Jump to content

The main problem of the "Leica look"


setuporg

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Leica look is real. It was described in The Cambridge Encyclopaedia of Astronomy (1977 edition) under the "Pulse profiles and dispersion measures" section as "a stacked plot of radio signals form a pulsar". It is also the look I give to random Leica M owners when I see they have their red dot gaffer taped.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
On 12/6/2023 at 4:54 PM, strangeboy said:
On 12/26/2020 at 9:53 PM, farnz said:

Clearly you need to purchase a pair of Leica's 'Photo Viewing Spectacles' that will give any picture viewed through them taken on any camera the 'Leica look'.

The alternative is several stiff whiskies - that usually does the trick and works on females too.

Pete.

I just found this post, and almost choked on this reply... 😂

I have noted Pete likes soda’s and caffè latte : that works on males as well as on females. 😚

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!

(Eindhoven, Leica M-P_)

 

Edited by Alberti
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

As for me, having a whiskey works on males neither females:

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!

At least I expect not this is a leica look we like

M9M

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

If the 'Leica look" imaginary description already existed during emulsion film camera days, doesn't it means that all that matters is the lens character that gives rise to the 'Leica look'?

So coming back to modern digital sensor piece of the puzzle, all that can matter is the coverglass thickness as the color palette of RAW files can be adjusted in post process.

Am I missing anything else?

So attaching a Leica lens to any mirrorless body with a  sensor coverglass of 0.8mm thickness (as in any Leica sensors) followed by post process color adjustment should in theory replicate the same 'Leica look' produced by a Leica digital camera?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, sillbeers15 said:

So attaching a Leica lens to any mirrorless body with a  sensor coverglass of 0.8mm thickness (as in any Leica sensors) followed by post process color adjustment should in theory replicate the same 'Leica look' produced by a Leica digital camera?

 

Nah, the look is incapable of being replicated if your "any mirrorless body" 's bottom plate does not have the protective plastic foil still on.

  • Haha 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, sillbeers15 said:

So attaching a Leica lens to any mirrorless body with a  sensor coverglass of 0.8mm thickness (as in any Leica sensors) followed by post process color adjustment should in theory replicate the same 'Leica look' produced by a Leica digital camera?

Not in my experience. Curiously enough i prefer (for now) the Sigma look with M lenses. It is subjective of course and i don't know how long it will take but with the same kind of 61mp FF sensor i tend to use my recently acquired Sigma FPL more so than my otherwise favorite Leica M11. Don't tell this M11 bashers there are 2 or 3 of them on this forum 😄

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 hour ago, lct said:

Not in my experience. Curiously enough i prefer (for now) the Sigma look with M lenses. It is subjective of course and i don't know how long it will take but with the same kind of 61mp FF sensor i tend to use my recently acquired Sigma FPL more so than my otherwise favorite Leica M11. Don't tell this M11 bashers there are 2 or 3 of them on this forum 😄

 

Since my purchase of a Nikor Z 600mm F4 VRS TC prime lens beyond my comfort zone of using the Leica SL2 w. Sigma 150-600mm F6.3 zoom (only option) for wildlife application I've picked up a Nikon Z9 body. Having had the experience of using the Z9, I realised how premative the SL2 is in comparison from the three major mirrorless body makers Sony, Nikon & Canon which all offer comparable mirrorless bodies with way faster sensor readout speed, AFC calculation & subject detection selection robustness since the beginning of the SL vs only Sony A7 in 2015 with marginal difference lead by Sony then. Now after 9 years and into the third generation of SL3, the difference widened.

From my own experience, I've come to realise much of the contrast, rendering of bokeh and a part of the color is related to the light fall off determined by the lens design. Further post process adjustments on contrast & color from RAW files can compensate how each image sensor interpret the RAW images straight out of each camera.

My curiosity lead me to move both my Leica M 0.95 Noctilux & 21mm Summilux to my Z9 body via two Techart AF adaptors which I was using both M lenses on my SL2 earlier. Surprisingly the AF adapters worked well so far. I'm doing more trials to determine if my idea can yield the imaginary results I'm happy from the past experience of using Leica SL/2 bodies on portraits photography application.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
44 minutes ago, Al Brown said:

Oh, for a second there I thought you wrote "a truckload"... phew, what a relief.

A fuckload is the larger unit of measure.  To clarify, 1 fuckload equals 4 truckloads. 

One truckload is sometimes referred to as a quarter fuckload.

And then we have metric fuckloads, just like we have metric tons.

 

Edited by Herr Barnack
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

2023 I decided to purchase a new camera. I researched and assessed countless new brands and models and in my search stumbled upon the Leica Q2. I had absolutely zero interest in buying a Leica camera. Even in Sydney, I would always walk past the Leica store, never entering as I had no interest in the brand, they were just another camera, but 3 to 5 times the price. Back to the Q2, I downloaded DNG files from dpreview and other sources and wham!!!!, the quality, the strange alluring look of the photo.....I couldn't pin point what it was but the RAW DNG files from this Q2 were just beautiful. For years I have worked with Canon and Sony high end gear for commercial advertising work and none of the cameras/lens we currently used ever gave me a wow feeling.

I had to have this camera!!!!! I ended up getting a Q3 and FOR ME, the images produced by my Q3 are just beautiful, I can't explain it. Is it a Leica look? I don't know but image quality I get from the Q3 is just beautiful. Believe me, in my business we have used all of Canon and Sony top end glass for media production and yet the Leica dominates when it comes to image quality.  So perhaps there is a Leica look, what exactly it is I don't know.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 4/26/2024 at 5:35 PM, lct said:

Not in my experience. Curiously enough i prefer (for now) the Sigma look with M lenses. It is subjective of course and i don't know how long it will take but with the same kind of 61mp FF sensor i tend to use my recently acquired Sigma FPL more so than my otherwise favorite Leica M11. Don't tell this M11 bashers there are 2 or 3 of them on this forum 😄

 

Is that Sigma the camera without EVF?

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, algrove said:

Is that Sigma the camera without EVF?

It can have one, i find it handy but the kit looks rather ugly admittedly (link). Beware that the FPL has an electronic only shutter too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 12/26/2020 at 3:10 PM, setuporg said:

... is that you get used to it.

I shoot M, Q2, SL2, and S007 systems, and now recognize the "Leica look" as desirable -- a good photo has it.

The flip side is that I see photographs taken with other systems and immediately recognize them as lacking -- the skies are flat, the foliage is either to kitschy or not rich enough, the blur is either not there at all or kinda sad.

What's interesting is that such clearly flat, uninteresting photos are accompanying for instance travel writing in the New York Times online.  Perhaps they are not optimizing their images for the web?

National Geographic is beyond reproach here, they really do stellar work.

The most organic and immediate Leica look I see OOC is with the S system, where every shot separates the subject as only the 50 APO does on the M, or the Summicrons do on the SL.  But you learn to appreciate, recognize and expect the Leica look across all Leicas.

This notably comes up with the X1D system.  Although it is wonderful, I immediately notice the lack of the Leica look OOC.  OTOH, folks like @Vieri say it is superior for landscape.  Vieri shot with the S system and reviewed SL 16-35 before going all in with the X1D and XCD lenses.  He can achieve fantastic results in post.

I wonder whether the Leica look is our shared set of values, or a niche / camp hobby?  Is it something that helps us differentiate or narrows our view?

Moderators: I could have placed this in any of the systems in hand, notably S, but it has the least readership, so putting it where the most "Leica look" is made.  Feel free to relocate if needed, but I assume the M photographers are the main keepers of the æsthetics, and the oldest, from the M3 on.  In my view, the Leica look was created there and the Q/L/S systems simply expand on it and emphasize it, taking it to the new levels.

Just reread your original post. Now I see "the problem" as you put it. Some mini MF files of mine show similar looks, but it takes some PPing to get there.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I see the Leica look in some Leica glass, the low contrast, the yet strong colors and good micro contrast, warm colors and organic sharpness. That's my take on it anyway.

That being said, as much as I love my Q (116), I see a quite modern almost generic rendering. What I love about that camera still is the excellent microcontrast, sharpnes and just quality.

My M240 with the Summicron 90 (pre asph) is perhaps the combo which shows me the most distinct and insanely nice look when I get the photo right.

I see some traces of the same image from the LEica Q in my SL2 paired with the 24-90, but for me the M series is the most Leica ;)

I dont have an analog Leica rangefinder, it would be nice as I have several m mount lenses, but they're priced so high, I think I might get an Leica R 6, 7 or 8 first.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 12/26/2020 at 3:08 PM, astrostl said:

A la audiophile double-blinds, I have incredible doubt that folks can reliably detect a "Leica look".

The Leica look, as I see it, (pun intended) is a Leica developed sensor with Leica’s color science in a Leica camera captured on a SD card to computer screen…!

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 5/31/2024 at 9:49 AM, Leicaboy Norway said:

 

I dont have an analog Leica rangefinder, it would be nice as I have several m mount lenses, but they're priced so high, I think I might get an Leica R 6, 7 or 8 first.

To my mind it's worrying that people want to spend so much money buying a look rather than create their own signature if it's supposed to be a creative process. But with an SLR Leica and lenses first and foremost you have the look of the film and processing before you can try to define a 'Leica look', and then darn it you'd find it's the same as the Nikon, Minolta, or Pentax look after all the effort. It's a journey worth making though because it shows the look of the photograph can be an individuals choice with little input from Leica.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...