90mm Apo-Summicron-M not apochromatic?

[Robert Blanko]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Would be interesting to see a comparison with the non-m-mount apo lenses mentioned for the same scene.

I think that the challenging aspect in said scene is that the focus is in the foreground while the background is far far behind. 
 

[LarsHP]

1 hour ago, lct said:

What excuse? Why would this superb lens change in any way? Sorry but i seem to recall that when you came on this forum it was to complain against Leica prices in the first place and claiming that other lenses are at least as good for a fraction of the price. Please reassure me you're not trying to support that sort of claim by disturbing good faith colleagues trying to help you are you. 

The reason I came to this forum was not to complain about Leica prices although you and I and some others had a discussion about that not long after I joined here. As I said in that discussion, I do think current Leica prices aren't justified considering the quality that several Zeiss and Voigtländer lenses offer at a fraction of Leica prices, but - as you may remember, I also did leave the discussion. I also see several other members here sharing my view on this. That said, I am not here to argue about Leica prices. People buy what they think fits their needs. 

[Advertisement]

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

[vanGeist]

vor 8 Stunden schrieb LarsHP:

Right. But it's a 180mm. I need a short telephoto lens too.

I'm curious: Have you ever considered the Zeiss Otus 85 or 100 in F mount for your Z6? If the 90 Apo is not up to your standards, maybe the considerably newer Zeiss APO lenses are?

[ianman]

1 hour ago, pippy said:

Is it too much to hope that you might try out a Thambar sometime soon and share your views on its performance with us?

There’s nowt wrong with ‘t thambar lad!

[ianman]

4 hours ago, LarsHP said:

I did actually try such a lens on an M 240. To be precise and honest, it was not my current sample of the lens though, but an M 90 Apo it was. That lens also showed chromatic aberrations like I see now, but the test shots weren't as challenging as the ones I have posted here. Still, it was enough for me to skip buying the lens at that time.

So, you test a lens, it’s not good enough for you, even on less challenging shots. Then you buy it and complain it’s not good enough. What am I missing? 🧐🤔

[pippy]

29 minutes ago, ianman said:

There’s nowt wrong with ‘t thambar lad!

Best lens to take when out "On Ilkley Moor Baht 'at" I'd say. In point of fact John Constable's Yorkshire-born cousins confirmed this belief to me in person...

I would have posted a link to your Thambar photograph in the 'Character Lens' thread but didn't think it was my place to do so.

Nice to see that Lars is being a really good sport and I do thank him very much for taking all this knock-about stuff and gentle teasing in the goodnatured spirit in which it is posted!

Philip.

Edited May 17, 2021 by pippy

[ianman]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

34 minutes ago, pippy said:

Best lens to take when out "On Ilkley Moor Baht 'at" I'd say. In point of fact John Constable's Yorkshire-born cousins confirmed this belief to me in person...

I would have posted a link to your Thambar photograph in the 'Character Lens' thread but didn't think it was my place to do so.

I have no idea why I wrote that in a Yorkshire accent. My third ear heard Graham Chapman saying ‘There's nowt wrong wi' gala luncheons, lad!’

The photograph in question was taken on a moor but further south. I’d like to think that Turner might have used a Thambar. His style certainly inspired that - and other - landscape shots I have made.

ps: post/share away. If you sell it you can have 5%... should get you a box of matches!

Edited May 17, 2021 by ianman

[pippy]

36 minutes ago, ianman said:

...I’d like to think that Turner might have used a Thambar...

I'd like to think that Turner's Watercolours and Oils were where Leitz found their inspiration to create the Thambar in the first place...

Philip.

Edit : Just saw your edit so Thanks!

For anyone not familiar with the 'Drawing / Painting" of the Thambar have a look at post #12;

https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/319326-character-lenses-which-are-your-favourites-on-the-m9/

Not sure about LoCa, LaCa or Lines Per Trillimetre but this image (IMO) is Utterly Magical (regardless of the fact it's as soft as shite).

Edited May 17, 2021 by pippy

[ianman]

Good point 🧐 Tbh though I think soft focus portrait lenses were a bit of a trend weren’t they? I’m sure Andy could write up a paragraph or two about lens development in the 20s & 30s.

 

[pippy]

21 minutes ago, ianman said:

...I think soft focus portrait lenses were a bit of a trend weren’t they? I’m sure Andy could write up a paragraph or two about lens development in the 20s & 30s. ...

Odd that you should bring that point up, Ian, because - moot to the OP - I notice that Adan / Andy has written, describing the '80-'98 90mm Summicron, elsewhere;

"......the 1980 pre-APO Summicron......represents an earlier design approach from Leitz. Less contrast, greener color, less clarity...but lovely bokeh, second only to 75 Summilux...wide-open."

Taking into consideration the extremely high regard in which the 75mm Summmilux is held by many users I'd suggest this appraisal to offer-up some hearty food for thought...

Philip.

Edited May 18, 2021 by pippy

[Guest]

I read an incredibly detailed article  about "leni riefenstahl" by marco cavina and she often used the original thumbar lens to good effect in the 1930's.

Off topic i know.

[LarsHP]

5 hours ago, vanGeist said:

I'm curious: Have you ever considered the Zeiss Otus 85 or 100 in F mount for your Z6? If the 90 Apo is not up to your standards, maybe the considerably newer Zeiss APO lenses are?

Yes and no. I haven't considered it seriously since these Zeiss lenses  (and Sigma Art by the way) for DSLR are huge and heavy. I did actually see that there's a guy selling his 135mm Apo Sonnar in Nikon F mount locally, but again, after checking the weight (920 grams) and size (it uses 77mm filters), I don't see that lens fitting in my Tenba Cooper 8 bag. If I bought such a big lens, I'm afraid I wouldn't use it much.

The reason I use M lenses is their size and moderate weight (as previously stated). So why do I carry the Voigtländer 180mm Apo-Lanthar? That's a SLR lens, yes, but it's tiny! It's so small that it fits in my Cooper 8 bag along with my selected four M lenses (15, 28, 50 and 90mm) and Nikon Z6 with "intelligent" adapter. This kit is small enough that I will carry it with me practically always when leaving the house. That was not the case when I used DSLR. I would either not take my camera or just the camera and one lens. 

[LarsHP]

6 hours ago, ianman said:

So, you test a lens, it’s not good enough for you, even on less challenging shots. Then you buy it and complain it’s not good enough. What am I missing? 🧐🤔

Well, what you are missing in the equation is that I didn't explain everything about why I didn't buy the first M 90 Apo I got to see: 

It's cosmetic condition wasn't as nice as I prefer my gear to be and the aperture blades had a serious case of "crown cork" shape particularly when stopped down to f/2.8  and f/4. As I mentioned, it did show some LoCA, but it didn't look as bad as in the image of the OP. Finally, I also suspected that the specific lens might be a "lemon". 

At that time I already had the Elmarit-M (as well as my big and heavy Mitakon Speedmaster 85mm f/1.2) and thought that for carrying around and daily use, the Elmarit-M would be fine. However, since I live outside Tromsø, well North of the Polar Circle, the extra stop that a Summicron provides was handy during the dark season (two months literally without daylight). So, when a nice sample appeared for sale locally at a good price, I couldn't resist buying it. It has been in my kit since, while the Elmarit-M has been in the cupboard. I just love that little lens so much that I haven't had the heart to sell it. Thankfully I haven't, because then it will be easier to sell the Apo, if I decide to. I'm not saying I will, but I do consider it. In that case, I will probably buy the Voigtländer Nokton 75mm f/1.5 for the extra speed while losing some focal length. This may be a better lens for me in the dark season than a 90mm f/2. 

So where's that perfect LoCA-suppressing short telephoto M mount lens? At the moment, nowhere, so I might as well just get a non-apo lens.

[LarsHP]

6 hours ago, pippy said:

(...)

Nice to see that Lars is being a really good sport and I do thank him very much for taking all this knock-about stuff and gentle teasing in the goodnatured spirit in which it is posted!

Philip.

A big thank you for that comment. I really appreciate it. To be honest, I'm actually touched since I feel that you understand my motivation. 

[adan]

6 hours ago, ianman said:

I’m sure Andy could write up a paragraph or two about lens development in the 20s & 30s.

6 hours ago, pippy said:

I notice that Adan / Andy has written, describing the '80-'98 90mm Summicron, elsewhere;

"......the 1980 pre-APO Summicron......represents an earlier design approach from Leitz. Less contrast, greener color, less clarity...but lovely bokeh, second only to 75 Summilux...wide-open."

Taking into consideration the extremely high regard in which the 75mm Summmilux is held by many users I'd suggest this appraisal to offer-up some hearty food for thought...

Philip.

 What I know about lens design in the 20's and 30's is - there were massive limitations on what could be achieved. No computers, much more limited glass formulas, the infancy of coatings.

Imagine sitting yourself down at your desk in preparation to spend the next 120-odd days of your life, 10 hours a day, doing nothing but punching digits into one of these and cranking the handle. Sound exciting?

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!

Even to get a "plain vanilla" four-element Tessar or Elmar required months of that, so the idea of "Let's design a perfect lens!" or "Let's design a lens with character!" really just wasn't what designers did - at least those who preferred to remain sane. "Good enough" was good enough. Except on very rare occasions like the Thambar.

Summars, Summitars, Xenons, even the Hektors are what they are because they were the best that could be done at the time 1) with the materials available, and 2) without stretching out the calculations for years instead of months.

WW2 changed the world (beyond the obvious) - new glass and manufacturing techniques for bomb and gun sights, expanded development of the coatings Zeiss prototyped in the 30's, computers developed from code-making/code-breaking machines (ENIGMA, Turing, etc.) and so on.

In a similar vein (but 40 years later) the 75 Summilux, using all those new tools, was "the best that could be achieved" in 1980. Or perhaps I should say "the best that could be achieved for the specs, at a non-military price" (given that the 180mm APO-Telyt f/3.4 predated it by 5 years).

 

Edited May 18, 2021 by adan

[lct]

2 hours ago, LarsHP said:

A big thank you for that comment. I really appreciate it. To be honest, I'm actually touched since I feel that you understand my motivation. 

Nice but you have problems with two lenses if i understand well, which are both among the very best of the world: this 90/2 apo and a 28/2 v2 that both give unexpected results. Those curious green things with the 90 and a surprising softness at one (or two?) edges of your 28. You are using those two lenses on a Kolari mod Nikon body i have nothing against being a Kolari user myself. The first idea i would have in such a case would be that the body could be the culprit. As you have access to a M240 if i understand well the first thing i would do is to test the lenses on this M240 or to borrow or rent another one to be sure. Instead of this you came on this good old forum with technical explanations (loca/laca for the 90, field curvature for the 28) to explain why those lenses are faulty. I can understand your motivation perhaps, at least your good faith, but i don't quite comprehend your method i must say. One of our colleagues suggested above that you try your lenses on an M body. It is the thing to do before complaining any more about two superb lenses i happen to own and which deserve more respect IMHO.

[pgk]

9 hours ago, ianman said:

Tbh though I think soft focus portrait lenses were a bit of a trend weren’t they?

Dallmeyer circa 1865 caused controversy by introducing a 'soft focus' lens. They have been in use ever since. Trend - not so sure. Niche - yes.

Threads like this amuse me. Take a designation, apply it well beyond its scope and complain when things aren't quite as anticipated. Few (only those looking for miniscule optical flaws) will ever notice the 'imperfections' that are noted here when looking at photographs for any reason other than trying to find such 'imperfections'.

[LarsHP]

1 hour ago, lct said:

Nice but you have problems with two lenses if i understand well, which are both among the very best of the world: this 90/2 apo and a 28/2 v2 that both give unexpected results. Those curious green things with the 90 and a surprising softness at one (or two?) edges of your 28. You are using those two lenses on a Kolari mod Nikon body i have nothing against being a Kolari user myself. The first idea i would have in such a case would be that the body could be the culprit. As you have access to a M240 if i understand well the first thing i would do is to test the lenses on this M240 or to borrow or rent another one to be sure. Instead of this you came on this good old forum with technical explanations (loca/laca for the 90, field curvature for the 28) to explain why those lenses are faulty. I can understand your motivation perhaps, at least your good faith, but i don't quite comprehend your method i must say. One of our colleagues suggested above that you try your lenses on an M body. It is the thing to do before complaining any more about two superb lenses i happen to own and which deserve more respect IMHO.

You come across as hostile. Hopefully I am wrong.

Didn't you read that I actually did test M 90 Apo on a M 240 just above in this thread? 

I tested my 28mm Summicron-M Asph II on that M 240 a week ago and will send it to Leica service in Norway tomorrow (they send it to Leica in Wetzlar). It is exactly as bad on M 240 as on my Z6UT. The difference is that my Z6UT doesn't show the "Italian flag", but vignettes more. On the other hand, the Italian flag issue is very obvious on the M 240, but does vignette less. The head of Leica in Norway called me after receiving my test shots and he made it clear that this looked bad.

So what's your point here? I have a quite badly aligned lens that needs service even though it came from optical adjustment in Wetzlar half a year ago. (Since it was dark season I mostly shot it wide open when outdoors, so I didn't realize how it behaved at infinity when stopped down.) Am I wrong to be unsatisfied with a f/2 lens which is severely blurred in both sides at infinity when stopped down to f/4 (caused by very strong field curvature)? I think nobody would accept that unless it was an old or very cheap lens. 

You seem to get personally involved when I criticize my samples of lenses that you also have a sample of. However, one sample of a lens is not necessarily performing superbly just because another one does. I am convinced that my 28mm is off optically.

Regarding the M 90 Apo, I think it's as it should be, but (sorry to repeat myself) it's LoCA correction is below the standard I expected from a highly praised lens with apo designation. When I read reviews of "apo" lenses, reviewers usually refer to LoCA performance when they assess if the "apo" designation is justified or not, so that's where I am coming from. 

[farnz]

10 minutes ago, LarsHP said:

You come across as hostile. Hopefully I am wrong.

For balance, LCT doesn't come across as hostile to me.  Persistent, yes, but always courteous.  (Contrast this with the vile online gushings from some members on social media sites with little or no provocation.)

Pete.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[lct]

48 minutes ago, LarsHP said:

So what's your point here? I have a quite badly aligned lens that needs service even though it came from optical adjustment in Wetzlar half a year ago.

My point is that it is exactly what i suggested when you explained that the lens was suffering from field curvature. Misalignment. You said no then remember?  As for your 90, you say that you tested it on your M240 and that it showed the same issue put you did not post any pic then or did i miss something. If so would you be king enough to point me to the right pic?

Edited May 18, 2021 by lct