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

[ravinj]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Isn't the point of having a camera to just take pictures 💭

Edited July 27, 2020 by ravinj

[Advertisement]

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

[LBJ2]

10 hours ago, Jeff S said:

Apparently Erwin Puts still pays some attention to the latest Leica news.  Here he comments briefly on the basis for a modern Leica lens.

https://photo.imx.nl/blog/files/7ffd1cf05f545c1ec24b21ef9b653ca8-165.html

Jeff

Very interesting contribution to my thread question. I also like this final summary of Leica design history as I am fairly new ( two years) to using Leica and in particular Rangefinder and M glass. Lot to learn from a very long and esteemed history. Peter Karbe, Stephan Daniels and Dr Kaufmann interviews are quickly becoming a must read on my top ten list. 

"-Objectives of the first generation: calculated by hand by one single designer: M objectives for 1950
-Objectives of the second generation: computer supported calculation by team: M objectives for 1975
-Objectives of the third generation: computer assisted optimization techniques and use of new techniques such as floating elements and aspherical surfaces.
-Objectives of the fourth generation: design teams using computer assisted optimization techniques, and use of many lens parts, computer-controlled assembly technique: not yet for M, but for SL/2." 

[LBJ2]

1 minute ago, ravinj said:

Isn't the point of having a camera to just take pictures 💭

For some yes. For others we might have to fulfill specific requirements and view camera, lenses, lighting and post processing as tools to achieve a deliverable or artistic vision. 

[01af]

 

vor 20 Minuten schrieb LBJ2:

There are those that just take pictures with a suitable camera and those that also select the right tool for the job, camera and/or lens. Nothing pointless about either approach. 

How to select the right tool for a job is a question that has neither been asked nor discussed here in this thread.

 

[ravinj]

3 minutes ago, LBJ2 said:

For some yes. For others we might have to fulfill specific requirements and view camera, lenses, lighting and post processing as tools to achieve a deliverable or artistic vision. 

Fair enough, but this is different than the topic of "modern lenses for M10R". Maybe the hypothetical question is "which lenses for M10R will achieve objective A, B, C... given a set of lighting conditions and post processing recipe x with an artistic vision y". 

[ravinj]

20 minutes ago, LBJ2 said:

Very interesting contribution to my thread question. I also like this final summary of Leica design history as I am fairly new ( two years) to using Leica and in particular Rangefinder and M glass. Lot to learn from a very long and esteemed history. Peter Karbe, Stephan Daniels and Dr Kaufmann interviews are quickly becoming a must read on my top ten list. 

 

Not sure if this was already mentioned in one of the responses here, but could be an interesting read for you:

https://www.yumpu.com/en/document/view/45658127/their-soul-and-secrets-leica-camera-ag

It doesn't cover more recent lenses, but gives a lot of design history that may be of interest.

[willeica]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 hour ago, LBJ2 said:

For some yes. For others we might have to fulfill specific requirements and view camera, lenses, lighting and post processing as tools to achieve a deliverable or artistic vision. 

Making photography into a big exercise of micro management of equipment ultimately leads away from the art of photography. The best camera is the one that does not seem to be there at all. Going through a military style test and procurement process before putting a lens on a camera and going out to take some photos leads away from what photography is all about. We all know what the 'modern' lens thing is about and it is certainly not about photography. Artistic vision has nothing to do with being able to view pixels.

1 hour ago, LBJ2 said:

"-Objectives of the first generation: calculated by hand by one single designer: M objectives for 1950
-Objectives of the second generation: computer supported calculation by team: M objectives for 1975
-Objectives of the third generation: computer assisted optimization techniques and use of new techniques such as floating elements and aspherical surfaces.
-Objectives of the fourth generation: design teams using computer assisted optimization techniques, and use of many lens parts, computer-controlled assembly technique: not yet for M, but for SL/2." 

This is more mythology building and badly written too. I see that my favourite lenses from the LTM era are cast into outer darkness and don't 'exist' anymore. The rest of this is attribution of lens performance to different manufacturing processes and techniques eg newer processes = better lenses. I'm not going to suggest micro-testing to prove this one way or another. The surest test of any lens is how the image it produces looks when it is finalised either on a PC or in a darkroom. Most experienced photographers can tell how good a lens is by glancing at such an image without having to pixel peep.

This thing seems to be breaking down into those who really believe in the great heritage of Leica/Leitz optics and those who advocate that only a new ('modern' if you wish) set of lenses will do for the latest digital Ms. I cannot see how such divergent views can be reconciled.

William

[SrMi]

1 hour ago, ravinj said:

Not sure if this was already mentioned in one of the responses here, but could be an interesting read for you:

https://www.yumpu.com/en/document/view/45658127/their-soul-and-secrets-leica-camera-ag

It doesn't cover more recent lenses, but gives a lot of design history that may be of interest.

Thank you for that. Here you can download the PDF: https://usermanual.wiki/Manual/LeicaMLensesTheirSoulandSecretsen.36269959/view

[01af]

vor einer Stunde schrieb willeica:

This thing seems to be breaking down into those who really believe in the great heritage of Leica/Leitz optics and those who advocate that only a new ('modern' if you wish) set of lenses will do for the latest digital Ms. I cannot see how such divergent views can be reconciled.

The real problem is: Way too many people believe for a 40-MP digital camera you're going to need other lenses than for a 24-MP digital camera. Which of course is bunkum.

[willeica]

3 hours ago, 01af said:

The real problem is: Way too many people believe for a 40-MP digital camera you're going to need other lenses than for a 24-MP digital camera. Which of course is bunkum.

I agree absolutely. It always worries me when I see Puts being quoted in what is the present day equivalent of mythology building. The world of Leica has way too many such myths most of which have no basis. As I implied above, the only cure is to use Leica cameras to take photographs, which is what they were intended for. 

William

[LBJ2]

On a particularly pleasing Side Note IMO: ( with hints on the topic of this thread) 

Here a very interesting and most appropriate application of the M10-R 40.89 MPs for Architecture. With an R lens. 

1. M10-R

2. 28 PC-Super-Angulon-R was designed in 1998 and last produced in 2009

3. Tripod and hand held

4. R mount to M mount adapter with a tripod collar

5. Cable release

6. Love this setup/Kit. Never heard of this cool lens 

6. Because I am who I am with this kit, I would have also tethered wirelessly with the Leica Fotos app for full DNG transfer to my iPad while shooting. 

 

 

[Rick in CO]

16 hours ago, willeica said:

I agree absolutely. It always worries me when I see Puts being quoted in what is the present day equivalent of mythology building. The world of Leica has way too many such myths most of which have no basis. As I implied above, the only cure is to use Leica cameras to take photographs, which is what they were intended for. 

 Erwin Puts proposes that Leica lenses since 1975, designed along optimal MTF performance, should be considered "modern".

There is much ado about different Leica lenses having a certain "character" or being too "clinical", which is the result of the evolution of lens design as Erwin Puts described.

Lenses from these various design eras undoubtedly will have similar character on 24, 41, 62 Mp (or, whatever) sensors.

Herr Karbe was pointing out that the new SL lenses have been designed to take advantage of the higher resolution sensor of the SL2.  

However, his message was clear:  if you want the highest (MTF) performance, buy a new lens (or camera system)!

 

[mujk]

On 7/27/2020 at 1:53 PM, 01af said:

The whole topic—Which lenses are suitable for the M10-R?–is totally pointless to begin with. Any M lens suits the M10-R. And via adapters, many more.

This is not completely correct. There are a few Leica lenses listed in the manual as not compatible:

"INCOMPATIBLE LENSES
– Hologon 15 f/8
– Summicron 50 f/2 with close-up function
– Elmar 90 f/4 with retractable tube (manufactured 1954-1968)
– Some examples of the Summilux-M 35 f/1.4 (non-aspherical, 
manufactured 1961-1995, Made in Canada) cannot be attached 
to the camera or cannot focus to infinity. Leica Customer Care 
can modify these lenses for use with the camera."

In addition, there are some older wide angle lenses that produce a color cast (Italian flag) at the edges. These can of course be used, but need correction in post processing.

Let's hope Leica doesn't make this list longer when moving to newer sensors. I find the reported increased vignetting on the M10-R is a bit disturbing in this context.

[LBJ2]

4 minutes ago, mujk said:

This is not completely correct. There are a few Leica lenses listed in the manual as not compatible:

"INCOMPATIBLE LENSES
– Hologon 15 f/8
– Summicron 50 f/2 with close-up function
– Elmar 90 f/4 with retractable tube (manufactured 1954-1968)
– Some examples of the Summilux-M 35 f/1.4 (non-aspherical, 
manufactured 1961-1995, Made in Canada) cannot be attached 
to the camera or cannot focus to infinity. Leica Customer Care 
can modify these lenses for use with the camera."

In addition, there are some older wide angle lenses that produce a color cast (Italian flag) at the edges. These can of course be used, but need correction in post processing.

Let's hope Leica doesn't make this list longer when moving to newer sensors. I find the reported increased vignetting on the M10-R is a bit disturbing in this context.

Thanks for these details. I have been careful to write "almost all" Leica M lenses because I figured there would be some exceptions. 

[01af]

vor einer Stunde schrieb mujk:

This is not completely correct. There are a few Leica M lenses listed in the manual as not compatible: [...]

Sheesh ... oh yeah, there's always an exception to the rule, right?

But did you understand the crucial point? The compatibility (or lack thereof) has nothing to do with the M10-R's 40 mega-pixels. Those lenses are incompatible due to mechanical constraints, not due to performance or resolution. So, your objection is technically correct but totally beside the point ...

Edited July 28, 2020 by 01af

[adan]

Hey, it is a Leica Users forum - a.k.a "Anal-Retentives Anonymous."

[mmx_2]

2 hours ago, LBJ2 said:

On a particularly pleasing Side Note IMO: ( with hints on the topic of this thread) 

Here a very interesting and most appropriate application of the M10-R 40.89 MPs for Architecture. With an R lens. 

1. M10-R

2. 28 PC-Super-Angulon-R was designed in 1998 and last produced in 2009

3. Tripod and hand held

4. R mount to M mount adapter with a tripod collar

5. Cable release

6. Love this setup/Kit. Never heard of this cool lens 

6. Because I am who I am with this kit, I would have also tethered wirelessly with the Leica Fotos app for full DNG transfer to my iPad while shooting. 

 

 

Also on a side note, that lens is not made by Leica, it was designed and manufactured by Schneider Kreuznach and is available in many mounts :).

 

[84bravo]

It seems obvious to me that when someone from Leica management says modern lens they would mean current production lenses. They are in the business of selling new lenses, not getting in the weeds of what collectors and users consider modern or classic. With that I think I would disregard anything else Leica has to say about lenses no longer in production. It does them no good to publicly say a lens that is one or two generations old is as "good" as a current production lens. They want their customers to purchase new lenses, not used bargains that perform just fine.

I think most of us know that a 1950's Summitar or first version 50mm Summilux is not going to resolve well on a 40mp sensor according to Leica engineers who are strictly looking at MFT data. However, I believe that those old lenses will continue to provide the "classic" look with modern cameras that many of us like.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[pgk]

2 hours ago, Rick in CO said:

Herr Karbe was pointing out that the new SL lenses have been designed to take advantage of the higher resolution sensor of the SL2.  

I just wonder if by this he is referring to the possibilities opened up by the use of software in optimising an electronically integrated lens's performance. Heresy to suggest such a thing in an M section of the forum, but this is one area in which 'modern' lenses will continue to move forward I have no doubt. For those us using archaic M lenses, well, we will just have to live with the pure optical excellence which derives from whenever it was that our lenses were made (on however many MPixels we use).

[LBJ2]

3 minutes ago, pgk said:

I just wonder if by this he is referring to the possibilities opened up by the use of software in optimising an electronically integrated lens's performance. Heresy to suggest such a thing in an M section of the forum, but this is one area in which 'modern' lenses will continue to move forward I have no doubt. For those us using archaic M lenses, well, we will just have to live with the pure optical excellence which derives from whenever it was that our lenses were made (on however many MPixels we use).

Apparently 12-20 MP sensor is the sweet spot/best balance for generation II lenses depending upon the lens--Peter Karbe