Leitz Macro-Elmarit-R 60/2.8 for portraits?

[Shepherdphotographer]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Would anyone be kind enough to post in this topic, some portraits taken with the Elmarit-R60, showing a similar rendering to the Elmarit-R 90 / 2.8, please? Thank you in advance!

 

 

 

[Advertisement]

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

[TomB_tx]

I have only used the SummicronR, SummiluxR, and ElmaritR 60 on film (LeicaflexSL) - but primarily used the Elmarit as my standard lens. A very versatile performer.

[Shepherdphotographer]

50 minutes ago, TomB_tx said:

I have only used the SummicronR, SummiluxR, and ElmaritR 60 on film (LeicaflexSL) - but primarily used the Elmarit as my standard lens. A very versatile performer.

If you have used Elmarit-R 90/2.8, are there differences between 90/2.8 and 60/2.8?

[hepcat]

5 hours ago, Shepherdphotographer said:

I finally found this photo, on Flickr, in which the yield of the Elmarit-R 60 / 2.8 Macro would seem to be very similar to that of the Elmarit-R 90 / 2.8, which would have highlighted even more wrinkles on the skin, it would have been more delicate and would have returned even less saturated colors. But we are getting closer ...

 

The link of thi picture is the following: https://www.flickr.com/photos/draculro/15349625032/in/pool-1884412@N24/

 

The problem with looking at other images online and trying to figure out the contrast and sharpness of a lens is that they are ALL manipulated when posted online, whether by the camera's .jpg engine, or the photographer's post-processing of a RAW file to suit his or her own tastes.   There is really no way to know what that image looked like straight out of the camera. 

In order to find the actual character of the lens, you almost need to do side-by-side comparisons with the same body/sensor/film, and do it in RAW on your own monitor so you can see what you're looking for.  Otherwise you're comparisons just don't mean much.  The photo you linked to is shot on a Fuji body, and the rendering of the file would be done much differently say, from the rendering of the same image on my Lumix S1 or different yet on a an SL2 or SL2-S.
 

[Shepherdphotographer]

15 minutes ago, hepcat said:

The problem with looking at other images online and trying to figure out the contrast and sharpness of a lens is that they are ALL manipulated when posted online, whether by the camera's .jpg engine, or the photographer's post-processing of a RAW file to suit his or her own tastes.   There is really no way to know what that image looked like straight out of the camera. 

In order to find the actual character of the lens, you almost need to do side-by-side comparisons with the same body/sensor/film, and do it in RAW on your own monitor so you can see what you're looking for.  Otherwise you're comparisons just don't mean much.  The photo you linked to is shot on a Fuji body, and the rendering of the file would be done much differently say, from the rendering of the same image on my Lumix S1 or different yet on a an SL2 or SL2-S.
 

It's true and I said it before. When there was only the film, it was known the personality of a lens, there were the manipulations, but much less. There were less differences among films against the differences among sensors of today, but there was the personality of a lens and it exists today. There could be someone who knows this personality and however, also if there is the digital photography, each great lens has got its personality: also in this forum there is who knows the personality of a model of a lens, for example.

[Shepherdphotographer]

My English isn't good, excuse me

[hepcat]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

31 minutes ago, Shepherdphotographer said:

My English isn't good, excuse me

Your English is MUCH better than my (non-existant) command of Italian!  You're doing fine! 

[frame-it]

might help

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!

 

[frame-it]

8 hours ago, Shepherdphotographer said:

I can't, because I have got only a Nikon D810 camera and I can't mount a Leica R lens directly!!!

so how are you shooing with your other R lenses?

[Shepherdphotographer]

56 minutes ago, frame-it said:

so how are you shooing with your other R lenses?

I have changed Leica R bayonet into a Nkon F bayonet. The difference in draft between Leica R and Nikon F is so small that it is not possible to make such a thin adapter ring and the only possibility is to change the bayonet directly.  In the case of use on Canon bodies, however, the difference in draft is much greater and it allows you to make an adapter ring of a fairly large thickness.

[Shepherdphotographer]

2 hours ago, frame-it said:

might help

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!

 

Already seen...... 90%of them is very contrasted and saturated, isn't true? Thanks.

[Shepherdphotographer]

48 minutes ago, cbass said:

Which 90/2.8 elmarit are we talking about? Version 1 or 2?

Version 1

[otto.f]

1 hour ago, Shepherdphotographer said:

Version 1

Just take the jump. Where the 50Elmar M is the best value for money in M lenses, the Elmarit60 Macro is the best value for money in the R collection, but even more so. You will certainly have a sharper lens than you 90 but not at all harsh, you’ve seen it on the flickr portrait. And mind that this lens is very versatile, it is not just you using the lens, it will lead you to other discoveries outside your own beaten path. I would just be alert to buy a more recent version. 

Edited October 27, 2022 by otto.f

[otto.f]

14 hours ago, Shepherdphotographer said:

it seems less saturated and contrasted

Very risky to draw such conclusions when you don’t know which camera, sensor and postprocessor was involved. If you see here on the forum how the M10M handles an old and rusty Jupiter lens, you cannot recognize it from how it performs on film, or a digital Sony A7 even. 

[Shepherdphotographer]

21 minutes ago, otto.f said:

You will certainly have a sharper lens than you 90 but not at all harsh, you’ve seen it on the flickr portrait

Thanks for your valuable contribution! I would like to have confirmation that I have understood correctly: you mean that the Elmarit-R 60 / 2.8 Macro would give, therefore, the same type of result as the Elmarit-R 90 / 2.8 that I have in portraits, with even more sharpness, but still it would remain at the same time delicate, respectful, like the 90 / 2.8 and the photo of the portrait taken on Flickr is an example? From the photo it would seem more contrasted and saturated than the 90 / 2.8, but the speech is always the same, that is what has just been said: most likely the author has manipulated the image, even if less than others (a matter of personal taste) . I would have imagined, however, the 60 / 2.8 a little "harder" and less "introspective", "clinical" than the 90 / 2.8, but you know both lenses and I don't, from the messages and the level I think you must also have greater experience than mine, so I take your statements to be true, for which I thank you so much! Even in the Flickr photo the saturation seems high, as in all the ones I have seen on the net and, of course, it may have been desired by the author and added in the photo editing phase, but I think it is part of the personality of the lens.

[Shepherdphotographer]

The choice to add a new lens to my kit of similar focal length to the Summicron-R 50/2 (which I own in two versions) and to the Summilux-R 50 / 1.4 E55 also lies in the search for a lens that can guarantee me an excellent blur, without giving the photograph a dreamlike, fairytale tone: the Summilux-R 50 / 1.4 has, for my tastes, an excellent blur, but all the yield is excellent, it is a lens with a very particular, fairytale yield, enhances lights and colors and it emphasizes subjects in certain light conditions, returns dreamy athmospheres, suspended in time and painting in the blur: this is one of my favorite genres of photography, but it is not the only one and for these genres I use the Summilux-R 50 / 1.4 and the Summilux-R 80 / 1.4 and I'm satisfied. However, as I just said, for some shots I would need to get a shot that is not "fairytale", "dreamy", but still with an excellent blur. Looking in my kit, having to exclude the Summilux-R 50 / 1.4, then, the Summicron-R 50/2 would remain, which returns colors that I am madly in love with, I would dive into a pool full of such colors, if they were liquid, I would like to drown in it, but I don't like the blur of the Summicron-R 50/2 very much, it's not its strong point: it is a lens that has other advantages, it has been conceived differently and does not have its strong point in the blur. The blur of the Elmarit-R 60 / 2.8 macro seems wonderful to me, very beautiful, I like it a lot. Unfortunately I have seen above all, on the internet, macro photos, which emphasize the blur of a lens, but it is a lens that has a reputation for its blur ....... and it shows anyway. In addition to this, the article by Marco Cavina, who, referring to this lens, speaks of it as: "Poetry in power" (link: http://www.marcocavina.com/articoli_fotografici/Leica_macro-Elmarit-R_60mm_2,8/00_pag.htm) despite not having (this is also an obvious thing) the performance of the Summilux, who produce almost abstract photographs and emphasize the subject and everything around it in the frame like no other lens.

[Shepherdphotographer]

46 minutes ago, otto.f said:

Very risky to draw such conclusions when you don’t know which camera, sensor and postprocessor was involved. If you see here on the forum how the M10M handles an old and rusty Jupiter lens, you cannot recognize it from how it performs on film, or a digital Sony A7 even. 

It's a great and real problem, you're right, the sensor counts a lot in the final yield, in the final result, but, in any case, it always starts with a certain character of the lens: if you mount a 90 / 2.8 Elmarit-R on a camera, you realize one shot and then the same shot you do by mounting a Summilux-R 80 / 1.4, the camera will ALWAYS rest two photos that will have affected the completely different personality of the two lenses, don't you think?

[a.noctilux]

Hello,

maybe using on Nikon Leica R lenses is not "natural",

closing the aperture can be limiting factor with these very nice Leica R lenses designed to be used at all aperture to control the rendering.

Maybe using "always" at full open (or whatever F number) and focussing at that aperture can be right answer.

As many decades long user of the Macro-Elmarit-R 2.8/60mm, I can say that lens is (will never be the case with other 50/80/90 R lenses) something "good for universal use".

 

For me this is the must have Leica R lens, if not the only one many photographers took nice pictures with.

Then take time to learn how to use this lens at best, for portrait or whatever you fancy to use this lens for.

 

Have a look here , K1

 

 

Edited October 27, 2022 by a.noctilux

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Shepherdphotographer]

2 hours ago, a.noctilux said:

closing the aperture can be limiting factor with these very nice Leica R lenses designed to be used at all aperture to control the rendering.

Maybe using "always" at full open (or whatever F number) and focussing at that aperture can be right answer.

Thank you for your contribution.

Premise: sincerely and I mean sincerely in the true sense of the word, absolutely never had any problems using the Leica R lenses adapted on Nikon !!!! I have a lot of them, I have been using them for several years and even more and more time passes, the more I am satisfied with them and their number increases !!

Then we come to your answer regarding focusing: on high-class Nikon reflex cameras (because focusing is difficult with medium and low-class ones), always focus, systematically at maximum aperture, but also, if desired, at f / 4 (it depends on how bright the attached lens is) and, whether you focus directly from the viewfinder, or, again from the viewfinder, you use the focus led (dot), then, once focused, select the aperture you want to shoot with on the aperture ring. You have to do it this way, because with smaller apertures the viewfinder becomes dark and you have difficulty focusing, both "by eye" and with the LED (I never use Live view, absolutely, I hate it before of all and I hate that way of photographing, Photography, for me, is necessarily an optical viewfinder and that's it !!!!!!!). On the internet we read with some frequency that, with some lens models, such as the Summicron-R 90/2, for example, there may be, by doing this, problems of focus shift: with D800 and D810 never had (and I'm talking about the problems of thousands of photos taken!) !!!!!!! Focus at f / 2, f / 2.8, in general and then close to the aperture with which you want to shoot, without problems of offset, consequent shift of focus ("focus shift", in fact). Absolutely I have been able to enjoy and continuously enjoy all the rendering nuances of all the Leica R lenses on the D810, lady machine and there is no mechanical problem that prevents it: the mounted lens is exploited in all its qualities and changes of the rendition at all aperture values and lighting conditions and focus distances. In my opinion and I apologize for what I am about to say, I think your statement about it is a big nonsense, as it has no reason, no reason, to be able to verify. I don't want to offend, of course. 😉

Edited October 27, 2022 by Shepherdphotographer

[Shepherdphotographer]

2 hours ago, a.noctilux said:

Have a look here , K1

(Read my answer at pag.2, before!)

Elmarit-R 60/2.8 could be an "universal lens", very versatile, but I'll use it only for ambiental portraits and when, wanting to use a focal length close to 50mm, I will need to have an excellent blur in the photo without a dream atmosphere (in which case I would use the Summilux-R 50 / 1.4). The reason for this choice? I am very happy, for everything else, with all the lenses I already have, each one for each different situation that I want to reproduce in photos. Consider that my equipment has always been constantly evolving, I've been shooting for 25 years, I come from film (luckily!), I know the performance of almost all manual focus lenses produced by Nikon and almost all autofocus ones (the most important, in both cases, in any case 80% of the total). Then, slowly, the Nikon lenses began to be joined by the Zeiss ZF / ZF.2 (which I had all, from the Distagon 21 / 2.8 to the APO-Sonnar 135/2 - under 21 there was the 18mm, which I didn't care), then, since a friend opened the gate for me, the Leica stargate, I only have Leica R by now. Even before Nikon, I shot with Minolta; I began with Zenit.

Edited October 27, 2022 by Shepherdphotographer