Are vintage lenses losing their vintageness on the latest sensors

[sometimesmaybe]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

15 hours ago, Stevejack said:

Lovely portraits on your insta - I was scrolling through your feed and actually recognised one of your models, then realised you were also from Australia 😄

Yeah, don't get me wrong I love the 50mm APO for things like studio work using the monochrom camera - the detail and clarity is exceptional and can really make a subject pop. But for environmental portraits in natural light I do often prefer the softness a vintage lens. There is a limit to how much you can tank the clarity, texture, and sharpness sliders in Lightroom to bring down the inherent bite of modern lenses.

I'll often find myself dragging the shutter a little to soften up a portrait if I'm using a modern lens. On the M11 shooting at 1/60 and below works pretty well to soften things up just enough to make a noticeable difference, or I'll shoot into the light a bit to bring some veiling flare across the image to reduce the contrast (easier to do when using the Visoflex).

ha! yes im on the other side of the continent 😬

i usually drag a collection of cameras on a portrait shoot

1. GFX100s - 100 megapickles
2. m246 - 24 megapickles
3. canon 1v - no megapickles

doing post on a high megapickle camera can be a nightmare for me. with a GFX RAW file it takes me (per image) around 30min editing and touching up blemishes. it takes me around 20min per image for the m246 and 10min for film.

when i get lazy, i just leave the GFX behind and just take my m43 olympus. i end up saving so much time in post

 

[BillCB]

An old (1969) Telyt 280mm f4.8 designed for Visoflex housing but used here with the Macro-Adapter M to achieve infinity focus. I'm pleasantly surprised how sharp it is on the M11-P at F8.

This is a 100% crop of the centre of the frame.

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!

T

[Sergius]

15 hours ago, costa43 said:

So I’ve included a couple of links below to some samples to try and illustrate what I mean. These are mainly snapshots of my wife and daughter as I don’t have any other models and I live in a relatively rural location.
 

This is not me saying that the bokeh, fall off, aberrations etc are not there on the m10r. It’s just the overall look to the image on the older sensors to me looks more ‘vintage” I do not necessarily prefer those images, it’s just an observation. All these photos are edited to taste but are not edited toward a vintage look and many share the same starting preset that I add to the majority of my images.  I can link to dng files at some point when I have a little more time.

https://www.flickr.com/gp/200035244@N02/4QWWK2JF4s

https://www.flickr.com/gp/200035244@N02/315Jc93490

No discussion. Old lens on old sensor is better. And I prefer those images. 
Please link dng files of 10r. 

[LocalHero1953]

16 hours ago, costa43 said:

So I’ve included a couple of links below to some samples to try and illustrate what I mean. These are mainly snapshots of my wife and daughter as I don’t have any other models and I live in a relatively rural location.
 

This is not me saying that the bokeh, fall off, aberrations etc are not there on the m10r. It’s just the overall look to the image on the older sensors to me looks more ‘vintage” I do not necessarily prefer those images, it’s just an observation. All these photos are edited to taste but are not edited toward a vintage look and many share the same starting preset that I add to the majority of my images.  I can link to dng files at some point when I have a little more time.

https://www.flickr.com/gp/200035244@N02/4QWWK2JF4s

https://www.flickr.com/gp/200035244@N02/315Jc93490

What are the older sensors you are using? I'm not a Flickr user, so apologies if it is there somewhere.

I think you are seeing the difference just between older and newer sensors, and would see the same differences whether the lenses were vintage or modern. That may still be a reason for choosing to use old lenses on old cameras, but I don't think the old lenses somehow perform differently on new sensors.

(I enjoyed your photos, BTW!)

Edited February 9, 2024 by LocalHero1953

[costa43]

1 hour ago, LocalHero1953 said:

What are the older sensors you are using? I'm not a Flickr user, so apologies if it is there somewhere.

I think you are seeing the difference just between older and newer sensors, and would see the same differences whether the lenses were vintage or modern. That may still be a reason for choosing to use old lenses on old cameras, but I don't think the old lenses somehow perform differently on new sensors.

(I enjoyed your photos, BTW!)

Thanks Paul. The older cameras are the m9 and m8 in the examples posted. I feel that the new high res sensors make images look modern even when vintage lenses are mounted but most people seem to disagree. I do not dislike the look. I just thought I would throw it out there for discussion. I think I put the emphasis on the lens being the variable in my original post but I should of put it on the sensor. The lens is always the lens. It is the sensor that changes the look for me.

[tom0511]

Am 8.2.2024 um 00:53 schrieb shirubadanieru:

Agree, did not enjoy them on the M10M or M11 as much as I did on the M9/M10/M9M/M240 cameras. They do lose their unique characteristics & just look sharp. Also on the M11 somehow pre asph lenses that never exhibited this on other sensors, on the M11 you see a lot of purple fringing with them. 
 

Anyway given I only shoot pre asph glass I sold the M11 within a month, and the M10M didn’t last too long either. 

So what do you use now/ whch body? I agree with the M11 showing a little more purple fringing with some lenses.

[LocalHero1953]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

9 minutes ago, costa43 said:

Thanks Paul. The older cameras are the m9 and m8 in the examples posted. I feel that the new high res sensors make images look modern even when vintage lenses are mounted but most people seem to disagree. I do not dislike the look. I just thought I would throw it out there for discussion. I think I put the emphasis on the lens being the variable in my original post but I should of put it on the sensor. The lens is always the lens. It is the sensor that changes the look for me.

It's well worth the discussion. I did have a M9, but was glad to change it eventually for a M240. There are plenty of afficionados of the M8 and M9 CCD sensor (see the 400 Photographers..... thread), and they do have a very different look, to my eyes: to me they are like Kodachrome compared to the Portra of CMOS sensors. I prefer the latter (but that is nothing to do with this discussion!)

[Alberti]

here is a current picture of my M10r with Summicron 35mm v1. I looked in older files and it seems I never ever had such visible coma with this lens, probably just because I never used it wide open in the open air so to say: into the horizon. The wall far away is incredibly sharp.

Now note how the LED lights produce coma while the light from the bill board does not.

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!

First I thought that it was the high-res sensor that will show this more pronounced.

But it could also be the case that this coma thing comes when the light source is in front of the focal plane. Then the sensor is not at all relevant; I just never noted that before in 50 years of using this lens (ha ha). (Well, I knew it was a little bit of vague at times but never found out why  . .)

Anyway, the fishes in the sky match our favourite fish restaurant La Méditerranée on the Place de L'Odeon.

[Ray Vonn]

Well I used a Noctilux 50mm F1 V4 with an M11.  The images, whilst fantastic, looked like any other modern lens of that aperture and focal length, unlike when I used the same lens with an M10.  Better off just getting that new Voigt F1 was how it felt.  I know there's been bit bit of theory in this thread but that was my practical experience.

[JMF]

I like this thread ... old lenses will start loosing their value 😉

[Ecar]

1 minute ago, JMF said:

I like this thread ... old lenses will start loosing their value 😉

Or maybe it's the new cameras that will see their prices drop...😉

[shirubadanieru]

I started feeling this on sensors above 24MP, basically M10M, M11, etc. the older lenses definitely feel sharper, but not in a good way, they lose some of their unique character, and more than anything, lenses that I never had issues with things like CA, purple fringing, etc. suddenly showcase extreme purple fringing on the M11. 

M9, M240, M10 definitely offer the best digital results for vintage lenses from my PoV. Hopefully when the M12 comes around there will be a lower resolution model, but probably not. Since leica is reissuing a bunch of lenses, they should just reissue the only digital classic/cult camera, M9 : p 

[Ecar]

6 hours ago, shirubadanieru said:

I started feeling this on sensors above 24MP, basically M10M, M11, etc. the older lenses definitely feel sharper, but not in a good way, they lose some of their unique character, and more than anything, lenses that I never had issues with things like CA, purple fringing, etc. suddenly showcase extreme purple fringing on the M11. 

Interesting. I'm not seeing this - but I'm still an M11 newbie and have only been able to use a handful of vintage lenses on it. What I did notice, however, is that default post-processing settings (at least in LR and with the Adobe Standard profile) need some tweaking to achieve results I'm happy with - basically dialing down anything that has to do with sharpness, clarity and, to a lesser extent, contrast. FWIW, I'm rather impressed by the DR and low-light capabilities offered by the M11 sensor.

6 hours ago, shirubadanieru said:

M9, M240, M10 definitely offer the best digital results for vintage lenses from my PoV. Hopefully when the M12 comes around there will be a lower resolution model, but probably not. Since leica is reissuing a bunch of lenses, they should just reissue the only digital classic/cult camera, M9 : p 

Have you tried the M11 on its lower-res 18 MP mode? Just curious, as it's next on my test list.

Agree on the M9, but IMO this is more of a CCD vs CMOS debate (or at least a sensor calibration, rather than a resolution one) - and this horse has already been beaten to death on the forum, so I won't get into that.

Edited March 3, 2024 by Ecar

[frame-it]

6 hours ago, shirubadanieru said:

on sensors above 24MP, basically M10M, M11, etc. the older lenses definitely feel sharper, but not in a good way, they lose some of their unique character,

please post some unprocessed straight-out-of-camera [with camera sharpening lowest or off] sample jpg's

 

Edited March 3, 2024 by frame-it

[costa43]

The best digital M for a ‘filmic’ look in my opinion is the m8, then the m9, then the 240, then the m10.. a definite trend😂 it’s not just resolution, I think the increase in dynamic range might be contributing to this 4K hdr, high micro contrast look I see a lot and do not enjoy so much. I do think that the m10 is the best balance for usability and output. If Leica re-issue the m9 in an m10 body and software, I’ll dance a jig all the way to the store on release day.  

[250swb]

4 minutes ago, costa43 said:

The best digital M for a ‘filmic’ look in my opinion is the m8, then the m9, then the 240, then the m10.. a definite trend😂 it’s not just resolution, I think the increase in dynamic range might be contributing to this 4K hdr, high micro contrast look I see a lot and do not enjoy so much. I do think that the m10 is the best balance for usability and output. If Leica re-issue the m9 in an m10 body and software, I’ll dance a jig all the way to the store on release day.  

All of which could be dealt with in post processing. And isn't that the missing link throughout this whole thread?

People are so scared of their M11, M10, or whatever, they blame the lens for not looking how they want it to instead of messing around with the M11 files to make them come in line with the lens characteristics they love. I suppose in some minds if they spend £7500 on a camera body peer pressure says they always need to prove their purchase by showing the sharpness, showing all the pixels are present, showing the DR, after all it's what most M11 photos are about. But it doesn't have to be so and yet another new camera isn't needed to do it, use post processing to dial down the irritating sharpness, add some vignetting, or add some grain to imitate a lower pixel sensor. It isn't the lenses that have changed, so gather all the changes together in a preset and press the button.

[shirubadanieru]

1 hour ago, frame-it said:

please post some unprocessed straight-out-of-camera [with camera sharpening lowest or off] sample jpg's

 

I never shot jpgs on a leica : p only raw files. And I sold my M11 a month after getting it because of all the stated reasons, so it’s long gone ahah

[shirubadanieru]

2 hours ago, Ecar said:

Interesting. I'm not seeing this - but I'm still an M11 newbie and have only been able to use a handful of vintage lenses on it. What I did notice, however, is that default post-processing settings (at least in LR and with the Adobe Standard profile) need some tweaking to achieve results I'm happy with - basically dialing down anything that has to do with sharpness, clarity and, to a lesser extent, contrast. FWIW, I'm rather impressed by the DR and low-light capabilities offered by the M11 sensor.

Have you tried the M11 on its lower-res 18 MP mode? Just curious, as it's next on my test list.

Agree on the M9, but IMO this is more of a CCD vs CMOS debate (or at least a sensor calibration, rather than a resolution one) - and this horse has already been beaten to death on the forum, so I won't get into that.

I was shooting the M11 in the middle resolution which I believe was something like 36MP? 

I did enjoy the M9 / M9M above all else, but also did love my M-D (type 240), and M10-D, the M11 was the first digital camera that I was like, nope…usability wise of course no issue, but all the things I stated I didn’t enjoy, feeling I always needed a faster shutter speed due to amount of MP, CA/purple fringing on lenses that never had seen it before (summicron rigid / lux-pre asph 35 & 50), and generally the feeling of ultra-sharpness even from vintage lenses. I’m sure for people who love APO ASPH lenses M11 is the best Leica ever, but I’m mostly a film M shooter, so this is just my personal experience and pov about the camera, no offense intended at all to those who love the M11.

[frame-it]

43 minutes ago, shirubadanieru said:

I never shot jpgs on a leica : p only raw files. And I sold my M11 a month after getting it because of all the stated reasons, so it’s long gone ahah

so your very definitive comment cannot be confirmed.

 

8 hours ago, shirubadanieru said:

on sensors above 24MP, basically M10M, M11, etc. the older lenses definitely feel sharper, but not in a good way, they lose some of their unique character,

 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[costa43]

1 hour ago, 250swb said:

All of which could be dealt with in post processing. And isn't that the missing link throughout this whole thread?

People are so scared of their M11, M10, or whatever, they blame the lens for not looking how they want it to instead of messing around with the M11 files to make them come in line with the lens characteristics they love. I suppose in some minds if they spend £7500 on a camera body peer pressure says they always need to prove their purchase by showing the sharpness, showing all the pixels are present, showing the DR, after all it's what most M11 photos are about. But it doesn't have to be so and yet another new camera isn't needed to do it, use post processing to dial down the irritating sharpness, add some vignetting, or add some grain to imitate a lower pixel sensor. It isn't the lenses that have changed, so gather all the changes together in a preset and press the button.

I do agree that many people with an m11 just want to show off the detail the sensor can capture rather than looking at the image as a whole and once the price comes down and more people get their hands on one, we will be seeing some more diversity. I disagree though that you can replicate an m8 file from an m11 file in post. You can get close with the colours  maybe but there is a difference to the look of the image on those earlier sensors to my eye. Again, this is massively subjective and I can only really put it down to crappier dynamic range and lower res.