jaapv Posted January 16, 2016 Share #41  Posted January 16, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) The original Leica look:   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!   Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!   ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/255633-signature-look-leica-look/?do=findComment&comment=2969989'>More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 16, 2016 Posted January 16, 2016 Hi jaapv, Take a look here Signature Look / Leica Look. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
hepcat Posted January 16, 2016 Share #42 Â Posted January 16, 2016 Can somebody please kindly share me examples of the "signature Leica look" of a Leica product? Â Examples are most appreciated! Â While jaapv's post above is very nearly true, the TRUE "signature Leica look" is that which makes you appear to be Royalty when it's held to your eye: Â Â Â And I believe that manoleica's post succinctly describes the impetus for the myth about the "other" "signature Leica look." Â Â Dear Dream Killer, after paying $12,000,00 for a box and a tube with glass inside, I need to believe.. "" Â Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manoleica Posted January 16, 2016 Share #43  Posted January 16, 2016 Over the time I have spend more than 12 k on Leica gear, sorry about my spelling I am a foreign national. 12k is a good start, do not stop here. Sir, over the years I have spent -W A Y- more than the $12k on Leica cameras, lenses & other Red Dot products..  Regarding being a foreign national, we do have Spell check and a Free Thesaurus available via the internet... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manoleica Posted January 16, 2016 Share #44  Posted January 16, 2016 The original Leica look:   US_$5000_1934_Federal_Reserve_Note.jpg Is it legal to reproduce any Federal Reserve Note? -- Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 16, 2016 Share #45 Â Posted January 16, 2016 In Germany it is not illegal, this is a German site. Anyway, these images are all over the Internet... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hepcat Posted January 16, 2016 Share #46  Posted January 16, 2016 Is it legal to reproduce any Federal Reserve Note? --  Actually, no it's not.  It's only illegal to reproduce it and try to use it as currency. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted January 16, 2016 Share #47 Â Posted January 16, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) Does your point rely on Pluto being a planet? Â I think Rick was referring my friend, Pluto the dog. But everyone knows I was referring to Plato's theory of Forms. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paulus Posted January 16, 2016 Share #48 Â Posted January 16, 2016 Thank you all for your opinions. Â I'm relieved that nobody so far has told me that I am blind if I cannot see the difference. To be honest (and I think I have said this elsewhere) I use Leica gear not because I appreciate its distinct photographic results but because I can afford it and simply like the classical look of the equipment - and yes, perhaps the snob appeal. Â But I know there are many others out there who buy it for the optical quality. Â I have an Apo Summicron, Noctilux, and a few other "expensive lenses" which makes me feel special, but other than that feeling of ownership, there is nothing magical about them in my sense. Â If you see the difference, good for you! I can't, and I envy you. I simply want to see where you can see the differences. Â I enjoy this forum as much as anybody else does, but when people start talking how "Leicas are magical" and "Oh, look at that sjgnature Leica look!" and even "Sony makes plastic images" "You're blind if you can't see the difference between lightroom converted BW and a M Monochrom image" then I start to wonder if I'm and idiot for not "seeing the difference". An Apo Summicron? What kind of lens is that?? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
a911s Posted January 16, 2016 Share #49 Â Posted January 16, 2016 When I was shooting slide film professionally, the owner of my stock agency and my slide duplicator both asked me the same question: "What lenses are you using?" When I answered "Leica", they both nodded and smiled. Certain Mandler designed lenses have a look on film that is only found with Leica. Not so much anymore with digital - the latest Leica lenses (except for the 28mm Summicron) on a M 240 produce results that look very similar to Nikon or Canon's best lenses and camera. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paulus Posted January 16, 2016 Share #50  Posted January 16, 2016 When I started with the M6 and a canadian summicron 50mm. I made this picture. My first filmrol.  I really love this photo and I really thought that it was made this way, because of the Leica.  I thought I couldn't have made it with my Nikon F3 + nikkor 1,4 50mm. But maybe it's just the situation and the feeling I have for the subject which brought me to this conclusion:  Still I really like this picture ( especially the print form ) .     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! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/255633-signature-look-leica-look/?do=findComment&comment=2970081'>More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted January 16, 2016 Share #51  Posted January 16, 2016 Lots of words, few photos.  So, can anyone post one photo that shows the definitive 'Leica look' which I'll also get no matter what Leica lens I use, or if I use film or digital?  If not, it doesn't exist, simple. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevesurf Posted January 16, 2016 Share #52  Posted January 16, 2016 There are lens signatures, the most distinct from the earlier years. As pointed out above, all lens designers now have the same tools, but what they choose to demonstrate is different. In the earlier years it was as much an art as science, and different 'looks' were a goal.  Speaking of early lenses, in the film days we did the best with what we had. One street photo I cannot unsee from Bruce Davidson:    There are lens signatures, the most distinct from the earlier years. As pointed out above, all lens designers now have the same tools, but what they choose to demonstrate is different. In the earlier years it was as much an art as science, and different 'looks' were a goal.   I believe the above most accurately describes the "Leica Look," also the goal of the lens designer at the time, remembering that all our lenses have been designed in a distant or not-so distant past and by a lead optical designer with their team inspired by a rendering goal agreed on. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted January 16, 2016 Share #53 Â Posted January 16, 2016 An Apo Summicron? What kind of lens is that?? Â http://us.leica-camera.com/Photography/Leica-M/M-Lenses/APO-Summicron-M-50mm-f-2-ASPH Â http://us.leica-camera.com/Photography/Leica-M/M-Lenses/APO-Summicron-M-75mm-f-2-ASPH Â http://us.leica-camera.com/Photography/Leica-M/M-Lenses/APO-Summicron-M-90mm-f-2-ASPH Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted January 17, 2016 Share #54  Posted January 17, 2016 I believe the above most accurately describes the "Leica Look," also the goal of the lens designer at the time, remembering that all our lenses have been designed in a distant or not-so distant past and by a lead optical designer with their team inspired by a rendering goal agreed on.  At one time lenses were designed to certain aesthetic effects before the metrics of MTF and other engineering abstracts were created. Since those metrics were made, any reader could quote and argue about lens 'quality' in internet text with no experience of their own, no reference to images, or clue regarding their own vision. So some bloke would write one day that he has just got into photography and three weeks later he is posting his own opinions of quality based upon metrics, text!  The same happens in this group, in particular with the vociferous Noctilux people, followed closely by the APO enthusiasts, Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldwino Posted January 17, 2016 Share #55 Â Posted January 17, 2016 A Leica is just a tool designed to do a specific job in a certain way. For most of us here, it does its job the way we wish (it gets out of our way). Â If there is any "magic" involved, it is that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paulus Posted January 17, 2016 Share #56  Posted January 17, 2016 http://us.leica-camera.com/Photography/Leica-M/M-Lenses/APO-Summicron-M-50mm-f-2-ASPH  http://us.leica-camera.com/Photography/Leica-M/M-Lenses/APO-Summicron-M-75mm-f-2-ASPH  http://us.leica-camera.com/Photography/Leica-M/M-Lenses/APO-Summicron-M-90mm-f-2-ASPH I just meant, that when somebody is writing: " I have an Apo summicron, Noctilux etc. I cannot know what lens he means, there are different kinds. A 90 apo doesn't cost as much as an apo 50mm. There's a price difference.  Also, if I have a lens , that I know really well, I would not say: " I have an Apo summicron." I would gladly chair all the information about this specific lens.  It's like saying: "I have a Mercedes" nobody knows what kind... Last year I drove a Mercedes with 450 kilo of diving gear to the port. Can you tell me what kind that was? Was it expensive? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exodies Posted January 17, 2016 Share #57  Posted January 17, 2016 A Leica is just a tool designed to do a specific job in a certain way. For most of us here, it does its job the way we wish (it gets out of our way).  If there is any "magic" involved, it is that.   On the contrary, it gets right in the way. It needs attention - framing, focusing, ISO setting, white balancing, focal length, aperture, shutter speed, battery and memory card maintenance, lens character choices, ... and there's more. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted January 17, 2016 Share #58  Posted January 17, 2016 On the contrary, it gets right in the way. It needs attention - framing, focusing, ISO setting, white balancing, focal length, aperture, shutter speed, battery and memory card maintenance, lens character choices, ... and there's more.   Speak for yourself. With my Leica cameras I simply focus, frame and shoot – it couldn't be simpler or less intrusive. Exposure (including aperture setting) is made well in advance of bringing the camera to my eye and as for all the stuff about ISO, white balance, battery and memory card maintenance. Well that's someone else's problem. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manoleica Posted January 17, 2016 Share #59  Posted January 17, 2016 Speak for yourself. With my Leica cameras I simply focus, frame and shoot – it couldn't be simpler or less intrusive. Exposure (including aperture setting) is made well in advance of bringing the camera to my eye and as for all the stuff about ISO, white balance, battery and memory card maintenance. Well that's someone else's problem.  How can that be someone-else's problem? Your the photographer holding the camera!! Or maybe it's just jewelry to you!! A somewhat naïve Post from an experienced photographer.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Livingston Posted January 17, 2016 Share #60  Posted January 17, 2016 I think Ian is referring to digital cameras and therefore 'digital photographers'... and therefore their problem (on the digital specific stuff he mentioned).  On the other hand, I disagree with his point that the camera doesn't intrude on the picture making process. The very fact you have to make choices in aperture, shutter speed, film selected and loaded, iso, developing, printing etc., etc., means the camera and the whole process of making an image very much 'gets in the way'... although I would argue that's the very reason we choose to use these cameras... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.