What defines "Modern" Leica M Lenses for the M10-R?

[pgk]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Just now, scott kirkpatrick said:

I agree that this is a silly conversation, although the newer, higher resolution sensors do present interesting qualities to discuss.

To make use of the abilities of the latest sensors and lenses I will have to move house and ensure much larger amounts of wall space as I am already running out of places to put up my existing  30" x 20" frame prints from my M9s. Practicality suggests that we are into diminishing returns for some very basic reasons now😉.

[Advertisement]

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

[scott kirkpatrick]

I ran out of space long ago, in part because the rest of the family uses the walls as well.  But there are always big displays and one can show a print at 100% or more, sliding the image around to see it all. 

[LBJ2]

6 hours ago, IkarusJohn said:

Looks like marketing, smells like marketing, tastes ... etc etc

Where does this get you, LBJ?  Can you accurately identify the differences between your lenses capable of resolving 40lp/mm and 50lp/mm?  If you can, then when you buy your M10-R, apparently you need to sell all your lenses of less than 50lp/mm?  The point I was making was that even a lens which resolves less than 50lp/mm (if you actually believe the figures) will still perform better on a 40MP sensor based camera than a 24MP based camera.

So, you buy the highest resolving lenses in pursuit of "balance" - was does that look like in your photos?

For myself, I really couldn't care less about this sort of nonsense.  My lenses range 1948-1960-1967-1980-2006-2008-2013-2015  Each has its own fingerprint and character.  I would lose a lot in pursuit of "balance" if I ditched the 6 lenses which pre-dated the mythical perfect date.

You need to get out and take pictures more, mate  😀

"Different Paths Up the Same Mountain" 

P.S. I would be very interested to see the special fingerprint and character of a few of your favorite lenses in your collection if you have a few examples you could share that would be great. 

[willeica]

8 hours ago, scott kirkpatrick said:

The M is not there yet.

It has been there since 1954.

William

[jdlaing]

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!

[adan]

Wonderful, jd! Although the progression breaks down a bit with

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!

Two Exposures

1 is awesome

[willeica]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

With this one each shot has to be awesome. No excuses accepted.

https://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-wiki.en/index.php/OLEYO

William

[LBJ2]

Again, I want to thank all that submitted meaningful comments, and information to help answer my thread question to define "modern" Leica lenses particularly with regards to fully resolving all 40.89 MPs of the new M10-R. I've learned a lot with some of your responses, even much beyond my original question.

Along with your contributions, email responses and others that contacted me directly, I think I have come to a satisfactory and meaningful conclusion culminating in how Stephen Daniels answered the below question from LHSA in the video below. 

 "A Conversation with "Mr. M" Stefan Daniel and the Leica M10-R" Jul 27, 2020

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!

"...older lenses are usable on the M10-R, but of course if you want to have a pin point sharp pictures...if you want to have that resolution power [40.89] and image quality...wide open...you should better go with any, more recent design such as the APO 50 Summicron or, the 35 F1.4 does a great job ...so all the lenses we have been bringing out the last 10-15 years can easily cope with the resolution to the full extent at full open aperture." - Stephen Daniels July 27, 2020.

My thread question: "What defines "Modern" Leica M Lenses ..." 

Answer: IMO includes "...all the lenses we [Leica] have been bringing out the last 10-15 years can easily cope with the resolution to the full extent at full open aperture."

 

 

 

Edited July 30, 2020 by LBJ2

[Tailwagger]

A word of caution for those contemplating using the 10-R with early optics. I finally got a chance to spend a few minutes shooting this morning with a 1969 35mm 'lux and the 1956 Summarit 1.5. Several photographs ran afoul of some rather severe ghosting effects that previously I had never noticed when these lenses were mounted on the M10 or M240. What previously might have been considered  'glow' is now rather ugly blur. Certainly this is situational... interestingly portions of the photo are to my eye rendered beautifully, but I'd suggest if you are intent on using early optics, you might test before purchase. My early guess is that these optics will still be valuable in the M10-R context, but there appears to be a few new wrinkles to the learning curve.

 A second problem I encountered, specific to the 35mm, was the appearance of some rather ugly striations in the corners which, given they are concentric and consistent in the two lower corners, are possibly original to the manufacture of the lens rather than some artifact of cleaning. OTOH, perhaps some form of previously unseen delamination? Can't say. Could be unique to my copy or possibly more generic, dunno, but worth mentioning. 

Here was the scene... overcast day, well lit, filtered but not high contrast light. Summilux 35mm f2 1/500" ISO 100.  The Summarit on similar white fencing also resulted in ghosts, thogh not quite as pronounced. 

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!

Where at first glance the fence looks to be OoF in the above, as can be seen below this was not the case, given the brush strokes on the cross bar are sharp both here and in the following crop. 

And in the lower right corner we see the stria...

There are a few tears in my eyes over this, as overall, I really enjoy the gentle color and rendering. 

[LBJ2]

8 minutes ago, Tailwagger said:

A word of caution for those contemplating using the 10-R with early optics. I finally got a chance to spend a few minutes shooting this morning with a 1969 35mm 'lux and the 1956 Summarit 1.5. Several photographs ran afoul of some rather severe ghosting effects that previously I had never noticed when these lenses were mounted on the M10 or M240. What previously might have been considered  'glow' is now rather ugly blur. Certainly this is situational... interestingly portions of the photo are to my eye rendered beautifully, but I'd suggest if you are intent on using early optics, you might test before purchase. My early guess is that these optics will still be valuable in the M10-R context, but there appears to be a few new wrinkles to the learning curve.

 A second problem I encountered, specific to the 35mm, was the appearance of some rather ugly striations in the corners which, given they are concentric and consistent in the two lower corners, are possibly original to the manufacture of the lens rather than some artifact of cleaning. OTOH, perhaps some form of previously unseen delamination? Can't say. Could be unique to my copy or possibly more generic, dunno, but worth mentioning. 

Here was the scene... overcast day, well lit, filtered but not high contrast light. Summilux 35mm f2 1/500" ISO 100.  The Summarit on similar white fencing also resulted in ghosts, thogh not quite as pronounced. 

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!

Where at first glance the fence looks to be OoF in the above, as can be seen below this was not the case, given the brush strokes on the cross bar are sharp both here and in the following crop. 

And in the lower right corner we see the stria...

There are a few tears in my eyes over this, as overall, I really enjoy the gentle color and rendering. 

Hello Tailwagger. Did you try the same specifically at F8 ?

[Tailwagger]

12 minutes ago, LBJ2 said:

Hello Tailwagger. Did you try the same specifically at F8 ?

Sorry, no. It's not something I noticed until I got home and processed the results. If you saw my thread on the SL2 and M10-R, I shot all those at f2. These shots were done using a similar subjects of fences and flowers and were intended purely as a personal test to see how the older lens might fair against the modern one shooting similar subject material. Having been someone who on these pages had touted the M10-R as something on the order of the second coming, I felt the need to at least pull the alarm bell that perhaps not every lens in the system might subscribe to that PoV.  

[edit] But I can try something similar in the next few days.

Edited July 30, 2020 by Tailwagger

[LBJ2]

20 minutes ago, Tailwagger said:

Sorry, no. It's not something I noticed until I got home and processed the results. If you saw my thread on the SL2 and M10-R, I shot all those at f2. These shots were done using a similar subjects of fences and flowers and were intended purely as a personal test to see how the older lens might fair against the modern one shooting similar subject material. Having been someone who on these pages had touted the M10-R as something on the order of the second coming, I felt the need to at least pull the alarm bell that perhaps not every lens in the system might subscribe to that PoV.  

[edit] But I can try something similar in the next few days.

Yes. If and when you can find the time/opportunity and if otherwise nothing is wrong with the lens itself or the front element, try stopping down the lens a few stops and then also all the way down to F8 and then compare both with the effect you saw/presented in your F2 ( wide open) shots. 

Edit: I would also recommend to fix the WB too ( don't use AWB) maybe set WB to "daylight" for a scene similar to the one above. 

Edited July 30, 2020 by LBJ2

[lct]

32 minutes ago, Tailwagger said:

Where at first glance the fence looks to be OoF in the above, as can be seen below this was not the case

Halos around highlights aka "Glow". Well known feature of the Summilux 35/1.4 pre-asph. No need to have big sensors to see that. Here on a 12MP sensor:

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!

 

[LBJ2]

3 minutes ago, lct said:

Halos around highlights aka "Glow". Well known feature of the Summilux 35/1.4 pre-asph. No need to have big sensors to see that. Here on a 12MP sensor:

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!

 

A higher MP sensor can sometimes intensify/bring out certain characteristics maybe even beyond "pleasing" just depends. 

Edited July 30, 2020 by LBJ2

[UliWer]

May I try to sum up?

• There is no precise definition of "modern" lenses for the Leica M. Optical design is no realm where you might start a new era by decision. It depends on physical rules which cannot be changed and has to make use of techniques which are constantly developing. It also depends on glass - yes, real glass, not just a slang word for "lens" - with certain qualities which are not defined by modernity. Glasses with anomalous partial dispersion are no "modern" invention, though it may be much easier to produce them by "modern" means. Aspherical lenses are known since "pre-modern" times, though "modern" technology (known for more than twenty years now) makes them available in much higher quantities and qualities than before. Same for "floating elements". Economy is the most important factor for lens design: it is said that the design for the Apo-Summicron-M 1:2/50mm asph. was in the Leica cupboards for many years - but it could not be realized as production costs would be too high and the price would not be acceptable for the market. Costs and the marked have changed and we now have the "old" design as a "modern" lens. 

• If you use certain criteria for "modernity", you will run into some problems. The most popular touchstone for "modernity" - and certainly for a camera with high resolution sensor like the M10-R - is resolution:  looking at the MTF-graphs for the Apo-Summicron 1:2/90mm asph., which is rather "old", you find out that at f/2 it resolves better  than the very "modern" Summilux-M 1:1,5/90 mm at the same opening. The Elmarit-M 1:2.8/28mm (version IV) has no aspherical glasses. Can anybody show that the older lens resolves less than the Elmarit-M 1:2.8/28mm asph? The best resolving lenses you can use with the M 10-R (with adapters) are some 30 years old R-lenses like the Apo-Macro Elmarit-R.  The Elmar-M 1:3,8/24mm asph. was recently abandoned by Leica - not "modern" enough? If you look how it resolves, it fulfills the highest criteria of "modernity". Though, isn't the concept of a lens with low opening a very "un-modern" one from the times of Abbe`s law?

• The assumption that an "old" lens with lower resolution and less contrast will be worse with a high resolving sensor is wrong. "Old" lenses do not go on strike and refuse to let the light passing though their glass if they realize that the light is captured by more pixels (they won't bother). If you take the pains to look extremely close (which is no realistic concept), you'll find out that "old" and "bad" lenses get "better" with more pixels than with less. More important is another technical aspect: less contrast of the lens will reduce the highlights, so they may reduce the risks of burned out lights. Perhaps this is not so important for an M10-R, but it may be interesting for an M10 Monochrom. 

• With an M10-R (or any other body from the M10-series) you can use all lenses Leitz and Leica produced for LTM and M-mount. The quote from the manual which says that some lenses are not compatible is partly wrong: you can attach a Dual-Range Summicron or a pre-aspherical 35mm Summilux to an M10, because it's bayonet connection protrudes from the body and gives more room. My 35mm Summilux, which I cannot attach to the M9, has no problems on the M10. There is a long thread about the Dual-Range Summicron on the M10 in this forum. Of course you can use an old collapsibe 1:4/90mm Elmar on any digital body - you just cannot collapse it. You can use old designs like the 21mm Super-Angulon or early 28mm Elmarits - it is only the normal lightmetering which won't work properly, but with an M10 you have other options for lightmetering by Liveview. Certainly some old designs like the Super-Angulon produce ugly magenta/cyan casts in the edges if you use them with colour - but you can correct this with post-production means. With some adapters for LTM-lenses lens detection does not work, but there will be no problem if you turn it off.

• So after all, your decision for your lens depends on what you have and what you like, and perhaps on what you want to achieve. There are no other limits

[Tailwagger]

1 minute ago, lct said:

Halos around highlights aka "Glow". Well known feature of the Summilux 35/1.4 pre-asph. No need to have big sensors to see that. Here on a 12MP sensor:

Sure... I have dozens of similar shots, but this seems far more pronounced and nowhere near as pleasing. Perhaps a downside of actually being able to resolve whats going on now. 

[willeica]

44 minutes ago, LBJ2 said:

Answer: IMO includes "...all the lenses we [Leica] have been bringing out the last 10-15 years can easily cope with the resolution to the full extent at full open aperture."

 

There is no objective basis for this, it is just your opinion. All Leica lenses are 'modern' to my eyes and this is a 'meaningful' response.

45 minutes ago, Tailwagger said:

A word of caution for those contemplating using the 10-R with early optics. I finally got a chance to spend a few minutes shooting this morning with a 1969 35mm 'lux and the 1956 Summarit 1.5. Several photographs ran afoul of some rather severe ghosting effects that previously I had never noticed when these lenses were mounted on the M10 or M240. What previously might have been considered  'glow' is now rather ugly blur. Certainly this is situational... interestingly portions of the photo are to my eye rendered beautifully, but I'd suggest if you are intent on using early optics, you might test before purchase. My early guess is that these optics will still be valuable in the M10-R context, but there appears to be a few new wrinkles to the learning curve.

 A second problem I encountered, specific to the 35mm, was the appearance of some rather ugly striations in the corners which, given they are concentric and consistent in the two lower corners, are possibly original to the manufacture of the lens rather than some artifact of cleaning. OTOH, perhaps some form of previously unseen delamination? Can't say. Could be unique to my copy or possibly more generic, dunno, but worth mentioning. 

Here was the scene... overcast day, well lit, filtered but not high contrast light. Summilux 35mm f2 1/500" ISO 100.  The Summarit on similar white fencing also resulted in ghosts, thogh not quite as pronounced. 

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!

Where at first glance the fence looks to be OoF in the above, as can be seen below this was not the case, given the brush strokes on the cross bar are sharp both here and in the following crop. 

And in the lower right corner we see the stria...

There are a few tears in my eyes over this, as overall, I really enjoy the gentle color and rendering. 

What is wrong with that lovely 'glow'?

William

[willeica]

3 minutes ago, UliWer said:

So after all, your decision for your lens depends on what you have and what you like, and perhaps on what you want to achieve. There are no other limits

This is what I have been saying all along. My view was based on my experience of using Leica lenses of all ages, but you have provided some explicit examples. Thanks for doing this.

William

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[LBJ2]

13 minutes ago, UliWer said:

May I try to sum up?

• There is no precise definition of "modern" lenses for the Leica M. Optical design is no realm where you might start a new era by decision. It depends on physical rules which cannot be changed and has to make use of techniques which are constantly developing. It also depends on glass - yes, real glass, not just a slang word for "lens" - with certain qualities which are not defined by modernity. Glasses with anomalous partial dispersion are no "modern" invention, though it may be much easier to produce them by "modern" means. Aspherical lenses are known since "pre-modern" times, though "modern" technology (known for more than twenty years now) makes them available in much higher quantities and qualities than before. Same for "floating elements". Economy is the most important factor for lens design: it is said that the design for the Apo-Summicron-M 1:2/50mm asph. was in the Leica cupboards for many years - but it could not be realized as production costs would be too high and the price would not be acceptable for the market. Costs and the marked have changed and we now have the "old" design as a "modern" lens. 

• If you use certain criteria for "modernity", you will run into some problems. The most popular touchstone for "modernity" - and certainly for a camera with high resolution sensor like the M10-R - is resolution:  looking at the MTF-graphs for the Apo-Summicron 1:2/90mm asph., which is rather "old", you find out that at f/2 it resolves better  than the very "modern" Summilux-M 1:1,5/90 mm at the same opening. The Elmarit-M 1:2.8/28mm (version IV) has no aspherical glasses. Can anybody show that the older lens resolves less than the Elmarit-M 1:2.8/28mm asph? The best resolving lenses you can use with the M 10-R (with adapters) are some 30 years old R-lenses like the Apo-Macro Elmarit-R.  The Elmar-M 1:3,8/24mm asph. was recently abandoned by Leica - not "modern" enough? If you look how it resolves, it fulfills the highest criteria of "modernity". Though, isn't the concept of a lens with low opening a very "un-modern" one from the times of Abbe`s law?

• The assumption that an "old" lens with lower resolution and less contrast will be worse with a high resolving sensor is wrong. "Old" lenses do not go on strike and refuse to let the light passing though their glass if they realize that the light is captured by more pixels (they won't bother). If you take the pains to look extremely close (which is no realistic concept), you'll find out that "old" and "bad" lenses get "better" with more pixels than with less. More important is another technical aspect: less contrast of the lens will reduce the highlights, so they may reduce the risks of burned out lights. Perhaps this is not so important for an M10-R, but it may be interesting for an M10 Monochrom. 

• With an M10-R (or any other body from the M10-series) you can use all lenses Leitz and Leica produced for LTM and M-mount. The quote from the manual which says that some lenses are not compatible is partly wrong: you can attach a Dual-Range Summicron or a pre-aspherical 35mm Summilux to an M10, because it's bayonet connection protrudes from the body and gives more room. My 35mm Summilux, which I cannot attach to the M9, has no problems on the M10. There is a long thread about the Dual-Range Summicron on the M10 in this forum. Of course you can use an old collapsibe 1:4/90mm Elmar on any digital body - you just cannot collapse it. You can use old designs like the 21mm Super-Angulon or early 28mm Elmarits - it is only the normal lightmetering which won't work properly, but with an M10 you have other options for lightmetering by Liveview. Certainly some old designs like the Super-Angulon produce ugly magenta/cyan casts in the edges if you use them with colour - but you can correct this with post-production means. With some adapters for LTM-lenses lens detection does not work, but there will be no problem if you turn it off.

• So after all, your decision for your lens depends on what you have and what you like, and perhaps on what you want to achieve. There are no other limits

"...you'll find out that "old" and "bad" lenses get "better" with more pixels than with less."  Depending upon the lens, I agree. I have seen this for myself with some of my own lenses I've used on both 24 and higher MP cameras. No lens will ever stop working on a higher MP sensor. In some cases, the lens might even look sharper. 

Edited July 30, 2020 by LBJ2

[lct]

11 minutes ago, LBJ2 said:

A larger MP sensor can sometimes intensify/bring out certain characteristics.

If you mean magnify, yes of course that's what higher pixel counts are supposed to do. 

Edited July 30, 2020 by lct