Can you see if a photo is made by a Leica camera and how?

[Paulus]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

A while ago, I accidently put a photo of a Nikon Camera on the photo forum. To my surprise nobody saw that it was made by a NOT Leica camera.

 

Can anybody tell me if and how we can see de difference in photo between Leica and the other cameras, or is it just an illusion, that one can see it?

 

One of these thee photos is not a Leica photo. Can you tell me why.

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!

[pico]

Can't tell on a monitor. It's like looking at cheaply printed postcards.

[Paulus]

Can't tell on a monitor. It's like looking at cheaply printed postcards.

 

So it's the quality of the picture, not the art of making a picture? You must see it on paper?

Then you can see the difference?

[SJP]

#1 - no Leica "pop", #2 and #3 are obviously Leica pics.

[wattsy]

If I had to bet I'd say the second photo is the non-Leica shot and only because the others have the subject more towards the centre of the frame (something I see a lot of with RF shots).

[earleygallery]

Essentially, no, I can't tell you which is the non-Leica shot, nor do I think that anyone else can get this kind of quiz reliably correct. Now, if you had taken the same shot with three different cameras/lenses it might have been a different matter.

[!Nomad64]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Can't tell based on scaled images on a monitor.

Besides, I don't give a darn f*ck if a photo is taken with a Leica or not. A good photo is a good photo no matter what camera was used. Nothing else matters.

In my very specific case using Leitz gear is something that regards me and not others. I tend to work better with a rangefinder rather than a SLR because I'm born with a RF. Sure, I used and owned more SLRs than RFs, but ultimately I prefer these latter. That's my imprinting and there's nothing I can do at that. Furthermore I happen to love the tactile feelings that come from handling Leitz stuff. It's something that neither Zeiss or CV can replicate, go figure the newer plastic made SLRs. The only thing that comes close is my Canon RF of the '50s which is a clone of the IIIf.

It's something that has more to do with personal tastes rather than rational reasons. It's probably the same thing that makes me to prefer writing with a Mont Blanc or a Parker Duofold fountain pen rather than a Bic. Or that makes me appreciate more a Rolex (that I don't have) over a quartz Citizen or Casio.

This doesn't mean that I do not appreciate the virtues of a Bic pen (more reliable and abuse resistant than the fountain pens) or a quartz watch (more precise than a mechanical watch). But feeling is feeling. At least to me.

 

Cheers,

Bruno

[MX5Bob]

I've used everything from a pinhole camera to a Linhof. I've owned three Leicas, five lenses, which are outnumbered by three Nikon SLRs, five lenses, and one Canon SLR and two lenses.

 

The shooter is more important, given equal formats That said, there are times when a photo has a certain snap to it leads me to think it was shot with Leitz glass, mostly color pictures.

 

Finally, I'd vote 1 and 3 as being shot with Leica; partly it's the contrast, partly the centered subjects. but like everyone else said, Judging low res images on a monitor is a handicap. The real luminosity, gamma and dynamic range are what shows in a print, digital or wet process.

[thetoaster]

This is my vote as well. I suspect I feel that way because it is less contrasty. But, given the composition, it should be expected. So... I'm not sure.

 

#1 - no Leica "pop", #2 and #3 are obviously Leica pics.

[BJDrew]

It is far more likely to sniff out what lens was used in certain scenarios, but camera bodies far less.

I have used a Bessa before and no one would ever know the difference for most photos, despite really wanting there to be one. I have even done side-by-sides with an M6, and 16*20" enlargements. No one in the darkroom consistently could ID the Leica.

 

Glass, not bodies man. Glass

[Paulus]

#1 - no Leica "pop", #2 and #3 are obviously Leica pics.

 

But why?

[prunelle]

But why?

I guess that only someone with extensive knowledge regarding the specificities of Leica cameras can say. These people must be very few but it could help us learning if you posted only photos made by Leica cameras, bodies and lenses!

[k-hawinkler]

I guess that only someone with extensive knowledge regarding the specificities of Leica cameras can say. These people must be very few but it could help us learning if you posted only photos made by Leica cameras, bodies and lenses!

 

It seems you are making up your own new rules.

[prunelle]

It seems you are making up your own new rules.

I'm not making any rule; I was joking. You can understand that?

[k-hawinkler]

I'm not making any rule; I was joking. You can understand that?

 

Thanks for the clarification.

[pgk]

Some lenses have their own characteristic 'signatures' when used is certain ways (and this applies not only to Leica lenses). This has been discussed under various guises on the forum many times. To people who appreciate and understand this, and who are experienced enough in viewing images from these lenses the lens may well be identifiable if it has been used appropriately. However, for generalised images shot at mid apertures and then viewed via the web it is impossible to make any sort of definitive statement whatsoever.

 

As an example ('though somewhat more general in terms of lens identification) take a couple of shots taken of a building. These can be 'squared up' in camera either by using a shift lens or shot with an ordinary lens and then post processed in software to 'square' it up. If the adjustment is just a few degrees, many viewers will not be able to tell which is which (although many will probably prefer the 'in camera' shot as the eye/brain system is very sophisticated and will probably note subtle differences), but viewers who have an interest and experience in such imagery are far more likely to recognise the 'in camera' shot for what it is.

[earleygallery]

It is far more likely to sniff out what lens was used in certain scenarios, but camera bodies far less.

I have used a Bessa before and no one would ever know the difference for most photos, despite really wanting there to be one.

 

How on earth could there be any difference? The camera body is essentially a light tight box to hold the film. As long as the mechanicals (or electronics) are accurate what could possible affect the final result that you would be able to identify?

[SJP]

But why?

Mainly guessing, the other vwo have no distortion I can see, hard to judge with #1, also the way the lens handles contrast, corner to corner sharpness. #1 looks a bit "flatter" than the other 2 (to me). Basically still a lot of guesswork though - the quality of the light is more important in most cases.

[tobey bilek]

A screen image makes it hard to tell. Even harder if you do not have a Nikon/Leica of the same scene side by side. If you do the test and do no sharpening or other PP, the Leica will prevail.

 

The secret is you need to saturate the colors more and sharpen a bit more, 50%, and they become close

 

Film printed images get a 3 D effect from German glass that is not there from Nikon.

 

Nikon glass is approaching Leica where as there was a bigger difference 4/5 decades ago. The gap is closing, but mind you they both are advancing.

 

With film, Leica still rules. Digital manipulation gives a leg up to Nikon, but is certainly does not surpass it.

 

The last consideration is Leica lenses can make people look bad because they are so sharp, have so much micro contrast. When I take a pic of my mother, I do not want to see every pore and wrinkle. On the other hand, I want every detail to show on a landscape.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[tmldds]

I am not good enough to tell. Cameras are only tools preferred for different reasons. I use my Canon at work, my Leica and Nikon at home. I choose to use them for different tasks. I have made good and bad photos using all those cameras! BTW, I cannot tell Cottonelle form Charmin either!

 

Tri:)