M10 and 21mm Super-Angulon?

[rjjackson]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hello,

 

Has anyone tried either version of the 21mm SA on the new M10?  I have been searching for samples but I don't seem to see any.  I would love to see a review, links, or sample images with this lens on the M10.  DNG files would be great.

 

Specifically I am wondering about the mechanical fit and the color shift issue.

 

Thanks!

Edited October 3, 2017 by rjjackson

[Utz Nagal]

It doesn't work on a digital M. Look at this: http://www.kenrockwell.com/leica/21mm-f4.htm

Edited October 3, 2017 by Utz Nagal

[Advertisement]

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

[rjjackson]

It don´t work on a digital M. Look at this: http://www.kenrockwell.com/leica/21mm-f4.htm

 

Thanks for the link, although Rockwell's review only considers the M9.  I'm hoping to see a similar lens test on the M10.

[pgk]

SA 3.4 works fine on the M9. Unless the shutter on the M10 is much thicker it should be ok I would have thought, but I'm sure that a web search will bring up confirmation. On the M9 there is considerable colour shift though. It can be corrected, but even if not the SA makes a great B&W lens.

[adan]

M10 with 21 SA f/3.4 - some small improvement over the M9/M240, but still not really usable for color.

 

Fit is fine (although that is relative and depends on specific unit - I had a 21SA that was stiff to get on/off an M4!)

[rjjackson]

M10 with 21 SA f/3.4 - some small improvement over the M9/M240, but still not really usable for color.

 

Fit is fine (although that is relative and depends on specific unit - I had a 21SA that was stiff to get on/off an M4!)

"Small improvement" doesn't sound very hopeful.  I have the 21/4 -- really looking forward to using this on digital some day.  Any chance you can share some color photos showing the severity of the color shift?

[Jared]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have played around with one on an M10, but don't own one so I can't share any results.  The color shift is quite severe--you can't miss it even on the LCD.  Also, the metering off the shutter doesn't work properly, so you have to use Live View mode to set the exposure properly.  That being said, you can apply flats in Lightroom (or Photoshop) that will fix the color shift.  It's a huge pain in the neck, but it definitely works and works well.  

 

End result:  if you don't mind the extra effort of fixing the color shift on every exposure, and you don't mind using the EVF for composition (or Live View and the screen), then it's a perfectly workable solution.  However, it's not going to match the performance of the current 21mm SEM, especially in the corners.  

[rjjackson]

I have played around with one on an M10, but don't own one so I can't share any results.  The color shift is quite severe--you can't miss it even on the LCD.  Also, the metering off the shutter doesn't work properly, so you have to use Live View mode to set the exposure properly.  That being said, you can apply flats in Lightroom (or Photoshop) that will fix the color shift.  It's a huge pain in the neck, but it definitely works and works well.  

 

End result:  if you don't mind the extra effort of fixing the color shift on every exposure, and you don't mind using the EVF for composition (or Live View and the screen), then it's a perfectly workable solution.  However, it's not going to match the performance of the current 21mm SEM, especially in the corners.  

 

Thanks for the note and reminder about the other inconveniences such as EVF - that never bothered me on film.  I like the 21/4 because it matches nicely with my other late LTM lenses and like the low contrast look from the 50s and 60s lenses.  I've been very happy with what I've seen from my Summicron and Summaron on a borrowed digital M.  Just hoping to get the 21/4 SA to play along. 

[Jared]

Thanks for the note and reminder about the other inconveniences such as EVF - that never bothered me on film.  I like the 21/4 because it matches nicely with my other late LTM lenses and like the low contrast look from the 50s and 60s lenses.  I've been very happy with what I've seen from my Summicron and Summaron on a borrowed digital M.  Just hoping to get the 21/4 SA to play along. 

 

 

It will definitely play, but it takes some extra work to address the gradients.  Assuming you are using Lightroom, the process is as follows:

 

- Create a master set of flat fields (an exposure of an evenly illuminated, white wall) at all apertures and at a variety of focus settings; this is a one time creation of a library of master flats.  You want them all to be blurry/out of focus, so you need to get as close as you can to the even surface without casting any shade.  Using a diffusor right in front of the lens can help.  These flats serve as a map of sorts for the field of view (both vignetting and color cast).  Make sure your sensor is clean when you start.  If you have any dust donuts, particularly noticeable at smaller apertures, clean these up in the master flats.  

 

- Capture your normal images in DNG format

- Import into Lightroom as usual

- Use the "DNG Flat Field" plug in to "apply external correction"

- Choose the flat that matches your exposure for lens, aperture, and approximate focus distance (nothing too precise here on focus distance; I got good results with a set at 1m, 2m, and infinity)

- You'll get a choice of "apply color" or "apply color and falloff".  Basically, you decide whether you want to fix the colors alone or also fix the vignetting.  That's a matter of taste.

 

That's it.  You'll get a second image in Lightroom that has the correction applied.  You can run this for multiple files at once, but they should be taken at the same aperture at least, and ideally at the same approximate focus distance.  It adds maybe an hour of work one time to generate your master flats, then perhaps an extra minute for each image to correct it.  Works like a charm if you have a good set of flats.

 

One note of caution with regard to the Angulon... Again, I haven't owned one so I'm working off general impressions from testing one out... It didn't seem to me that it had the same low contrast look as the older Summicrons and Summarons.  It seemed more like a modern lens in its results.  Of course, you already own it and use it on film, so I'm sure you know much better than I what to expect from it optically.

 

Best of luck whatever your decision!  A lot of people seem to think it's a bunch of work to flat-field away the color cast in these older lens designs.  It's not.  It's a little work, and it needs to be done on each image (often individually depending on aperture and subject distance), but if you regularly post process the majority of your images, it really doesn't add much to that effort.  Again, if you can afford a minute per image you are probably good.  If you are processing hundreds of images per day it's definitely going to get annoying really quickly, but for a lower volume of pictures it is perfectly workable.  I'd say the bigger issue is needing to use Live View to correctly meter the lens.  But, heck, you were already going to need an external finder to accurately compose, and if you are willing to use the EVF you were going to need Live View anyway.  Yes, this is all doable.

[russell]

Just wondering if this flat field correction could be done once centrally.  Said another way, why would everyone need to create a version bespoke to their lens?  Couldn't it be created once and then shared?

 

I had good success on the M246 with the f4 version.  It held details exceptionally well with a rendering I quite liked.  And with the live view I was able to use it's close focus range to good effect.

[adan]

In theory, sure. After all, Leica applies a single "shared" (not bespoke) correction for all copies of the, for example, 21 f/2.8, via the 6-bit code.

 

With an approximate guess as to aperture used (even with the M10, although they no longer provide that guessed aperture to photographers in EXIF).

[rjjackson]

Thanks for all the updates and description of the process.  Jared your process does sound doable for the times I'd be using this lens, which are not so frequent, actually.  I am also surprised, as Russel points out, that this process can't be delivered centrally or even shared -- but maybe individual lens variation benefits from custom layers. 

 

It's also interesting to think about how to track the stop used.  Some will be obvious within a stop or two.  f4 is pretty obvious, but the difference between f5.6 and f8 could be hard to tell in some lighting and focus points. 

 

I guess I need to try the whole process out more to see whether I can tolerate it. 

[Jared]

It would certainly be possible to deliver a set of master flats. Honestly, though, it’s not very hard to build your own. Probably an hour’s effort.

 

As far as how careful you need to be in selecting the correct aperture and focus range... Frankly, it is more critical for the vignetting correction than for the banding. If you are off by a stop or two it probably won’t matter. You can always use trial and error if you don’t get it right the first time. Also, different pictures will require more or less precise correction. Lots of sky? You’ll want to get it right. Internal architecture shot? Maybe not so much.

[rjjackson]

Jared, good tips, thanks.  Lots of sky will probably be f5.6 or f8, so testing two options isn't a big deal.  I would mainly be interested in the color shift correction -- the vignetting is one of the things I like about this lens.  Also, most of the shots with this lens will end up in BW anyway. 

 

I have been thinking about your other point that the SA seems to feel more modern than its contemporaries.  Just as an aside, there are a few other factors that make me feel that this lens fits nicely with the Summaron mainly and the 50/2 Summicron.  Some of these are subjective, but what I like about these together is the low distortion and the way they render the center differently from the edges/corners.  They seem to impart a character that has some advantages in some photographic settings.  Of course these lenses aren't as precise, even clinical, when compared to modern lens designs, but somehow these old symmetrical designs offer an appealing character all of their own. 

 

Here's a few fast screengrabs (not hooked up to my database right now, so they are low res LR screenshots) of a few photos from the same shooting where I used 3 lenses.  The transition between the lenses feels fairly consistent, in my view, apart from focal length of course.

 

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/c4nopjf8x5b2evp/AACHH6NGapE_RbhGO9aoK3X8a?dl=0

[russell]

It's also interesting to think about how to track the stop used.

 

I tend to shoot only two stops.  Wide open or two stops down.   Like that it would be a bit easier to figure out which shot was which.

I'm still thinking there must be a way to convert all of this to a standard algorithm somehow.

Edited October 4, 2017 by russell

[Jared]

Honestly, as long as I'm not waiting days to process my images, I generally remember at what f-stop I was shooting.  And if I'm wrong, I can just try it again.  I found this worked just fine with a Zeiss 21mm f/4.5 that I owned for a while.  While I never really bonded with that lens, the routine I am describing worked perfectly for addressing the color cast.  I would expect the same for the older Leica/Schneider 21's.

[pgk]

FWIW: http://marinewildlife.co.uk/info/leica-21mm-f3-4-super-angulon-m/

 

Paradoxically its a great lens on the M8 and IMO very good as a B&W on the M9 (one day I'll try it on a Monochrome!). I just had a 20" x 16" B&W print made from an M9 file and I defy anyone to find sharpness unacceptable in this print (shot at ~f/11-16). Its one of my three 'older' M lenses which I really enjoy using 'warts and all'. My copy has seen some use is slightly looser than ideal but still delivers cracking images.

[rjjackson]

Jared, your instructions were extremely clear and helpful.  Thanks! 

 

I have just now tried this for the first time.  Something I noticed is that my first set of flats seems to over-correct, and make the shifted areas a bit green.  Maybe this is because my flats are a bit under exposed.  Not sure.  I'll keep playing around and see what works best, but ultimately I agree with your conclusion that once everything is set up this should be a viable option.  It's just one small step in the workflow.

 

 

 

It will definitely play, but it takes some extra work to address the gradients.  Assuming you are using Lightroom, the process is as follows:

 

- Create a master set of flat fields (an exposure of an evenly illuminated, white wall) at all apertures and at a variety of focus settings; this is a one time creation of a library of master flats.  You want them all to be blurry/out of focus, so you need to get as close as you can to the even surface without casting any shade.  Using a diffusor right in front of the lens can help.  These flats serve as a map of sorts for the field of view (both vignetting and color cast).  Make sure your sensor is clean when you start.  If you have any dust donuts, particularly noticeable at smaller apertures, clean these up in the master flats.  

 

- Capture your normal images in DNG format

- Import into Lightroom as usual

- Use the "DNG Flat Field" plug in to "apply external correction"

- Choose the flat that matches your exposure for lens, aperture, and approximate focus distance (nothing too precise here on focus distance; I got good results with a set at 1m, 2m, and infinity)

- You'll get a choice of "apply color" or "apply color and falloff".  Basically, you decide whether you want to fix the colors alone or also fix the vignetting.  That's a matter of taste.

 

That's it.  You'll get a second image in Lightroom that has the correction applied.  You can run this for multiple files at once, but they should be taken at the same aperture at least, and ideally at the same approximate focus distance.  It adds maybe an hour of work one time to generate your master flats, then perhaps an extra minute for each image to correct it.  Works like a charm if you have a good set of flats.

 

One note of caution with regard to the Angulon... Again, I haven't owned one so I'm working off general impressions from testing one out... It didn't seem to me that it had the same low contrast look as the older Summicrons and Summarons.  It seemed more like a modern lens in its results.  Of course, you already own it and use it on film, so I'm sure you know much better than I what to expect from it optically.

 

Best of luck whatever your decision!  A lot of people seem to think it's a bunch of work to flat-field away the color cast in these older lens designs.  It's not.  It's a little work, and it needs to be done on each image (often individually depending on aperture and subject distance), but if you regularly post process the majority of your images, it really doesn't add much to that effort.  Again, if you can afford a minute per image you are probably good.  If you are processing hundreds of images per day it's definitely going to get annoying really quickly, but for a lower volume of pictures it is perfectly workable.  I'd say the bigger issue is needing to use Live View to correctly meter the lens.  But, heck, you were already going to need an external finder to accurately compose, and if you are willing to use the EVF you were going to need Live View anyway.  Yes, this is all doable.

[fire2368]

Street silhouettes did a review of this on the the m10. Check it out: http://www.streetsilhouettes.com/home/2018/4/16/leica-21mm-f4-super-angulon-m

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Abram]

Thanks for sharing that article! I can’t believe I never thought to apply a simple gradient layer in Lightroom. That is SO much easier for my workflow than having to make the profiles and constantly be using the flat field plugin. I did a couple basic tests and the gradient mask does an admirable job for almost no effort.