Macro lenses for Leica CL. <merged>

[dkCambridgeshire]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 1/23/2020 at 10:52 PM, DRWWE said:

As I'm transitioning away from Nikon to my new CL, I'm contemplating a macro lens as I really enjoy close-up photography.  There is, of course, Leica's APO-Macro-Elmarit-TL 60mm f/2.8 ASPH.  I haven't had a chance to try one and hoped someone on this forum could comment on it.  What other options are there for the CL?  I have heard that Sigma is coming out with a 70mm f/2.8 DG Macro Art Lens at a very tempting price, but I have no experience with their lenses.  Any opinions and additional options (M lens with adapter?) will be appreciated.  Thanks.  

You could consider cheaper alternatives to a 60mm TL macro lens i.e. supplementary achromatic close-up lenses: 

The Leica E52 Elpro will enable 1:2 magnification with the TL 18-56mm … the E52 Elpro is approx 7 diopter 

https://uk.leica-camera.com/Photography/Leica-CL-TL2/Accessories/Elpro-52

 

An even cheaper option is a used Leitz (Leica) Elpro 2 (approx 5 diopter) which would enable approx 0.36 magnification when used on the TL 18-56mm i.e. just over one third life size imaging 

 

https://www.ffordes.com/search/Elpro 2  …  would require a 55mm to 52mm stepping ring for use on the TL 18-56mm https://www.srb-photographic.co.uk/srb-52-55mm-step-up-ring-2601-p.asp

 

Please consider reading previous forum thread:

dunk

 

Edited January 26, 2020 by dkCambridgeshire

[Advertisement]

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

[huwm]

Marumi Achromat Macro +3 and +5 

[dkCambridgeshire]

32 minutes ago, huwm said:

Marumi Achromat Macro +3 and +5 

They're fine too for close-ups … and $£reasonable. Too many photographers assume that a marque macro lens is essential for close-up imaging - but this is not the case - perfectly good/usable close-ups can be taken using supplementary achromatic close-up lenses … which is why Leica continue to include same in their current product list. 

dunk

[huwm]

I bought them as a 'dip my toe in' before going whole hog, dedicated macro (had the oly 60mm f2.8 for my em1.2 but barely used it - long gone, with all my other m43 stuff)

Perfectly happy to stick with them for now (beware GAS)

[nicci78]

Really love my APO-TL 60. 
But I am playing with APO-R 100 + APO extender 2x. I really love macro at 300mm equivalent instead of 90mm. 
working distance is excellent. And you get greater than 1:1 magnification with the 2x APO-Extender. 
Sure it is heavy. But I really like it. 

[LocalHero1953]

I have the Apo-Elmarit-TL 60 and strongly recommend it. Things not mentioned so far:

- It is also a great portrait lens. I carry it around for ad hoc portraits, paired with the 11-23 zoom.

- You don't need to change lenses or add another bit on to do macro, compared to the Marumi and other macro attachments.

- Marumi-type attachments are fine on longer lenses, but on, say, a standard zoom, the near focus distance is often just too close for comfortable macro. I prefer a longer lens for macro. There was a reason the best R macro lens is 100mm.

- The TL 60mm can be operated in range-limited mode for AF focusing: either close/macro or normal distances. The option to use range limiting is selected in the menu. Unfortunately you cannot select the range in the menu - this you have to do by initial manual focusing to get the lens into the right range.

- Manual focusing can be a pain till you realise how non-linear focus-by-wire works. You can quickly manually focus from one end of the range to the other only if you turn the ring fast. Turn it normally and it seems to never get there. The converse is that you have very fine manual focus adjustment when you need it.

- I have created a user profile for macro shots with this lens, which sets focus to MF.

[nicci78]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Please consider using APO-TL 60 with TL2 instead of CL. 
TL2 will give you a very nice digital depth of field and distance scale. Something really useful with macro lenses.

Sadly CL lacked such a nice thing. That’s why I like the APO-R 100 with its magnification engraving and depth of field/distance scale. Very useful.  

[nicci78]

Please consider using APO-TL 60 with TL2 instead of CL. 
TL2 will give you a very nice digital depth of field and distance scale. Something really useful with macro lenses.

Sadly CL lacked such a nice thing. That’s why I like the APO-R 100 with its magnification engraving and depth of field/distance scale. Very useful.  
 

APO-R 100 has a very nice working distance. 
APO-TL 60 « zoom out » internally  from 60mm (90mm equivalent) to 40mm (60mm équivalent) when you passed into 1:2 - 1:1 focusing range. 
That’s why at 1:1 you only get 16cm of working distance. 
Aperture will also close to f/3.2 minimum. 
 

APO-TL 60 is a variable focal length and aperture lens. It should be marketed  as : 2.8/60mm - 3.2/40mm for 1:2 to 1:1 range 

You will feel the mechanical switch between these two stages : Infinity to 1:2 and 1:2.5 to 1:1

Edited January 28, 2020 by nicci78

[tommonego@gmail.com]

I generally look at macros of 40-60mm for tight situations, or copy work, sorry to hear that the TL 60 goes to 40mm at higher mags. This severely limits your working distance and lighting options. When I was doing medical photography we used the 55 micro Nikkor mostly for copy work, slides for presentations and later to scan for digital presentations. 100 (105)mm was to long of a working distance for the above work but was perfect for sitting patients or going to the OR to photograph instruments which were always small for eye surgery. When photographing surgery we used a 200mm macro, to stay out of the sterile field. So this is how I look at macro lenses. I also have to say in none of these cases would a diopter lens give the results we wanted as we wanted book level publishable images. 

With a pure macro your working distance at 1:1 is the focal length of the lens, with newer macros for 35mm cameras high magnifications the lens often changes focal length, like the 60 TL, unfortunately this is mostly using a shorter focal length. The plus side of this, is unless you are doing scientific photography, or want extreme closeups most of your work will be above the 1:2 magnification giving decent working distances. 

[Le Chef]

1 hour ago, nicci78 said:

Please consider using APO-TL 60 with TL2 instead of CL. 
TL2 will give you a very nice digital depth of field and distance scale. Something really useful with macro lenses.

Sadly CL lacked such a nice thing. 

Where does the digital depth of field and distance scale appear? EVF or rear screen or both?

[nicci78]

Both. When you select the second screen (through Info icon) with MF activated. 
 

Add the Visoflex. You can get an nice articulate EVF for easier framing. Sadly, you will lose flash. 
 
 

Edited January 29, 2020 by nicci78

[nicci78]

On 1/24/2020 at 2:54 AM, Le Chef said:

I borrowed a CL last summer and the lens that was attached was the TL 60. Not the ideal lens for street photography, but it’s a really nice lens to use. I recently tried a 55-135 and didn’t like it for a number of reasons. My next lens will be the TL 60.

I used to have both TL60 and TL 55-135. 
I sold the 55-135. It is a fantastic lens. But at the same time it is quite similar to TL60. I did not like the 1m minimum focusing distance and the f/3.5-4.5 aperture. 
 

I still stand behind my principle : not to have duplicate focal lengths. 
 

By the way, for long shots. Please consider to activate focus limiter for both lenses. That will improve AF. 
 

 

 

[Mr.Prime]

I was wondering if there is a cost effective set up to allow the use of a CL for photographing 35mm film negatives instead of using a film scanner ? 

 

I am currently a film-only M user and have been curious about the CL as my first digital Leica.

[dkCambridgeshire]

^^^ the Novoflex slide copier is excellent but the kit does not include the required Novoflex rack and pinion focusing rack 

https://www.novoflex.de/en/products-637/macro/extension-bellows/universal-bellows-balpro-1/castel-cop-digi.2439.html

… alternatively consider acquiring a small light box and good quality copy stand e.g.

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Jessop-Lightbox-6-15cm-X-9-24cm-w-Daylight-Balanced-Bulb-Free-Shipping/293461749484?hash=item4453aeeeec:g:rl4AAOSwZ3teOvx4

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Genuine-Nikon-PF-4-Repro-Copy-stand/133315581286?hash=item1f0a3a5566:g:ncEAAOSwvBpeLKam

 

… but you'd also need to decide which lens / supplementary close-up lens / macro lens to use with the CL 

dunk

Edited February 9, 2020 by dkCambridgeshire

[ramarren]

6 hours ago, Mr.Prime said:

I was wondering if there is a cost effective set up to allow the use of a CL for photographing 35mm film negatives instead of using a film scanner ? 

I am currently a film-only M user and have been curious about the CL as my first digital Leica.

To capture a full frame 35mm negative (24x36 mm dimensions nominally) with the CL (format is 16x24mm nominally) requires about a 1:1.5 magnification. So any combination of lens and camera/copy stand, plus light box and film holder, etc, that can achieve about that value makes for a good capture of your film negatives. I say "about a 1:1.5" magnification because the dimensions are not exact, and how much rebate you want to include is a personal decision. 

An extremely simple setup to do this I show in these example photos. I used a Novoflex copy stand, Leica M Adapter L, R Adapter M, Macro Adapter-R, and Macro-Elmarit-R 60mm f/2.8 along with a flat panel light box to capture an arbitrary negative laid on the light box. 

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!

I focused by sliding the camera/lens assembly up and down the copy stand until I could see the grain with the lens set to f/2.8. You can see from the second photo that this was a just shy of 1:1.5 magnification on the lens' focusing scale. Here's the view of the LCD with information display disabled.

I then set the aperture to f/8. The CL was on manual exposure, and I use the histogram as a guide to bring the curve all the way to the right as best possible by adjusting the time to .3 sec. I set the self time to 2 seconds to keep from jiggling the setup at the time of exposure, and made the capture into a DNG file. Here's the view with the info display enabled to see the histogram and other particulars. 

The DNG file was transferred to my Mac mini running LR Classic. I have my "usual preset" for negative conversions setup like this:

And that creates this rendering as a starting point...

Any detail rendering actions happens from that point on, usually on a 16-bit_per_component TIFF file that I export and re-import into LR. (I do that because when you've tweaked the Tone Curve to invert the image, the adjustment controls get funky since they work in reverse... ) 

Costs associated: This is basically as simple as it gets ... a copy stand, a CL with lens capable of achieving the right magnification, a light box. For this setup, the Novoflex Magic Studio copy stand was $300 or so (you can get cheaper ones... or use a tripod with a right angle capability to hold the camera in the right position), the light box about $80, and I had the CL, adapters, and lens in my kit already. The APO-Macro-Elmarit-TL 60mm f/2.8 would have done the same job mounted directly on the camera, as would any other lens (adapted or otherwise, with or without close up lens) that can achieve the magnification. The CL is very adaptable in this regard, and the smaller than 35mm format is a win for this kind of work since you don't need as much magnification to obtain a full 24mpixel image. 

G

Edited February 9, 2020 by ramarren

[tommonego@gmail.com]

I have been working on translating my negatives via a digital camera, my CL. I have a Beseler copy stand I have since when I had a studio and did slide productions. This stand has a lot of bells and whistles which are not necessary. One of the best parts is an 80mm f4 Schneider Componon that was made for slide copying. But with a copy stand and a light table if you are digitizing negatives a standard macro lens would work, you just have to be able to reach a 1:1 magnification. Here you do need a flat field lens, most true macros are. A good negative holder is also necessary because you don't want stray light around the negative. I am using the negative holder that came with the Beseler, or one from an old Minolta scanner, either is fine. 

Now for the bad news, I am having difficulty neutralizing the color negative base color. Best solution so far is a preset curves function in Photoshop to convert color negs, but I still have a color cast with Portra 160. If the neg has a good medium grey I can color pic that and it helps. I am bringing in the images as DNGs so I can look at the color balance to correct this. Every time I think I have it the next negative doesn't work. Right now I am thinking of going back to my Epson V700. 

[ramarren]

I don't do color negs very often, but the simple approach I use for neutralizing the crossover mask is to make one capture of an unexposed piece of the film and use the white balance sampling tool in LR Classic (or Camera Raw) to set that to white. That's been close enough to allow the inversion to get into the ballpark for me. For example, I took this arbitrary frame...

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!

and sampled the white balance between the frames on the rebate to net this negative image: 

I applied my usual conversion preset to the full frame and applied the white balance from the adjusted frame for this:

That seemed close but a little too cool for my taste, so I adjusted the white balance from 3400°K to 3100°K to get this ...

That's close enough for me to use as a starting point for further editing. All the negs on the same film strip will need about that same basic correction.

BTW: A good mask (and shade from ambient light) definitely improves the rendering but isn't absolutely necessary. I made these images and the previous set by just dropping the negs on the light table and turning down the lights in the room. I've made masks for negs before using a little bit of heavy black construction paper, and flattened badly curled negs with a sheet of glass too.  

G

Edited February 9, 2020 by ramarren

[tommonego@gmail.com]

Yes cutting one is not a bad idea, especially with Leica negs being slightly larger than normal, gets you the edge too. Always had my enlarger carriers filed out so you could have a black edge on your print.

I'll try the white edge thing, should come close. 

 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[Mr.Prime]

Wow - thanks very much, this was far more detail and information than I expected !

[ramarren]

You're welcome.

That last image I posted intrigued me ... I had picked it at random from my archive to show the color mask removal I used, but when I started looking at it, I liked it enough that I decided to render it a little further. Can't for the life of me remember what camera or lens it was, just Kodacolor 200 (my standard print film back then). Anyway, for what it's worth ...

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!

Fun to find things in the archives like that... 

G