Quality/resolution/sharpness of current M lenses

[LennyTheLion]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

How do the current crop of Leica M lenses compare to M lenses of the late 1990s?  For instance, if you did visual and optical tests of a 1990s 50 Summicron and the very latest iteration of the exact same lens, are there any noticeable differences. Have they been reconfigured, or whatever is that they do, to cater for the sensors in the digital M cameras?

[SiggiGun]

I have done some real life "tests comparing the Sumicron II (1957) and the recent Apo-Summicron. 

There a clearly differencies at every point. Color rendering, sharpness, contrast etc. Of course, you will see this differencies easier/better using f2 and/or in difficult light situation (darkness, no sun...). However If you go to f5.6 this is less evident. Sometimes I read critics saying moderne lenses are "clinical". Yes they have more contrast but the color rendering of all 4 Apo-M lenses is simply beautiful. 

[anickpick]

vor einer Stunde schrieb SiggiGun:

4 Apo-M lenses

5 Apo-M lenses

[MarkP]

6 apochromatic M lenses.  However, only 5 named as such:

35 APO-Summicron
50 APO-Summicron
75 APO-Summicron
90 APO-Summicron
135 APO-Summicron

The 1.4/50 Summilux ASPH is an apochromatic lens but not named as such.

[lct]

7 hours ago, LennyTheLion said:

[..] if you did visual and optical tests of a 1990s 50 Summicron and the very latest iteration of the exact same lens, are there any noticeable differences. [...]

No because the current Summicron 50/2 v5 has the same optical formula as v4 from 1979. But you will find a bit less flare out of v5 compared to v4.

[a.noctilux]

@LennyTheLion

you will see that sharpness is not that important for good pictures (one day?).

Just try the lens which can suits you or not.

Opinions from others are just that ...opinions.

No other can breathe in your place.

[Photoworks]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

not exactly you lens mentioned!
This is a compare gallery of 50 cron from the 60's and a new SL 50. 
I think they are more similar then different..

https://photos.alexkroke.com/TESTS/Summicron-R-1965-vs-Summicron-SL-50/n-n9s7Wh/

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!

[adan]

8 hours ago, MarkP said:

135 APO-Summicron

I wish!

Try 135 APO-Telyt f/3.4.

For LennytheLion: Problem with your question is that a lot of Leica lenses were introduced during the 1990s, with new technology (the advent of ASPH lens moulding and pursuit of APO performance with new glass). So it depends on whether you mean early 1990s, mid-1990s, or late 1990s.

Some of the latter have not changed significantly or at all in performance (sharpness/resolution) since the 1990s: 90 APO-Summicron, 135 APO-Telyt, 35mm Summilux ASPH, 35mm Summicron ASPH.

And as mentioned, the regular 50mm Summicron, which design dates from 1979, but acquired the newer coatings (increase in overall contrast/clarity) during the 1990s.

The 50mm Summilux-M ASPH (2004) will show the largest advance over the 50mm Summilux-M version available throughout in the 1990s. And since 2000 there have been other introductions of focal-lengths that had no real comparable equivalent in the 1990s (75mm APO-Summicron, 21mm f/3.4 Super-Wide Elmar, 21/24mm f/1.4 lenses, 90mm f/4 Macro).

However, what with improvements, and totally new lenses, the average MTF, and usually corner performance, across the M line, has increased over the past 22 years.

Excepting some recreations of lenses from the deep past, intentionally made to re-capture the performance and look of the 1960s/1950s/1930s(!) - 50mm f/1.2 Noctilux-M, 28mm f/5.6 Summaron-M, 90mm f/2.2 Thambar-M.

Edited May 21, 2022 by adan

[Jean-Michel]

In film days, just about any decent lens out-resolved any film, colour or black & white, available. Today, any decent lens out-resolves. OST of our photographic abilities. Yes, there are visible differences between lenses but those are by and large irrelevant. 

[MarkP]

12 hours ago, adan said:

I wish!

Try 135 APO-Telyt f/3.4.

Ha - thanks Adan.  I just copied and pasted APO-Summicron but went too far down the list.
One would think I know the names of my lenses 🙄.

Edited May 22, 2022 by MarkP

[VanDooglz]

23 hours ago, SiggiGun said:

but the color rendering of all 4 Apo-M lenses is simply beautiful. 

Sorry but this difference is not tangible. I've owned dozens of lenses by various manufacturers. Nikon, Zeiss, Leica, Canon, Tokina, Sigma, Voigtlander, the list goes on. The differences in color rendering are so subtle, they can easily disappear during RAW conversion (on digital bodies) or during scanning (on film). Basically, when it comes to final color, lenses do not matter at all. I never understood why this even comes up. I can easily match your Leica APO color with a $89 Canon lens (or even any Soviet lens) on film or digital.

[Alberti]

I am surprised that my old lenses shine on my hi-res sensor. They are so much better and differently performing than on my older 24MP. All kinds of advances. Quality = resolution^contrast and also with the equality of the colour rendition. Sharpness is also the contrast in details and colours. Old lenses are often good. [New one better] I saw the lens analysis of an old Elmarit 28, that shows the colours have an almost equal transmission. Near-apochromatic before APO.

There are advances with the new mold (first had mould, haha) production process to make an aspherical element and facilitate production of APO calculations: no CA, MTF is gorgeous. Picture quality too.

- But the drawback is price

so - - - I am hunting for an old 50mm macro-apo. Need patience.

Edited May 22, 2022 by Alberti

[jaapv]

2 hours ago, VanDooglz said:

Sorry but this difference is not tangible. I've owned dozens of lenses by various manufacturers. Nikon, Zeiss, Leica, Canon, Tokina, Sigma, Voigtlander, the list goes on. The differences in color rendering are so subtle, they can easily disappear during RAW conversion (on digital bodies) or during scanning (on film). Basically, when it comes to final color, lenses do not matter at all. I never understood why this even comes up. I can easily match your Leica APO color with a $89 Canon lens (or even any Soviet lens) on film or digital.

This colour rendering debate dates back to slide film   However, I think the poster meant colour differentiation. 

[SiggiGun]

vor 3 Stunden schrieb VanDooglz:

Sorry but this difference is not tangible. I've owned dozens of lenses by various manufacturers. Nikon, Zeiss, Leica, Canon, Tokina, Sigma, Voigtlander, the list goes on. The differences in color rendering are so subtle, they can easily disappear during RAW conversion (on digital bodies) or during scanning (on film). Basically, when it comes to final color, lenses do not matter at all. I never understood why this even comes up. I can easily match your Leica APO color with a $89 Canon lens (or even any Soviet lens) on film or digital.

You're probably right but it is not my point. I compared Leica 1957 with Leica 2018. Same camera, same image, same light etc. Unfortunately I haven't saved the files... 

[Alberti]

I have a Canon 35mm lens. On my M240 it has a very slight yellow cast; great in portraits. My [uncoded] Summicron 35mm does not.  Same recorded temperature by the camera, so that is not an automatic variable. Leica was once famously warm on film, Leica is often more manufactured neutral now.

And I tried new Zeiss lenses (35mm 2.8 so called stellar; 75mm) on my M240. They have much to very much purple fringing. Handed them back of course to the seller across the counter.

So lenses do differ. Just some recent findings.

I note there are people using a colour chart and process to that tone. yes, the picture from various lenses, will be similar in colour but not in rendering.