What's the point of shooting with other makes of lenses on your M camera?

[pippy]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

32 minutes ago, ktmrider2 said:

DDD is David Douglas Duncan.  He was the only Marine photographer aboard the USS Missouri during the Japanese surrender ceremony at the end of WW2.  He became a LIFE photographer following WW2 and his photos of the Marines in Korea and during the Chosin campaign are legendary.  He later spent years becoming friends with and documenting Picasso.  He passed away a couple years ago and his entire photography collection has been donated to the University of Texas in Austin.

I find the debate here on using this lens or that lens or which camera like debating Trump vs Biden, ie not very useful.  Studying the images and careers of famous photographers of the past would probably go much further in improving one's images then worrying about bokeh or if the latest version of the Summicron flares or has a few lines per mm more resolution then the equivalent Zeiss or the second version of the Summicron etc.  

This opinion will probably not be too popular on an equipment forum but that is what we did in photojournalism back in college, not debating if Leica was better then Nikon or if Canon was the way to go.  And I have a couple friends who shoot for NATIONAL GEO and their house is filled with books on photography and I do not mean which camera system to use.

If we accept the fact that DDD clearly DID care enough about the superor (in his opinion) performance of some of Nikon's optics in comparison to their Leica equivalents this puts your argument in an awkward position.

FWIW I am largely in agreement with everything you suggest. But you can hardly say 'It doesn't matter' and specifically mention DDD when to him, quite obviously, it did matter.

Philip.

 

Edited November 9, 2020 by pippy

[Advertisement]

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

[Peter Kilmister]

Having owned Nikkor lenses in the 1970s an 1980s I was impressed with them. Leica APO lenses are a revelation in comparison. Any APO lens produces true colour without purple edging. It's difficult to spot purple edging with B&W.

[M2Pete]

On 11/7/2020 at 5:54 PM, farnz said:

I view lenses as 'paint brushes' where each will provide a different rendering of the same subject

I'm in the same camp. Much of photograph is subjective so saying Leica is the only choice is only limiting yourself. I have a CV 50mm f/1.5 Nokton that I use if I want clinical sharpness at all apertures for that FOV but would never use for "atmosphere' or a portrait. I go to my Zeiss Sonnar for that. My Leica 75mm f2.5 lives on my M-D as it feels most like my 'mind's eye' and is so sharp, but love the oddities I get in early morning late afternoon light for its 'dreamy' lack of clinical sharpness I get on my Jupiter 9.

As opposed to @farnz I like to think of my various lenses as offering different flavors; not everyone will like a dill pickle with their peanut butter sandwich but I don't mind it.

[farnz]

2 minutes ago, M2Pete said:

As opposed to @farnz I like to think of my various lenses as offering different flavors; not everyone will like a dill pickle with their peanut butter sandwich but I don't mind it.

I don't disagree but give me Marmite on vanilla ice cream any day.  (Now stand well back and wait for the disbelief and disgust to ignite - Marmite has that effect on people. )

Pete.

[ktmrider2]

The point is other manufactures may make better optics than Leica or focal lengths like the 10 mm from Voigtlander not available from Leitz.  Don't want to limit myself but in all honesty my gear bag is too big.  It may be time to trim the herd which I do from time to time.

[sutlore]

Because there plenty of choices out there. By spending large amount of money buying lenses, I would buy many reasonable price lenses rather spending for only few expensive lenses, if the quality of those lenses are comparable.

I'm getting bored quite easily and love to be motivated to shoot by having new lenses from time to time. 😄

[Ko.Fe.]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 11/7/2020 at 6:19 PM, Herr Barnack said:

Leica M lenses are the holy grail - they are legendary in the world of photography.  They are most likely without equal.  M lenses are the reason so many photographers come to the M system.

So here's a question:  What's the point of shooting with other makes of lenses on your M camera?  Isn't that sort of defeating the purpose of owning and using M cameras?

Before people start to get offended/defensive/outraged or commence to flinging poo, this question is not intended to bash lenses other than M lenses and it is not a question based in snobbery or elitism.  At one point, I owned and used a Voigtlander Nokton 35mm f/1.2 ASPH v.1; I sold it off because I didn't use it much (and ended up kicking myself).  I am considering buying the current  Voigtlander Nokton 35mm f/1.2 ASPH v.3 lens, wven thouugh it is not a Leica M lens.

So my question remains:  For you, what's the point of shooting with other makes of lenses on your M camera?

 

Winograd was using Canon lenses on M cameras and Frank was using Nikkor lenses.  Here is nothing legendary about Leica lenses in real photography world. 

I see pictures from ZM lenses as good, if not better than from Leica M lenses. Current Chinese makers of M lenses are on pair with Leica M lenses.

Leica lenses have edge on slightly compact build, not always. But it doesn't affect image quality  .

Nor I'm finding your statement about users coming to M due to Leica only lenses to be very accurate. 

What is the rangefinder photography? It is not about cheesy sunsets, dogs, flowers and cute ladies, cars and so on.  It isn't about sharpness, either. Rangefinder photography is about having framelines and both eyes open. And sometimes CV VM tiny lens is better for it, because it doesn't protrude into VF, framelines. 

You need to watch video bellow. Not a word about the lens, it is all about Leica been the rangefinder. This is why many of us have chosen it. Lens is just second part, which gives some variations on rendering, but if image has content of rangefinder photography it doesn't matter at all how lens is labeled. It is about capabilities and understanding what rangefinder photography is and why Leica M is the only right tool for it. 

 

 

[Gobert]

I hope I may assume that your statement that Chinese lenses “are on par” with Leica M lensens is not meant seriously.

[Guest BlackBarn]

1 hour ago, Ko.Fe. said:

Rangefinder photography is about having framelines and both eyes open.

Rangefinder photography can also be about having one eye closed, sometimes shooting from the hip and for me the frames lines are there to be used or not. Sometimes I am only interested in a small aspect within the frame lines and if the lens I have on can’t accommodate that I still take the shot knowing  I can crop later.

[Ouroboros]

1 hour ago, Ko.Fe. said:

 

.......Rangefinder photography is about having framelines and both eyes open.

 

 

You're going to need a bigger crash helmet.  Left-eyed photographers are on to you.

[mdp]

I'm left eyed, am I allowed to use a rangefinder?!

[pop]

vor 3 Stunden schrieb Ko.Fe.:

Rangefinder photography is about having framelines and both eyes open

Obviously, using rangefinders are different things to different people. I don't know if the term "rangefinder photography" as such is useful. Are "metal body photography" or "rectangular format photography" or "off-axis tripod socket photography" useful terms?

My only reason for choosing a camera with an opto-mechanical rangefinder were the immense ergonomical advantages such a rangefinder had for me, despite the technical and economical shortcomings.

[lct]

Some of us are using M lenses on mirrorless cameras too. 

[pgk]

A poll of M camera owners to see how many used other maker's lenses would be interesting .....

[BrianS]

I wrote an article on the early Nikkor lenses, and compared the Nikkor-SC 5cm F1.5 with a 1943 CZJ Sonnar 5cm F1.5 that I rebuilt. 

https://cameraderie.org/threads/nikkor-sc-5cm-f1-5-the-lens-that-got-the-attention-of-the-world.39019/

Ike Fenton wrote a letter to Life with regard to David Douglas Duncan, which was used in the 1990 reprint of "This is War". Nice to know that Ike Fenton survived Korea, retired from the Marines as a Colonel,  and passed away in 1998.

""Men in my company think a great deal of him and felt it a great privilege in knowing him" His desire to obtain good pictures for your magazine often made him an exposed target to the enemy, and he gained the reputation as the type that would crawl out in front of our lines so he could get a picture of the facial expression of a Marine as he squeezed off a shot. Knowing Dave and having his friendship was one of the nicer things about Korea." - Captain Ike Fenton, USMC

I have a lot (~100) of lenses in Leica mount. The great thing about Leica- you have the widest selection of lenses available made over the past ~90 years that can be used as they were intended: Full frame with coupled RF focusing. You can photograph with keystones of optical design.

The "Design Philosophy" of the optical engineer goes into their lenses, even in the computer age.

https://www.35mmc.com/29/04/2020/zeiss-jena-5cm-sonnars-the-magic-of-the-prewar-uncoated-sonnar-by-brian-sweeney/

Leica produces lenses that are highly corrected for optical aberration, use mostly symmetric designs. The world moved in that direction- away from asymmetric Sonnar type designs. 

With modern manufacturing making aspherical optics much more affordable, we are seeing faster and better corrected lenses made possible. I have a new M-Mount lens on the way, the new Voigtlander (Cosina) 50/1.5 V2. The formula reminded me of a Bertele 1937 design that was never manufactured. It looks like "elements of Sonnar" in it, or at least more Asymmetry between the front and rear groups to reduce physical size. 

The most highly corrected lens I have was used in an optical computer, in the 1980s. The "Ultra-Achromatic" lens I have was used in a Spectrometer.

Edited November 10, 2020 by BrianS

[Susie]

There have been a few topics lately which seem to have raised the collective 'lock-down' blood pressure and this is certainly one of them.  I think the reference in the OP to Leica lenses being akin to the Holy Grail a bit unfortunate, but it has resulted in correspondence!

As in many things photographic it is really down to choice and preference.  A better lens to one person could well be only marginal to another.  This has nothing to do with the results of bench testing, or anything else, it is simply down to personal preference - and this does not need to be justified to anyone else.  It could well be due to the 'signature' of a particular lens designer, or the lens's physical size, maximum aperture, cost or even down to brand loyalty, which is often strong with Leica users.  I think that using what lenses certain photographers had on their cameras seventy years ago as a basis for determining what brand is 'better' rather spurious, but again, the lens they used was their choice.  As someone else has mentioned here, we could all learn more by looking at the photograph rather than trying to determine what the taking lens was.

My youngest lens is now 25 years old (21mm Elmarit-M non-asph) and I am perfectly happy with it and the others I have, even though I know there are 'better' lenses out there. I gave up chasing lp/mm and corner to corner sharpness a long time ago, and as  I don't much care for the clinical look of some more recent lenses,  to me, the ones I have remain my preference. The fact that they are all Leitz products is, again, my choice, but I understand that others would not give them house room and I respect their choice.

The bottom line has to be that for you the best lenses are those you like to use and give you the results you want.  After all, we are here to enjoy our photography - aren't we?

[Peter_S]

For me it is simple - not other company (besides PhaseOne) makes a camera with a monochom sensor, or digital rangefinder cameras.
I use three VM lenses (Ultron 21mm - landscape; Heliar 50mm f/3.5 - landscape;  Nokton 40mm f/1.2 - everything!), which do not need to hide from their Leica counterparts.
 

[pop]

vor 31 Minuten schrieb Susie:

I think the reference in the OP to Leica lenses being akin to the Holy Grail a bit unfortunate

It's a bit unfortunate in the sense that the Holy Grail is something you seek but never attain. That may or may not apply to certain Leica lenses, of course.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Ko.Fe.]

4 hours ago, pop said:

Obviously, using rangefinders are different things to different people. I don't know if the term "rangefinder photography" as such is useful. Are "metal body photography" or "rectangular format photography" or "off-axis tripod socket photography" useful terms?

My only reason for choosing a camera with an opto-mechanical rangefinder were the immense ergonomical advantages such a rangefinder had for me, despite the technical and economical shortcomings.

If you can't see and feel something it is not your fault. Just doesn't really mean it not exist because of it.

Did you watched and listen to words in the video I have provided? If not, it might help.

It is better than Winogrand description, who was trying to explain why he is using the rangefinder at available on-line meeting video with some students. Nor he really had to those students who can't understand it.

For several times I would find some photographer and photos, content would resonate with me. Every time I made a guess it was right. They are, were using rangefinder. Most of photography books I have are from those who are using/used rangefinders. It is existing style, method, philosophy of photography, but obviously not for everyone to see it.  

[Ko.Fe.]

On 11/7/2020 at 6:19 PM, Herr Barnack said:

Leica M lenses are the holy grail - they are legendary in the world of photography.  They are most likely without equal.  M lenses are the reason so many photographers come to the M system.

So here's a question:  What's the point of shooting with other makes of lenses on your M camera?  Isn't that sort of defeating the purpose of owning and using M cameras?

Before people start to get offended/defensive/outraged or commence to flinging poo, this question is not intended to bash lenses other than M lenses and it is not a question based in snobbery or elitism.  At one point, I owned and used a Voigtlander Nokton 35mm f/1.2 ASPH v.1; I sold it off because I didn't use it much (and ended up kicking myself).  I am considering buying the current  Voigtlander Nokton 35mm f/1.2 ASPH v.3 lens, wven thouugh it is not a Leica M lens.

So my question remains:  For you, what's the point of shooting with other makes of lenses on your M camera?

Here is another evidence of absurd statements of yours.

In case if you don't know about William Eggleston, he is considered as pioneer of color photography of modern times.

He is using Viogtlander lens on M camera. Most likely one you used to have. This remarkable photographer has no complex about Leica on Leica is a must.