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

[scott kirkpatrick]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

32 minutes ago, Jeff S said:

And he spent the last six years of his life at Napa State Hospital For The Insane.  

He probably got care there for dementia in spite of the fact that his vision had gone some years before, and he was unable to support his family.  He was apparently a terrible businessman, lost his business one or more times, lost his studio and most of his work in the San Francisco earthquake and fire.  He was a boyhood friend of Collis P. Huntington, came to California with him, worked for him for a while, named his son Collis.  But even though Huntington was the biggest of the West Coast railroad barons, unthinkably rich and powerful, he and Watkins'  family just wrote him off.  I suspect Watkins is better remembered that all of the others in his story.

[Advertisement]

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

[Jeff S]

54 minutes ago, scott kirkpatrick said:

He probably got care there for dementia in spite of the fact that his vision had gone some years before, and he was unable to support his family.  He was apparently a terrible businessman, lost his business one or more times, lost his studio and most of his work in the San Francisco earthquake and fire.  He was a boyhood friend of Collis P. Huntington, came to California with him, worked for him for a while, named his son Collis.  But even though Huntington was the biggest of the West Coast railroad barons, unthinkably rich and powerful, he and Watkins'  family just wrote him off.  I suspect Watkins is better remembered that all of the others in his story.

I’m aware.  Too bad he isn’t as well known as Ansel, outside photography circles, for his impact on Yosemite and elsewhere.

Jeff

[pgk]

21 minutes ago, Jeff S said:

I’m aware.  Too bad he isn’t as well known as Ansel, outside photography circles, for his impact on Yosemite and elsewhere.

Jeff

There are a lot of books about him, and his images were instrumental in gaining protection for Yosemite Valley. Probably still something of an unsung hero though. His original prints, whilst not as costly as AAs, are expensive today, so the cognoscenti appreciate his place in photography/environmental protection.

[Jeff S]

1 minute ago, pgk said:

There are a lot of books about him, and his images were instrumental in gaining protection for Yosemite Valley. Probably still something of an unsung hero though. His original prints, whilst not as costly as AAs, are expensive today, so the cognoscenti appreciate his place in photography/environmental protection.

That’s why I said “outside photography circles”.  I’ve been collecting photo books and vintage prints for 35 years, accessing vintage 19th and 20th century work both publicly and privately, including Watkins. So I’m well aware. But the average person outside photography has heard the name Ansel Adams; not Carleton Watkins.  That was my point.

Jeff

[LBJ2]

7 hours ago, 01af said:

It has been stated before but it seems it can't hurt to be repeated:

The performance, the characteristic, and the shape and value of the flaws of a lens do not—repeat: DO NOT—depend on the sensor's pixel count. A good lens will be a good lens on any sensor (as long as the sensor size is what the lens was designed to cover). And a poor lens will perform poorly on any sensor.

In the last two decades, this thread's topic has been discussed every single time—here and elsewhere—when a new digital camera came out with a pixel count higher than usual at that point. And every single time it died down as soon as the higher pixel count became the new standard. When everybody has 40 MP cameras then everbody will happily use the same lenses we are using today, which are (basically) the same we were using yesterday—Mandler lenses, Karbe lenses, Berek lenses on adapters, Apo Asph lenses, Voigtländer and Zeiss ZM lenses, etc pp.

And when a Leica M with a 60 MP sensor comes out, the whole pointless discussion will start over.

 

Edited July 31, 2020 by LBJ2

[IkarusJohn]

8 hours ago, Jeff S said:

That’s why I said “outside photography circles”.  I’ve been collecting photo books and vintage prints for 35 years, accessing vintage 19th and 20th century work both publicly and privately, including Watkins. So I’m well aware. But the average person outside photography has heard the name Ansel Adams; not Carleton Watkins.  That was my point.

Jeff

Geez, Jeff.  Who cares?

[pgk]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

9 hours ago, Jeff S said:

That’s why I said “outside photography circles”.  I’ve been collecting photo books and vintage prints for 35 years, accessing vintage 19th and 20th century work both publicly and privately, including Watkins. So I’m well aware. But the average person outside photography has heard the name Ansel Adams; not Carleton Watkins.

I rather doubt that all that many people outside of photography circles have heard of either to be honest. Pity.

To get back on topic. A friend has been generating some MTF curves for early lenses recently using his lens design software. In comparison with today's lenses these are truly awful graphs. But they delivered (and can still deliver if used appropriately) great images (my point about CW). What has really happened is that equipment has shrunk. Squeezing ever more pixels onto a 35mm format sized sensor is now a numbers game. Its application in the real world of printed material (as opposed to pixel peeping) is rapidly diminishing. Whenever lenses and sensors are discussed we tend to forget about the 'fit for purpose' reality of actually producing a print which is pleasing to the eye at the distance it is viewed. Old lenses can still do that, as can modern lenses. 

All that said though, I would urge all those who can afford it to buy new Leica lenses thus ensuring a supply of used ones for those of us happy to use them. I would also suggest that Leica should already be planning a 60MPixel M camera to help this process. After all why let reality get in the way?

[Jeff S]

7 hours ago, IkarusJohn said:

Geez, Jeff.  Who cares?

About Watkins, or about me?  You’re such a kind fellow.  I hear the ignore list works.

Jeff

[carbon_dragon]

It seems to me that there are two basic competing viewpoints, both of which are defendable. The first is based on scientific, laboratory technical excellence. By definition every new Leica lens is probably increasing that standard for the new lens or why would it be produced (even lenses like the summarits are trying for that, even if there are technical tradeoffs). The second is whether the average user taking pictures on his Leica (probably without a tripod) is going to notice the difference, even on a 5K iMac.

There is nothing wrong with either viewpoint. New lenses ARE better technically, that is probably undeniable, but for myself I'm probably incapable of telling the difference unless someone points out the issue on a much magnified part of an image. Just as I was never really able to tell the difference between CDs and records in audio quality. 

My summary of whether someone with an older lens (such as maybe the 50/2 Summicron pre-APO) is going to notice an issue with the M10R is that if they subject it to careful technical analysis with well damped tripods in low wind conditions with pinpoint focus and magnification on a computer, the answer is probably yes. If they just take the picture and import it into the computer and have a good, non technical look at it, the answer is probably no (unless you are particularly discerning).

Also I kind of like the glow on the fence personally. 

[Tailwagger]

2 minutes ago, carbon_dragon said:

Also I kind of like the glow on the fence personally. 

Precisely why I opened with the post with, "A word of caution".   Some might such things abhorrent, others seek them out. Personally, I want the lens to draw in a way that compliments what I'm after, rather than usurping it.  For me, that was the case here, but, as Adan implied, there is value in knowing you lens well to prevent or exploit such things. AFAIC, this was an unfortunate accident. The next instance, however, will be intentional. 

[LBJ2]

44 minutes ago, carbon_dragon said:

It seems to me that there are two basic competing viewpoints, both of which are defendable. The first is based on scientific, laboratory technical excellence. By definition every new Leica lens is probably increasing that standard for the new lens or why would it be produced (even lenses like the summarits are trying for that, even if there are technical tradeoffs). The second is whether the average user taking pictures on his Leica (probably without a tripod) is going to notice the difference, even on a 5K iMac.

There is nothing wrong with either viewpoint. New lenses ARE better technically, that is probably undeniable, but for myself I'm probably incapable of telling the difference unless someone points out the issue on a much magnified part of an image. Just as I was never really able to tell the difference between CDs and records in audio quality. 

My summary of whether someone with an older lens (such as maybe the 50/2 Summicron pre-APO) is going to notice an issue with the M10R is that if they subject it to careful technical analysis with well damped tripods in low wind conditions with pinpoint focus and magnification on a computer, the answer is probably yes. If they just take the picture and import it into the computer and have a good, non technical look at it, the answer is probably no (unless you are particularly discerning).

Also I kind of like the glow on the fence personally. 

Thank you for your thoughtful summary. As the OP who asked the question, not exactly sure why some took this thread into a couple different directions even a defensive posture. However, it is a public forum and all opinions are welcome and considered.

For me, my question was answered to my satisfaction and I learned a lot of ancillary information about the Leica system that I didn't know before. This might be the third or fourth time in this thread I've thanked those of you who have contributed. Photography has been and continues to be a journey for me. Both creatively and technically. 

As I wrote before, "Different Paths Same Mountain" 

[LBJ2]

47 minutes ago, Tailwagger said:

Precisely why I opened with the post with, "A word of caution".   Some might such things abhorrent, others seek them out. Personally, I want the lens to draw in a way that compliments what I'm after, rather than usurping it.  For me, that was the case here, but, as Adan implied, there is value in knowing you lens well to prevent or exploit such things. AFAIC, this was an unfortunate accident. The next instance, however, will be intentional. 

"I want the lens to draw in a way that compliments what I'm after" This is very important for me also.Thanks to you for posting examples of the Leica glow that encouraged others to post examples as well. First time I've really paid any attention to the Leica glow and now I not only know the visual definition of the Glow, I also know which M lenses I might select if I am after after that specific effect. 

[ravinj]

2 hours ago, LBJ2 said:

"I want the lens to draw in a way that compliments what I'm after" This is very important for me also.Thanks to you for posting examples of the Leica glow that encouraged others to post examples as well. First time I've really paid any attention to the Leica glow and now I not only know the visual definition of the Glow, I also know which M lenses I might select if I am after after that specific effect. 

I know you are looking into M lenses, but if you feel adventurous at some point, do some research on the Leica Summilux-R 80mm. Yes, you need an adapter and EVF or liveview on the M to focus it, but it is truly one of its kind. Sort of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde. Soft, glowy wide open and gets competently sharp as you stop down. One of Leica's "keep forever" lenses IMHO.

Good luck with your Leica journey, no matter which lens you choose, using the M is an enjoyable experience that just cannot be equalled, megapixels and feature-set not withstanding.

[IkarusJohn]

5 hours ago, Jeff S said:

About Watkins, or about me?  You’re such a kind fellow.  I hear the ignore list works.

Jeff

I guess that’s the point - your post on Watkins was informative, like many of your posts.  Then it became about you, which was less so.  

[pgk]

5 hours ago, carbon_dragon said:

My summary of whether someone with an older lens (such as maybe the 50/2 Summicron pre-APO) is going to notice an issue with the M10R is that if they subject it to careful technical analysis with well damped tripods in low wind conditions with pinpoint focus and magnification on a computer, the answer is probably yes. If they just take the picture and import it into the computer and have a good, non technical look at it, the answer is probably no (unless you are particularly discerning).

Interesting. At the moment I am researching into some very old photographic lenses and as part of this research I am trying to identify photographs taken with these lenses when the lenses, which were in their day, state of the art, were new. Fortunately some photographers detailed the way they worked and commented on the lenses they had used in certain places, so I can identify a few images taken with these lenses even after 160 years. However I should be able to identify more because the lenses were an improvement of others available at the time and were for a time, the best available. Its not that easy. With the right subject matter and relevant specifics it might be possible, but this is rarely the case. And the same will apply to today's state of the art lenses. In absolute comparisons it may be possible to detect and/or show differences but for the most part it won't.

[Jeff S]

9 minutes ago, IkarusJohn said:

I guess that’s the point - your post on Watkins was informative, like many of your posts.  Then it became about you, which was less so.  

Thank you, John.  I’ll keep that in mind as I read your many comments regarding you and your personal life and interests... your trips, your hobbies, your legal background, your health issues, etc, etc.  Didn’t mean to bore you or others with my lifelong study and passion for art and photography, which in this case was brought up to add personal meaning to my response to pgk’s post quoting me. 

Please consider the ignore function if you continue to harbor such apparent animosity.

Jeff

 

 

[IkarusJohn]

👍

[willeica]

On 7/31/2020 at 10:32 PM, Jeff S said:

That’s why I said “outside photography circles”.  I’ve been collecting photo books and vintage prints for 35 years, accessing vintage 19th and 20th century work both publicly and privately, including Watkins. So I’m well aware. But the average person outside photography has heard the name Ansel Adams; not Carleton Watkins.  That was my point.

Jeff

But the work of Watkins had far greater impact. His work led to the concept of a national park being established by Abraham Lincoln. This left Yosemite unspoilt and available for Adams and others to come along later and photograph It. Also Watkins did his work In Yosemite with a mule drawn cart as a lab for his giant glass plates. The icing on the cake was that he used a lens made in Dublin a few miles from where I live. I own the earliest and latest known versions of that lens. This is far more interesting stuff than the babble about the M10-R and so-called ‘modern’ lenses. As for Ansel Adams, he was a great photographer, but another great photographer photographed Yosemite long before Adams. Those in the know regard Watkins very highly. There is nothing wrong with that, but Watkins should be much more widely known. I know where my admiration lies in this discussion.

William 

Edited August 2, 2020 by willeica

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[willeica]

On 7/31/2020 at 7:34 PM, jdlaing said:

Understood and agreed. But we ain’t in the old days anymore.

Some of us are.

William

[willeica]

On 7/31/2020 at 8:18 PM, Jeff S said:

And he spent the last six years of his life at Napa State Hospital For The Insane.

Buddy Bolden spent the last 24 years his life in an insane asylum but is still remembered today for his great influence on 20th Century music https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddy_Bolden and was the subject of a recent Hollywood film of his life https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bolden_(film) . Michael Ondaatje, the author of 'The English Patient' and winner of the Booker Prize (among many others) wrote a wonderful book about Bolden called 'Coming Through Slaughter'. There is no recording available of Bolden (although rumours of one still persist) and just word of mouth and a song, Buddy Bolden Blues, sustain his legend. Genius and madness very often occupy the same territory. At least in the case of Watkins we have his photographs to admire. When we go on walks, my wife often complains about the delay caused by my photography. My standard response, is that 'after this walk you will have your memories, but I will have my memories and my photographs'. I wonder what Watkins was thinking as he got his mules moving each morning?

William