Forthcoming S-lens(es)...

[helged]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

17 minutes ago, peterv said:

Exactly, that is one of the things I was trying to point out with my Arri-link one page back. There are quite a lot of flavours available to S system users with many different kinds of lenses with varying looks. The SL even more so, of course, but with a smaller sensor.

Personally, I haven't noticed lens flare to be any kind of problem on my 70CS, 120CS and/or 24mm. But I always keep the lens hoods on and I rarely shoot with backlight.

Shoot with the sun/highlight at/near the periphery of the image circle, and you will see the flare. Lens hoods help a little. Shooting with a tripod, live view is the best way to check for flaring/loss of contrast. A slight change in the orientation of the lens axis may enhance/eliminate the flaring. When shooting hand held towards Sun/highlights, flaring is a little hit and miss.

In the example below, I had to be very careful not to get the right-most part of the image blown out by flare from a setting Sun. S006+120S.

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!

Edited February 21, 2019 by helged

[John McMaster]

I have said about the 120/2.5 and flare in the past

john

[Advertisement]

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

[Stuart Richardson]

I have not noticed a problem, per se, in the 70mm S lens, but it does have a characteristic that I occasionally run up against. At first I thought it was a fault in my lens, and I sent Leica samples. They wanted to test the lens, which they did, and they said it was fine. The behavior that I was seeing was that at apertures like f5.6 and below, I would see uneven sharpness at distance. Let's say I focused on a rock wall about 150 meters from the camera. The dead center of the wall would be tack sharp, but as you went to the field, it would get slightly softer and the area of sharpness would curve inward. So in the photo, the sharpest points would roughly be at 150m in the center, 100m in the edge and 70m in the corners. This would cause me some grief, as the wall was more or less equidistant at 150m, but the photo would manifest in being less sharp at the edges. 

At the time, I was photographing streetlights for a project and I was often in the distance, photographing them. They usually run in a straight line, and they are very high contrast lines. That is, they are a perfect storm for showing you optical problems. The prints in the series were 100x150cm, so these errors showed up. Lenses like the 120, 45, 35 did not show this issue, but the 70mm and 30-90 do. What I later learned is twofold -- all lenses have an inherently curved field if it is not otherwise corrected...the line of sharpness is not naturally flat unless the designers try to correct for it. It is very common to do so for macro lenses for example. Leica, rightly so, believes that sometimes it is better not to fully correct for this, as many photos benefit from a slightly curving field...it can help increase depth of field in the foreground and can render a more natural effect in a lot of compositions. Finally, the S actually accounts for this in the way that it focuses...the lens characteristics dictate the focusing algorithm's choice of distance. I would find that with certain lenses, the S would focus for maximum depth of field, rather than truly at the exact point indicated. The wide angles are especially prone to this...both my 35mm and 45mm rarely focus to true infinity...they stop just short to increase near field depth of field. This drives me nuts, but I was explained that it was done on purpose (as far as I recall anyway). 

In any case, I have found that the best choice for the 70mm is to stop down to f/8 or f/11. Below that it is still sharp, but its edge to edge performance is rather unpredictable. I agree that it is also not so spectacular wide open, at least for landscape work. I think all of the S lenses seem exceptional for portrait or fashion work, but unfortunately those advantages do not suit me quite so well. 

[helged]

34 minutes ago, John McMaster said:

I have said about the 120/2.5 and flare in the past

john

Thanks - I didn't pick up that thread. But it is spot on...

[alan.y]

2 hours ago, Stuart Richardson said:

I have not noticed a problem, per se, in the 70mm S lens, but it does have a characteristic that I occasionally run up against. At first I thought it was a fault in my lens, and I sent Leica samples. They wanted to test the lens, which they did, and they said it was fine. The behavior that I was seeing was that at apertures like f5.6 and below, I would see uneven sharpness at distance. Let's say I focused on a rock wall about 150 meters from the camera. The dead center of the wall would be tack sharp, but as you went to the field, it would get slightly softer and the area of sharpness would curve inward. So in the photo, the sharpest points would roughly be at 150m in the center, 100m in the edge and 70m in the corners. This would cause me some grief, as the wall was more or less equidistant at 150m, but the photo would manifest in being less sharp at the edges. 

At the time, I was photographing streetlights for a project and I was often in the distance, photographing them. They usually run in a straight line, and they are very high contrast lines. That is, they are a perfect storm for showing you optical problems. The prints in the series were 100x150cm, so these errors showed up. Lenses like the 120, 45, 35 did not show this issue, but the 70mm and 30-90 do. What I later learned is twofold -- all lenses have an inherently curved field if it is not otherwise corrected...the line of sharpness is not naturally flat unless the designers try to correct for it. It is very common to do so for macro lenses for example. Leica, rightly so, believes that sometimes it is better not to fully correct for this, as many photos benefit from a slightly curving field...it can help increase depth of field in the foreground and can render a more natural effect in a lot of compositions. Finally, the S actually accounts for this in the way that it focuses...the lens characteristics dictate the focusing algorithm's choice of distance. I would find that with certain lenses, the S would focus for maximum depth of field, rather than truly at the exact point indicated. The wide angles are especially prone to this...both my 35mm and 45mm rarely focus to true infinity...they stop just short to increase near field depth of field. This drives me nuts, but I was explained that it was done on purpose (as far as I recall anyway). 

In any case, I have found that the best choice for the 70mm is to stop down to f/8 or f/11. Below that it is still sharp, but its edge to edge performance is rather unpredictable. I agree that it is also not so spectacular wide open, at least for landscape work. I think all of the S lenses seem exceptional for portrait or fashion work, but unfortunately those advantages do not suit me quite so well. 

Exactly my experience, but I’ve seen field curvature at/near infinity in various copies of the S30 and S35 also. Didn’t notice it with the 45.

The field curvature (or wobble) is worse than suggested by the MTF graphs.

It doesn’t bother me so much on its own as its unpredictability.

[peterv]

6 hours ago, helged said:

In the example below, I had to be very careful not to get the right-most part of the image blown out by flare from a setting Sun. S006+120S.

 

Nice colors in that photo! The thing is photographers and cinematographers should all constantly be aware if there is any bright light source in or outside the frame shining - directly or indirectly - into the lens. At that moment alarm bells should always go off in a cameraoperator's mind because in those instances there's a high risk for flare. That is one of the reasons why on film sets we see so many C stands with black flags attached cutting off the lights and making sure the light they emit does not reach the cameralens, that's just always good practice while shooting.

I can imagine why in Norway with the sun so low in the sky one  may encounter lens flare more often, especially with strong back light like that, but we should take care with these kinds of threads and anecdotal photographic evidence not to create an internet myth that the S system lenses are somehow more prone to flare, which they are not.

It's nice to read the David Farkas' interview with Peter Karbe and it is good to know that Leica are you still working to "improve lens coatings and internal baffling to keep stray light and internal reflections to an absolute minimum” and it's also nice to read that newly designed lenses benefit from even more precise production techniques. But that does not imply that S lenses have suddenly become outdated worthless POS, which I know you're not doing, of course 🙂

Edited February 21, 2019 by peterv
typo

[Milan_S]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I love the rendering of the S 100mm it has the rendering of a classic Leica lens with the sharpness of a modern ASPH lens. 

I am curious to see if Leica is going to offer a faster lens than the 100mm f2.0 with the release of Hasselblad 80mm f1.9

[BernardC]

51 minutes ago, peterv said:

Nice colors in that photo! The thing is photographers and cinematographers should all constantly be aware if there is any bright light source in or outside the frame shining - directly or indirectly - into the lens.

I should add that, even though you can flare S lenses (or any lens), they tend to hold much higher contrast in the rest of the scene. I use this intentionally, taking backlit portraits with the sun just outside the frame. Faces keep a tremendous amount of contrast.

Other MF lenses will wash-out fine image detail when they flare.

[ZHNL]

I haven’t seen a fast tele lens not prone to flare yet no matter is OTUS85 or 135 APO zeiss, S100cron Leica M 90APO, contax120 you name it. It is related to field of view. Some show low contrast such as zeiss mentioned above, some show both with hard flare such as 100cron S. 

And leica S’s big element and house of lens certainly make thing even worse. 

Edited February 21, 2019 by ZHNL

[ZHNL]

5 hours ago, Stuart Richardson said:

I have not noticed a problem, per se, in the 70mm S lens, but it does have a characteristic that I occasionally run up against. At first I thought it was a fault in my lens, and I sent Leica samples. They wanted to test the lens, which they did, and they said it was fine. The behavior that I was seeing was that at apertures like f5.6 and below, I would see uneven sharpness at distance. Let's say I focused on a rock wall about 150 meters from the camera. The dead center of the wall would be tack sharp, but as you went to the field, it would get slightly softer and the area of sharpness would curve inward. So in the photo, the sharpest points would roughly be at 150m in the center, 100m in the edge and 70m in the corners. This would cause me some grief, as the wall was more or less equidistant at 150m, but the photo would manifest in being less sharp at the edges. 

At the time, I was photographing streetlights for a project and I was often in the distance, photographing them. They usually run in a straight line, and they are very high contrast lines. That is, they are a perfect storm for showing you optical problems. The prints in the series were 100x150cm, so these errors showed up. Lenses like the 120, 45, 35 did not show this issue, but the 70mm and 30-90 do. What I later learned is twofold -- all lenses have an inherently curved field if it is not otherwise corrected...the line of sharpness is not naturally flat unless the designers try to correct for it. It is very common to do so for macro lenses for example. Leica, rightly so, believes that sometimes it is better not to fully correct for this, as many photos benefit from a slightly curving field...it can help increase depth of field in the foreground and can render a more natural effect in a lot of compositions. Finally, the S actually accounts for this in the way that it focuses...the lens characteristics dictate the focusing algorithm's choice of distance. I would find that with certain lenses, the S would focus for maximum depth of field, rather than truly at the exact point indicated. The wide angles are especially prone to this...both my 35mm and 45mm rarely focus to true infinity...they stop just short to increase near field depth of field. This drives me nuts, but I was explained that it was done on purpose (as far as I recall anyway). 

In any case, I have found that the best choice for the 70mm is to stop down to f/8 or f/11. Below that it is still sharp, but its edge to edge performance is rather unpredictable. I agree that it is also not so spectacular wide open, at least for landscape work. I think all of the S lenses seem exceptional for portrait or fashion work, but unfortunately those advantages do not suit me quite so well. 

I will try to find sample to confirm this. If not, I will test it with S007 myself since now I have live view. I usually do infinity diagonal test for evaluate decenter or field curvature if there is any. For 70mm or 50mm FF, it is very difficult for lens cover wide DOF at f5.6 with near distance in focus.

However, pin point focus at certain mid-long distance with S2/S006 will be a problem as far as I can see. S’s AF sucks. This is the area I am afraid to use as I no longer can trust my manual focus as well, quite painful, so I have to shoot multiple frame or just stop down. 

Per Leica MTF, their 120, 180 and 45 have more flat field performance. However at 37M, I think they all should be fine, that is my feel and experience. But I will look into it. 

My favorite Leica S glass is actually 70mm , wonderful bokeh, manageable size and very sharp stop down. 

Edited February 21, 2019 by ZHNL

[peterv]

30 minutes ago, ZHNL said:

My favorite Leica S glass is actually 70mm , wonderful bokeh, manageable size and very sharp stop down. 

I find it hard to choose any of my three S lenses as my absolute favourite, but in 2015 we went to Berlin for two weeks and I brought only my 70mm with my S2-P and the photos from this trip have all such a nice and consistent look and feel to them, I love the 70mm for reportage-like work.

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!

[helged]

Many good comments here - thanks folks! 

After using the SL system since it was released in Nov 2015 or thereabout, I guess I have been somewhat spoiled - not to mention blinded - by the SL lenses, the SL primes and the SL 16-35 in particular.

After using the S006 in parallel with the SL for some time, I get more and more convinced that it would be hard to beat the combination of the S-sensor and SL-type of lenses. Therefore this thread, now that the S3 lurks around the corner. A few new, or updated, S-lenses would be great. I think. 

As mentioned above, I prefer and I pick the S006 over the other systems I use when the light is good and the motif is quasi-stationary. My intention is therefore not to downplay the S-system, but rather to add to its unique, modern potential.

[ZHNL]

54 minutes ago, helged said:

Many good comments here - thanks folks! 

After using the SL system since it was released in Nov 2015 or thereabout, I guess I have been somewhat spoiled - not to mention blinded - by the SL lenses, the SL primes and the SL 16-35 in particular.

After using the S006 in parallel with the SL for some time, I get more and more convinced that it would be hard to beat the combination of the S-sensor and SL-type of lenses. Therefore this thread, now that the S3 lurks around the corner. A few new, or updated, S-lenses would be great. I think. 

As mentioned above, I prefer and I pick the S006 over the other systems I use when the light is good and the motif is quasi-stationary. My intention is therefore not to downplay the S-system, but rather to add to its unique, modern potential.

Thanks for the thread. I don’t think anyone down play the S but honest feedback only for the system. Voice should be heard by either Leica or potential customers. I wish I know this much before I enter the system. 

I don’t have much complain for the lens optic performance for the way I use them and I do have access for best of best optics from FF. I think they are as good as I need them. However, AF is noisy and slow and accuracy/consistence is poor. I do hope S3 can fix accuracy problem I observed over different S body and lenses. 

[hoppyman]

On flare, in my experience any lens at all can be made to flare in some specific conditions. The APO Macro 120 has a deeply recessed front element due to the design and I always use hoods too. I think the angle needed to experience flare may be narrower than other lenses (to have bright light source shining directly on the front element)
Perhaps of interest to some, here is an occasion where I think that flare has worked well with portraiture.
S2 and the 120 at medium aperture. Background is a giant (studio flash)light modifier in studio and exposure has been chosen to clip that completely.



 

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!

Edited February 21, 2019 by hoppyman

[ynp]

Geoff, 

what is the distance from the background  softbox to the talent? 

 

Yevgeny. 

Edited February 21, 2019 by ynp

[hoppyman]

Hi the model here would have been about 1 to 2 metres from the very large softbox. It is almost 2 metres tall.It was designed to create this effect.

[helged]

59 minutes ago, hoppyman said:

Hi the model here would have been about 1 to 2 metres from the very large softbox. It is almost 2 metres tall.It was designed to create this effect.

Very nice! And an example that if the highlight isnt too hard/focussed, the S120 does a very nice job indeed. 

[Milan_S]

I have tested the S120mm and love the CS but the focus hunting prevents me from chasing it over the Summicron-S 100mm for my style of photography. 

The Summicron-S 100mm f2 has a wonderful fall off. Focusing is very tricky and I always shoot in continuous mode to to be sure to have the eye sharp. Somehow the central focus is too big for pin point sharpness, I wish this to be implemented in the S3...

 

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!

[helged]

And the answer is no more planned S-lenses: http://www.overgaard.dk/Leica-Camera-Typ-601-Leica-SL-Small-Camera-Large-Print-and-Large-Lenses.html. And that the time is not in - yet - for mirror less MF bodies.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Stuart Richardson]

Didn't sound too rosy for us here in S land... I find it hard to believe that the reason they will not sell longer lenses is because they are concerned that we cannot hold them steadily enough...it seems much more likely that they would be very expensive to build to the standard they require, and they don't think they would sell enough to get back the investment...they are probably right. That's why they should give up an APO teleconverter like we had with the R system! 

I am also very surprised to hear that Leica was surprised by the S1R...I would assumed their alliance meant that they more or less knew what kinds of cameras each other were going to release. If this is not the case, Leica might have stepped a bit on a landmine.