The "Optical Spirit" of Lecia lenses.

[kamilsukun]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I would like to learn if anybody agrees that Leica lenses have an "optical spirit" that makes them different than the rest?

[bill]

This has been talked about ad nauseum, most recently here.

 

Regards,

 

Bill

[offshore]

Sometimes I see dead people in mine.

[dkCambridgeshire]

I would like to learn if anybody agrees that Leica lenses have an "optical spirit" that makes them different than the rest?

 

 

Depends how often they have been wiped with the owner's necktie ... But seriously, good as Leica lenses are, there is a lot of OTT balderdash spoken about them when people start waxing too lyrical about bokeh and "optical spirit"

 

However, it's a common malady and it also affects Nikon and Canon owners.

 

dunk

[kamilsukun]

Sometimes I see dead people in mine.

 

Hmmm... how frequently?

[farnz]

Which company makes these "Lecia" lenses that purportedly contain this optical spirit?

 

Pete.

[adan]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm still unpersuaded that people have "spirit", let alone lenses.

 

But I do think that even as computerized as it has become, optical design is still something of an art form. Computers won't deliver a perfect lens design - they'll just quickly show one the options and tradeoffs available, and choosing among those tradeoffs still lies with the artistic sense of the lens designer.

 

I think, for example, Walter Mandler's lenses 1960-1980 share clear character traits based on the priorities he set for lenses (and the technology of the day) - maximize center sharpness at full aperture at the expense of edge performance; prefer old-style "resolution" over MTF contrast; stick with perfecting established designs (double-gauss); minimizing size and weight (for M lenses); a preference for a cooler color rendition.

 

I think such family traits are also recognizable in the Olympus OM and Canon FD lenses of the 1970's or the AIS Nikkor redesigns of the 1980's.

[kamilsukun]

The optical spirit of a Leica lens in my humble opinion is the reason and the reflection of the unique pleasure we have looking at a good Leica photograph which overlaps with the pleasure we have looking at another good Leica photograph.

 

The bokeh, the sharpness distribution, the angle, the footprint, the way lens draws the picture, the perspective, the design of the interaction with the sensor(s) and even the way light envelopes the objects "the Leica glow" may not be enough to define it enough.

 

The main ingredients of lens manufacturing such as the schematic design, the material, the main methods and subtle details governing the material handling, stocks, cooling and pasting and possibly many other fine traditions of the whole process are resulting the images of Leica lenses.

 

All these factors altogether produce a lens which evolved into a "legend" and the addiction to it we all know is far beyond a simple brand addiction. Numerous engineers, technicians and administrators have spent and are spending years to keep this legend going.

 

Beyond all the factors mentioned above the discipline and state of mind of the staff is a result of the heritage radiated from the walls of their manufacturing facilities.

 

This spirit is so vitally important that many gigantic companies chose to be partners with the relatively small but traditional optical companies in the past decades. Sony-Zeiss, Samsung-Pentax, Panasonic-Leica are only few examples of this vitally essential exchange of know-how.

 

At this point referring a Leica image only with some common tags seem a bit unfair to me and I would like to call it the 'optical spirit'.

 

A bit subjective...

[kamilsukun]

I'm still unpersuaded that people have "spirit", let alone lenses.

 

But I do think that even as computerized as it has become, optical design is still something of an art form. Computers won't deliver a perfect lens design - they'll just quickly show one the options and tradeoffs available, and choosing among those tradeoffs still lies with the artistic sense of the lens designer.

 

I think, for example, Walter Mandler's lenses 1960-1980 share clear character traits based on the priorities he set for lenses (and the technology of the day) - maximize center sharpness at full aperture at the expense of edge performance; prefer old-style "resolution" over MTF contrast; stick with perfecting established designs (double-gauss); minimizing size and weight (for M lenses); a preference for a cooler color rendition.

 

I think such family traits are also recognizable in the Olympus OM and Canon FD lenses of the 1970's or the AIS Nikkor redesigns of the 1980's.

 

Andy,

 

I bought my D2 after reading your important review.

 

Many thanks for your valuable opinions and serious information you have very kindly provided.

[Digitom]

This has been talked about ad nauseum, most recently here.

 

Regards,

 

Bill

 

And you can read my opinion at a very similar thread here (#27):

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-x1-forum/119287-digilux-2-owners-opinion-x1.html

 

My opinion has not changed although it is an interesting theme. But finally the eye and the brain behind the lens and the camera is what makes the spirit IMHO.