A lens worthy of the new M6

[Huss]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

It just showed up.  Immediately took off my FLE and threw it into the trash (now there is the FLE II, the old one is worthless) and put this bad boy on.

 

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!

[Huss]

I quickly tried it on my M10r as I wanted to make sure light actually passes through it. (quality check #1 that Leica should adopt).

At 2.8.  Smeary as expected away from the center.  Sharper than expected in the center!  I guess it is accurately coupled to the RF!

 

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!

[Advertisement]

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

[Steve Ricoh]

2 hours ago, Huss said:

I quickly tried it on my M10r as I wanted to make sure light actually passes through it. (quality check #1 that Leica should adopt).

At 2.8.  Smeary as expected away from the center.  Sharper than expected in the center!  I guess it is accurately coupled to the RF!

 

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!

Bonus points for the lens, it takes away the sharpness off digital.

Please post some more when you get a chance.

Edited March 23 by Steve Ricoh

[Huss]

3 minutes ago, Steve Ricoh said:

Bonus points for the lens, it takes away the sharpness of digital.

Please post some more when you get a chance.

Will do. Empirically this lens is garbage.  But if you want that look, then it's perfect!  Right tool for the job etc etc.

Amusingly, Light Room has a profile for this lens which corrects  - very significantly I might add - most of the flaws.  But if you're going to do that, why bother with this lens?  The raison d'etre is those flaws!  The profile turns the look of the pics from crap but interesting to crap and boring.

[Al Brown]

I have had similar results with the bottom of a beer bottle in custom housing. The hipsters went NUTS when I showed the pics to them.

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!

[Huss]

9 minutes ago, Al Brown said:

I have had similar results with the bottom of a beer bottle in custom housing. The hipsters went NUTS when I showed the pics to them.

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!

Let me guess, Guinness?

[Steve Ricoh]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

13 minutes ago, Huss said:

Let me guess, Guinness?

Not Guinness 0% for sure.

[earleygallery]

I like the results! Used sparingly it’s a great option.

However I can’t help but think that if you could add some more ‘character’ in Photoshop the results would look even better, maybe add some scratches across the frame??…

[Anbaric]

2 hours ago, Al Brown said:

I have had similar results with the bottom of a beer bottle in custom housing. The hipsters went NUTS when I showed the pics to them.

Was the bottle curated by an artisan microbrewery?

[Steve Ricoh]

43 minutes ago, Anbaric said:

Was the bottle curated by an artisan microbrewery?

Based on the angle, I’d reckon a Dutch artisan. 

[Huss]

Hmm, I just realized on digital the Minatar lens gives a blue-ish tone that is very reminscent of the Fuji Classic Neg jpeg film sim profile!  So if you want your Leica images to have the same color tone as the Fuji film sim, use this lens.

Xpro3 w Classic Neg film sim:

[url=https://flic.kr/p/2n9LAAQ][img]https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51951417964_1d3f0e6dc3_b.jpg[/img][/url]

In more ‘serious’ news, I have noticed that the aperture markings are, shall we say, poop.  The only marking that accurately corresponds to the real aperture opening is 2.8.  After that, the real aperture is larger/bigger opening that the number indicated climaxing at marked f22, which in actual fact is only f11.
I didn’t notice this when I was using the m10r as I had it on auto ISO.  But with my M7, using Sunny f16 as a baseline, in blazing sunshine today f16 should have been 1/250.  But, stopping the lens all the way down to f22 still gave a 1/1000 reading.  So at least 2 stops off.  Just looking at the lens it was clear to see that f22 is actually about f11 judging by the size of the hole.

So this lens, in the condition I have it, is a f2.8 - f11 lens.  Not an f2.8 - f22 lens.  It doesn’t matter too much if you are using a camera with a ttl meter, as it will still accurately meter, you just ignore what it says on the lens.  Problem is if you want to use this lens on a camera w/o a built in meter, like my M-A, or an M4 etc.  

Anyway, I just got my colour film back and will see how this lens looks on film.  I’ll then decide whether to keep it, or return it because of the aperture issue.

 

[Huss]

Forget this lens on digital - it works so much better on film.  Some lenses just are not good on digital - the original Voigtlander 25, 21 and 15mm come to mind.

Leica M7, Lomo Minitar 32mm 2.8, Fuji C200

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!

[Huss]

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!

[Huss]

Size reference for my 35mm lenses - ok the Lomo is 32mm, but you get the idea.

 

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!

[Huss]

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!

[tedd]

15 hours ago, Huss said:

Size reference for my 35mm lenses - ok the Lomo is 32mm, but you get the idea.

 

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!

What's the brass one here? Super sexy.

[Huss]

6 hours ago, tedd said:

What's the brass one here? Super sexy.

Light Lens Lab 35mm 8 Elements Replica.

[Mr.Prime]

Love those C200 images - how much was done to the colours in post? - i.e. do these images reflect the colour I can expect from this film?

 

(msg to Windows - stop underlying 'colours', it is not spelled incorrectly!)

Edited March 27 by Mr.Prime

[Steve Ricoh]

3 hours ago, Mr.Prime said:

Love those C200 images - how much was done to the colours in post? - i.e. do these images reflect the colour I can expect from this film?

 

(msg to Windows - stop underlying 'colours', it is not spelled incorrectly!)

Yeah, even the pronunciation of color doesn’t sound right to me. I can’t make it sound like colour. 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Huss]

4 hours ago, Mr.Prime said:

Love those C200 images - how much was done to the colours in post? - i.e. do these images reflect the colour I can expect from this film?

 

(msg to Windows - stop underlying 'colours', it is not spelled incorrectly!)

Nothing was done to the colour in post.  I scan the film in RAW with my Z7, convert it using negativelabpro.com in lightroom.