Are vintage lenses losing their vintageness on the latest sensors

[Jewl]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have the perception that 1. my 50mm summicron v4 looks more vintage than my 35mm summilux FLE and 2. that all older lenses seem in need of a calibration of used on a modern M like the M11 (haven't had this on my M10) - all my lenses needed an adjustment on the M11. Therefore tend not to buy further vintage lenses 😉 just a side comment and probably irrelevant

[Advertisement]

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

[costa43]

9 minutes ago, pgk said:

Many 'vintage' lenses (you really need to define the era about which you are referring to) from the '50s and earlier have the characteristic of being centrally very sharp with a gradual fall off in resolution to the corners. This is one area where modern lenses have improved dramatically. I have yet to see a sensor which can make the corners of such lenses sharp - if they could then there would be little need for modern designs. Older wide-angles especially, such as the Super-Angulon, show this characteristic along with vignetting too. I shoot on lenses which vary from current aspherical designs to some designed in 1857 and very limited in terms of performance. And I do so on a variety of sensors. All the sensors show the characteristics of each lens; they cannot do otherwise because there is no way that they can do anything except record the image formed on the sensor and with older, non-coded lenses this is not processed in any way to deal with optical characteristics. So to answer your question, no, vintage lenses do not lose their vintageness on any sensor.

I would add though, that some subject matter will show up those characteristics better.

Thank you. You raise some valid points that I agree with. I just feel that the latest high resolution sensors exaggerate the picture to the point that it does not have the same look as when it is taken on a lower res/older sensor. I cannot articulate myself well enough to explain it in a way that makes sense to anyone but me I think!

[hansvons]

1 hour ago, Alberti said:

My Summicron 35mm V1 gives moiré on the M10r so that implies that it out-resolves the sensor structure. To say differently: it proves it does not smear.

A lens cannot out-resolve a sensor. Any glass in front of any sensor or film degrades their initial performance. Soft focus, fingerprints on the lens etc make things worse. From a sensor’s POV the only question is, how bad will be the the lens I got mounted in front of me this time. 

Leica APO lenses allow an 18MP sensor to perform better than old vintage glass, as it does for a 60MP sensor. The idea that a high-resolving lens is wasted on a low-resolving sensor is wrong. The formula is basically: lens performance x sensor performance = result. Please note the ideal value would be 1, which no lens and no sensor can achieve. 

 

2 hours ago, LocalHero1953 said:

I can't do this: I only have one available digital sensor, that on the SL2-S. My older sensors are film. 

Same with me. Pics would be nice. 

However, I believe that a sensor’s texture pays a lot into the look and feel of a digital image. In terms of "vintage-ness" a lower-resolving sensor with visible texture like the M9 sensor out-performs the M11 by a large margin. Other features such as less DR, "older" colour science etc also play a role.

I find a modern 24MP sensor to be the sweet spot when I balance resolving power against fidelity, which for me includes texture and colour separation, especially in the shadows. I do print, and learned that the SL2-S sensor is good for 1m and more—if I used the 35mm Summicron ASPH and not the 24-90 SL zoom. Lenses are more important in that regard than the sensor, assuming the focus has been racked properly. 

 

10 hours ago, pippy said:

Not even remotely. If anything modern sensors bring out more of the character of any given lens.

Yes. And that's because the higher-resolution modern sensor with more DR is "measuring" the vintage lens’ quirks more accurately. But the overall impression could be less vintage-ish as the modern sensor misses the older sensor shortcomings that pay into the vintage look and feel. 

Edited February 8, 2024 by hansvons

[costa43]

10 minutes ago, hansvons said:

But the overall impression could be less vintage-ish as the modern sensor misses the older sensor shortcomings that pay into the vintage look and feel.

This is how I feel.

[pgk]

21 minutes ago, hansvons said:

I find a modern 24MP sensor to be the sweet spot .....

Indeed it appears to be a sweet spot to me too. I have a 40+MPixel camera the main use for which is copying - slides, negatives and artwork - which it does very well with both older and current macro lenses. But I don't find it offers much by way of advantage in other photographic areas and I've used it for landscape, macro and even underwater, and it really doesn't offer me sufficient advantage to sway me to use it instead of 18 or 24 MPixel cameras. I've used it with older lenses too and again no real gain for me.

[pippy]

5 hours ago, costa43 said:

Thanks Philip. Maybe I’ve not communicated my view very well in the original post as I agree that higher resolution sensors bring out more of the character from vintage lenses. I Just feel that modern sensors give you a modern look irrespective of the lens mounted...

Thanks for the reply, Costa, and yes, Mea Culpa, for misunderstanding your meaning.

The largest sensor of any M body I have is 'only' 24Mp but, even so, I can't imagine how, for example, an image captured when using a 50mm f1.5 Summarit wide-open could look anything other than 'Vintage' regardless of which body was used.

Perhaps someone here with a 60Mp body could carry out a quick test?

There are so many wonderful points being made in this thread and I would like to cut'n'paste this passage from one of Stevejack's replies;

" ...just because the sensor can record all of that dynamic range doesn't mean it needs to be shown in the final image. Blow those highlights out, crush the blacks, and don't use high shutter speeds and narrow apertures in low light even when the camera's high ISO performance is so good..."

The above, I believe, highlights (pun) one of the reasons why some photographers are disappointed with results they obtain from 60Mp sensors. A large part of Steve's comments here is to do with capturing the atmosphere of a situation. If we wish to take photographs in a dingy Blues Bar where the ambient lighting is low and it has taken our eyes five minutes to become accustomed to the dark then being able to produce a 'perfectly' exposed pin-sharp image with high dynamic range isn't going to capture any of the ambience of the scene nor the situation as experienced.

It comes back to the old adage; "Just because something can be done it doesn't mean that it should be done".

Philip.

Edited February 8, 2024 by pippy

[hansvons]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

14 minutes ago, costa43 said:

This is how I feel.

My sentiment. I recently bought a 12-year-old Fuji XE-1 for a few euros because I like the form factor and the concept. A few years ago, I owned its successor but could never relate to the sensor's colour and texture and hoped the original XE-1 would fix that. In a way, it did. However, my film Ms and the SL2-S are so much better in everything, including texture and colour, except for the size and weight, so I gave it to my niece, who loves it.

Sensors are complex things in their own right. The formula more MP = better is wrong, of course. In my opinion, it's more about better pixels vs more pixels. Equally important is how sharpening and noise reduction are applied in post. I only subtly denoise the colour part in a picture's noise and leave luminance alone because I like texture, as it gives the eye something to hold on to in out-of-focus areas. 

[costa43]

6 minutes ago, pippy said:

Thanks for the reply, Costa, and yes, Mea Culpa, for misunderstanding your meaning.

The largest sensor of any M body I have is 'only' 24Mp but, even so, I can't imagine how, for example, an image captured when using a 50mm f1.5 Summarit wide-open could look anything other than 'Vintage' regardless of which body was used.

Perhaps someone here with a 60Mp body could carry out a quick test?

There are so many wonderful points being made in this thread and I would like to cut'n'paste this passage from one of Stevejack's replies;

" ...just because the sensor can record all of that dynamic range doesn't mean it needs to be shown in the final image. Blow those highlights out, crush the blacks, and don't use high shutter speeds and narrow apertures in low light even when the camera's high ISO performance is so good..."

The above, I believe, highlights (pun) one of the reasons why some photographers are disappointed with results they obtain from 60Mp sensors. A large part of Steve's comments here is to do with capturing the atmosphere of a situation. If we wish to take photographs in a dingy Blues Bar where the ambient lighting is low and it has taken our eyes five minutes to become accustomed to the dark then being able to produce a 'perfectly' exposed pin-sharp image with high dynamic range isn't going to capture any of the ambience of the scene nor the situation as experienced.

It comes back to the old adage; "Just because something can be done it doesn't mean that it should be done".

Philip.

I think it was me who was halfway through a bottle of Malbec yesterday evening who was at fault for the confusion but thank you. 

"Just because something can be done it doesn't mean that it should be done". - Absolutely and I need to remind myself of this from time to time. It is applicable to more than just photography too.

The views of the people here and responses are the reason I enjoy this forum so very much. Most of my friends (Who am I kidding, all actually) have no interest in these subject matters. 

I think the best thing for me to do is to send some samples of pictures taken with vintage glass on older sensors and some with the same lenses on my m10r sensor. It will not be scientific as I have not compared them in that manner, just day to day snaps of my wife and child etc, lightly edited to taste. I'll send them over after I finish work.

 

 

 

[hansvons]

2 minutes ago, costa43 said:

I'll send them over after I finish work.

Looking forward!

[costa43]

14 minutes ago, hansvons said:

My sentiment. I recently bought a 12-year-old Fuji XE-1 for a few euros because I like the form factor and the concept. A few years ago, I owned its successor but could never relate to the sensor's colour and texture and hoped the original XE-1 would fix that. In a way, it did. However, my film Ms and the SL2-S are so much better in everything, including texture and colour, except for the size and weight, so I gave it to my niece, who loves it.

Sensors are complex things in their own right. The formula more MP = better is wrong, of course. In my opinion, it's more about better pixels vs more pixels. Equally important is how sharpening and noise reduction are applied in post. I only subtly denoise the colour part in a picture's noise and leave luminance alone because I like texture, as it gives the eye something to hold on to in out-of-focus areas. 

It's funny I still own a Fuji X-E2 and it is now my daughter's first real camera. 

[Alberti]

There might of course be totally other valid reasons to steer away from hi-res sensors but that requires more than a bottle of Malbec to write down 🤭

[hansvons]

Just now, costa43 said:

It's funny I still own a Fuji X-E2 and it is now my daughter's first real camera. 

My spoiled daughter couldn't relate to it and prefers my old R4 and me developing her pics. I think the Fuji X-E2 is the most exciting version of this camera and is on the fence to be rediscovered by younger folks looking for something relatable. For the X-E1, I bought a TT-Artisan 23mm manual lens, which is so quirky I wouldn't know where to start to describe it. But it's an excellent combo for beginners.

[Smudgerer]

3 hours ago, 250swb said:

Maybe only when the M13 has 120mp will the people still owning an M11 feel free enough of peer pressure to use an old Elmar or stick a pinhole on the front, until then nobody wants to explain to the watchers that they had an urge to throw off the shackles and be creative.

Like this perhaps?

M10M with pinhole "lens"........

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!

[costa43]

16 minutes ago, Al Brown said:

Which ones are the old sensors? The oldest M sensor is from September 2006.

My first hand experience is mainly with the m9 gen and m8 but I enjoy images that I’ve seen from more recent sensors prior to  the high res options we have today. I must add that I really enjoy the m10r sensor. It’s a thing of beauty, I’m specifically referring to a vintage look to the image.

Edited February 8, 2024 by costa43

[LocalHero1953]

It looks like photography is emerging from its realist Constable to Courbet phase and is now entering its impressionist phase.

[tim]

My 2cents …

I „only“ have a M10 & M6 and used to have an M8 and older analog M models, shooting with 1960 lenses up to relatively recent ASPH lenses …

key question to me is, what is a vintage look?

Color is a key aspect and it is IMHO more influenced now by the digital chain then the optical part of the imaging process. -> the old lenses I like on my M6 are perfectly fine on my M10

Micro contrast … if isn’t there coming from the optical path you will not get it with a modern sensor. Whether it matters or not depends on the subject. For me more micron contrast is better

Bokeh … not depth of field but the way how the out of focus areas are rendered … here I do personally prefer older lenses and I have not figured out yet (and don’t even want to) how the manipulate that in editing

Vignetting … don’t have any issues on that with any of my lenses and if it is fixable with profiles or editing

the list goes on of course …

my all time favorite lens with any of my cameras is the Summicron 2/50

Cheers

Tim

P.S.: there are issues with old super-wide-angle lenses on digital cameras, so that I try to avoid them

 

 

[pippy]

33 minutes ago, tim said:

Vignetting … don’t have any issues on that with any of my lenses and if it is fixable with profiles or editing...

P.S.: there are issues with old super-wide-angle lenses on digital cameras, so that I try to avoid them...

Just a little (tangential) bit on vignetting with early super-wide lenses whe used on the Digi-M cameras which might be of interested to those considering using such a lens.

My only super-wide is an old (1959) 21mm f4.0 Super-Angulon. Because the optical design is non-retrofocus this causes problems when used with a Digi-M because of the very close proximity of the rear element to the sensor plane. The main issue is not just the vignetting inherent to the design but also the acuteness of the angle at which light-rays hit those micro-lenses situated near the edges of the sensor's cover glass. With colour images there is pronounced 'Italian Flag' syndrome which is not easy to eliminate. When the images captured with it are used to make monochrome photographs, however, things are nowhere near as difficult to remedy.

Here is a pair of 'prints' from the same file (snapped on an M Monochrom and a Red filter was on the lens); the first shown as processed-out SOOC and the other which has been given a little bit of vignetting reduction in post-prod using the appropriate slider in Photoshop;

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!

Were I to have given greater adjustment it would, of course, have eliminated the vignette even further but I wanted to leave some simply because I like it better this way!

😸

Philip.

[hdmesa]

17 hours ago, costa43 said:

...With the m11/m10r, I feel that even vintage lenses give you a very modern look. They lose some of the charm they gave us on the older sensors. It’s very subjective but I was interested in seeing if anyone else feels the same. 

Definitely subjective.

*Laughs in film*

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Anbaric]

8 hours ago, LocalHero1953 said:

Since this is a forum about photography, I will repeat the usual comment: pics or it didn't happen. Please show us examples of the same image taken on an old sensor and a new sensor, so we can see the difference. I can't do this: I only have one available digital sensor, that on the SL2-S. My older sensors are film.

Yes, this. One thing I'd wonder (if any difference is indeed visible apart from resolution) is whether in-camera processing has changed significantly over time, perhaps to increase contrast or sharpness across the image, which might conceivably make differences between lenses less apparent. Are the people who are seeing this shooting raw or jpeg?

[costa43]

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