1980. I see no reason to buy newer for my M9.

[waileong]

There is no such thing as a 'digital' lens. That is marketing hogwash, designed to make you spend more $$. Of course, there are lenses that are six-bit coded, but coding can be done on any lens.

 

However, there is a case for saying older lenses may need to be properly calibrated for digital. Film has different thickness from a digital sensor, and it is not as flat. Thus there is a case for optimising lens calibration to work with an M9, especially if you often shoot wide open.

[tobey bilek]

The newer lenses are more highly corrected and work better on both film and digital.

 

I have tried the new 35 ASPH against my version 4 and found the outer 1/3 on an M8 to be better. On an M9 the difference would be more pronounced.

 

Stopped down, the new 35 is still better .

 

I have run the new 50 against my previous version, 1969/79, and I would pick the new.

 

All said and done , I am not buying new since I already own them.

 

To start again, I would pick the new. Specially for full frame.

 

You will find life miserable I you do not code and filter M8 lenses, M9 you can set lens id in the menu every time you change lenses and filters are not necessary.

[andyedward]

ADOX claims up to 800 l/mm with its b+w CMS 20 film, so there is a case for higher resolving lenses on film M cameras. I am awaiting both an MP and a 50 Apo, so I'll give the ADOX film a try when they arrive

[Fgcm]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Ciao Andy,

I extensively use Adox CMS.

Great film, but tricky.

If you need, I can give you some tips and ticks.

I performed many experiments in several month, also about scanning and whet printing on Ilford Multigrade.

First attempts was frustrating.

To get consistently good prints required some rolls and many more prints.

 

The claim for 800 lp is quite high.

But, belive me, the film outresolves M9 by far.

My problem is that to exploit the full potential I have to scan whet prints instead of negatives, because the resolution of the scanner is far from being enougth.

 

Franco

[SJP]

Agree with Jaap, digital or film lenses do not exist, they are all pretty impressive including, especially including the older designs - like my 1961 35/2.8 summaron or 1966 TE 90/2.8 which I both find to exellent, on film and on digital (M8).

 

The newer lenses are not necessarily better, different yes, mind blowingly good yes, not better except if MTF charts are the only criterion.

[Scarlet]

except if MTF charts are the only criterion.

 

Judging by some of the posts in this forum it seems that really is the only criterion. Naturally one must not taint the unbelievable output of an Instrument as fine as a Leica digital M with something as dirty or simple as a non-asph or non-apo lens. The horror, the horror.

Edited July 27, 2012 by Scarlet

[SJP]

Apologies for destroying your world of reference

[brianv]

Other manufacturers have brought out lenses for their Digital cameras, mostly to accommodate crop factor sensors. Leica sells lenses for u43 cameras- again, for the crop sensor. Some manufacturers of C-Mount lenses have different series of lenses based on resolution, 2MPixel, 5MPixel, etc. These tend to be for digital video cameras.

 

The attraction of the Leica M Digital is the vast selection of lenses produced over the last 80 years AND the top notch lenses being produced today. Buying new or old, is a personal choice. You get that choice when using a Leica. Less people make a choice based on MTF than you might think. I have an 8ft Optics bench in my office at work. Never used it to evaluate a lens for a Leica. Did use it to shim and calibrate a Nikon RF to use Zeiss lenses.

 

Most of the time my M9 has a lens on it made decades ago.

[luigi bertolotti]

....

My question now is do I need to spend large amounts on the newer lenses? It seems, from what I read, that the M9 may benefit by the newer lenses but not as much for film. Another way to ask, will it be apparent to me that the IQ is better with the newest available?

.

 

As other have said, this is a no-issue : digital and film Leicas benefit from the new lenses for their specific properties, and many old lenses exist, which can be very appreciable on digital and film Leicas.

But the concept that digital "does benefit more" of new superb lenses like the Summilux asph is rather widespread : imho, this is trivially due to the fact that with digital is a lot easier, for anyone and without any lab, to make any sort of enlargements to hair/splitting any critical detail... ; also, specific color-related phenomena (fringing etc....) are easier to scrutiny when you deal with a color bitmap...

Edited July 27, 2012 by luigi bertolotti

[pgk]

My question now is do I need to spend large amounts on the newer lenses? It seems, from what I read, that the M9 may benefit by the newer lenses but not as much for film. Another way to ask, will it be apparent to me that the IQ is better with the newest available?

Older lenses were not quite as well corrected as current designs. That does not mean to say that many are anything other than superb (depending on age and type - you can read about most here) and is a simple refection of the progress in both design and manufacture of high end lenses. Some 'film' lenses - and I would suggest that there are some designs which, whilst they work extremely well on film, do not work well on digital and are not really a good match for digital - the best example is one of my favourite lenses, the 21mm f/3.4 Super-Angulon which I would really class as a 'film' lens. This lens suffers from technical problems due to its design and is not easy to fully correct on digital, although it still remains usable for B&W pix. But apart from this and a few other wide-angle models, most older lenses will still produce excellent results on digital although an M9 will generally benefit from newer wide-angle lens designs (f = < or = 28mm) because they are better matched to the sensor's requirements.

 

Which leaves us with the tricky question of IQ which is measured both objectively and subjectively so it depends on what you mean and what criteria you apply. Newer lenses produce a more 'precise' and 'accurate' rendition, older lenses have residual aberrations and substantial technical imperfections, especially at wider apertures - which some people are wowed by. Only you can determine which 'look' you prefer and whether you want to spend more money to achieve a look you find better, if you do.