Low contrast M lenses

[stefanusj]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Recently i heard David Farkas also mention that Summicron 28 asph ii is low contrast lens, which i really really love. Which other M lenses that can be considered also as a "low contrast" lenses? Thanks.

Edited June 15, 2021 by stefanusj

[Advertisement]

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

[wda]

In comparative terms, most early lenses have lower contrast than more modern lenses. Remember that earlier lenses were designed for use in film cameras. Experts will identify specific lenses which vary in modern times. Remember that skilled users of post-processing software can change the appearance of contrast to varying degrees of acceptability. 

Edited June 15, 2021 by wda
Added words

[pgk]

Please define what is meant by 'contrast' then re-ask the question. Few seem to understand what 'contrast' actually is so discussing the merits of lenses based on an undefined characteristic is only going to lead to arguments. 

[a.noctilux]

As David above, I'd try older design, pre asph. lenses that I love not for low contrast (which can lead to something else), but "lovely rendering" in most of my use.

Those lenses (even if some so called 'character lenses') merit using a while before any opinion.

Some came to my mind as user, so you may try by yourself to see :

- Summaron lenses like 2.8/35mm, 3.5/3.5cm, 5.6/2.8cm

- Summicron 35mm "I" to "IV", each with individual character

 - older Summicron 50mm "I" to "III" (for me the last 'Cron before "apo-asph." which I use for some years are more modern rendering )

- most of LTM Leitz lenses

 

4/21 S-A

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!

 

Summarit 1.5/50mm

Edited June 15, 2021 by a.noctilux

[pedaes]

46 minutes ago, wda said:

most early lenses have lower contrast than more modern lenses

Often enhanced by haze. I think we should answer the key question posed by @pgkbefore further comment.

[wda]

7 minutes ago, pedaes said:

Often enhanced by haze. I think we should answer the key question posed by @pgkbefore further comment.

Also, lack of lens coating reduces what most experienced photographers understand by 'contrast'. You do not need science to quantify or define why some images are flat and muddy, while others exude life and a good range of tones. After many decades of experience,  I think I can recognize lower contrast when I see it. 😏

[pedaes]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 minute ago, wda said:

I think I can recognize lower contrast when I see it.

Agree - but is it a lens characteristic, or the way it was processed - either film or digital?

[wizard]

vor 1 Stunde schrieb stefanusj:

... that Summicron 28 asph ii is low contrast lens ...

The Summicron 28 asph version 2 is one of Leica's current lineup of lenses, and none of the current Leica lenses (with the possible exception of the new classic retro lenses like Summaron 5.6/28 etc.) is a low contrast lens by any means. Some of the latest Leica lenses may have higher contrast than the Summicron 28 asph, but that does not mean that the Summicron is a low contrast lens.

For truly low contrast lenses you will have to look at the older Leitz lenses like for example the Summarit 1.5/50, and generally all lenses designed before, say, 1950.

[wda]

35 minutes ago, pedaes said:

Agree - but is it a lens characteristic, or the way it was processed - either film or digital?

That is less easy to answer because I always apply my personal profile for the camera at the time of ingestion of new images into Lightroom. So, basic corrections have already been applied. 

You cannot easily isolate lens contrast from the quality of scene illumination. Even a so-called high-contrast lens can render little if scene lighting is intrinsically very low contrast. It is far more complex than sticking a label on a lens, so to speak.

Edited June 15, 2021 by wda

[SiggiGun]

135mm Elmarit, 21mm Elmarit this is my experience 

[jaeger]

I shoot digital so any lens could be low contrast

[spydrxx]

I remember back in the 1970s in a discussion of contrast and resolution a Leica rep’s comment at a clinic that looking forward they would spend less energy on achieving a contrast/resolution balance and produce lenses which would show distinct enhancements in each characteristic but not necessarily contemporaneously.

[pgk]

Anyone (seriously) interested in delving into contrast, etc. might want to download and read this: https://lenspire.zeiss.com/photo/app/uploads/2018/04/Article-MTF-2008-EN.pdf

[lct]

7 hours ago, stefanusj said:

Recently i heard David Farkas also mention that Summicron 28 asph ii is low contrast lens

Really? Sounds like a joke to me. The Summicron 28/2 is an high contrast lens the same way as all Leica asph lenses IMHO. Of course there may be nuances between such and such lens and the Elmarit asph is perhaps a bit more contrasty than the Summicron but to find low contrast lenses, you'd have to look for lenses from the fifties or sixties.

[BradS]

6 hours ago, wda said:

Also, lack of lens coating reduces what most experienced photographers understand by 'contrast'. You do not need science to quantify or define why some images are flat and muddy, while others exude life and a good range of tones. After many decades of experience,  I think I can recognize lower contrast when I see it. 😏

 

Sure but a low contrast image likely has nothing to do with the lens used. The lighting conditions, developer and development time and agitation regimen typically have a much greater effect than the lens. So the whole concept is quite muddy. We do need some way to disambiguate the effect of the lens from all the other effects....and I'll speculate that most people do not have the test equipment nor skill to make an objective evaluation.

Edited June 15, 2021 by BradS

[pippy]

2 hours ago, lct said:

Really? Sounds like a joke to me. The Summicron 28/2 is an high contrast lens the same way as all Leica asph lenses IMHO. Of course there may be nuances between such and such lens and the Elmarit asph is perhaps a bit more contrasty than the Summicron but to find low contrast lenses, you'd have to look for lenses from the fifties or sixties.

The eigtheen-fifties and -sixties?............

I happen to have quite a few lenses from the '30s through to stuff made just a couple of years ago and the only ones which are always returning 'low-contrast' images are those which are affected by haze etc. Even some 'notoriously low-contrast' lenses - such as the 50mm f1.5 Summarit (M) are nothing of the kind; but then again mine is an optically crystal clear example.

Philip.

[ianman]

3 hours ago, pgk said:

Anyone (seriously) interested in delving into contrast, etc. might want to download and read this: https://lenspire.zeiss.com/photo/app/uploads/2018/04/Article-MTF-2008-EN.pdf

Feeling up to the challenge and always hoping to learn I downloaded it... not sure I'm going to be able to read through 33 pages of charts though

[pgk]

1 hour ago, pippy said:

The eigtheen-fifties and -sixties?............

I have some from that era. They are low contrast! Few glass types were available, no coating obviously, and they have some seperation and wear. Despite this on a digital camera they can produce surprisingly good images. I also have some lenses from the 1890s which are a little better. A friend generated some MTF data for me for an 1857 design. By today's standards it was a poor performer, but then again it produced negative to be contact printed only so the MTF cascade was limited .....

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[stefanusj]

17 hours ago, pgk said:

Please define what is meant by 'contrast' then re-ask the question. Few seem to understand what 'contrast' actually is so discussing the merits of lenses based on an undefined characteristic is only going to lead to arguments. 

low contrast = low highlight, high shadows, or more controlled black/dark. thanks

[stefanusj]

17 hours ago, a.noctilux said:

As David above, I'd try older design, pre asph. lenses that I love not for low contrast (which can lead to something else), but "lovely rendering" in most of my use.

Those lenses (even if some so called 'character lenses') merit using a while before any opinion.

Some came to my mind as user, so you may try by yourself to see :

- Summaron lenses like 2.8/35mm, 3.5/3.5cm, 5.6/2.8cm

- Summicron 35mm "I" to "IV", each with individual character

 - older Summicron 50mm "I" to "III" (for me the last 'Cron before "apo-asph." which I use for some years are more modern rendering )

- most of LTM Leitz lenses

 

4/21 S-A

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!

 

Summarit 1.5/50mm

a really lovely pictures! yes this is the kind of lenses i love. i really love the classic render.