Jump to content

Is this the Leica Look?


Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Ok, its a very sad, has been public bin, trash can. Aperture f/1.7, is this the Leica Look that many talk about? It looks 3D to me and I recall seeing a video where one of the Leica Engineers suggested shooting wide open for the 'Look'

I find the look of a photo at f/1.7 intriguing.

 

AQ

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!

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, Mute-on said:

...If it was taken with a Leica, it must have the Leica look. So yes....

 

7 minutes ago, AussieQ said:

Oh cmon.....there's got to be something Leica about it? It looks Leicaish!!! ;)

Abolutely!

Here is a PERFECT example of 'The Leica Look'. Wonderfully crisp where it matters with beautiful tonality in the highlights and that wonderful 'Leica Glow' where the blacks and whites blend in the out of focus areas;

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!

Taken with a Leica M8.2 - hence the unmistakable 'Leica Look' but ftted with a Voigtlander 40mm f1.4 Nokton......😸......

Philip.

Edited by pippy
  • Like 6
  • Haha 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Advertisement (gone after registration)

3 minutes ago, pippy said:

 

Abolutely!

Here is a PERFECT example of 'The Leica Look'. Wonderfully crisp where it matters with beautiful tonality in the highlights and that wonderful 'Leica Glow' where the blacks and whites blend in the out of focus areas;

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!

Taken with a Leica M8.2 - hence the unmistakable 'Leica Look' but ftted with a Voigtlander 40mm f1.4 Nokton......😸......

Philip.

Stunner there Philip!

I have lenses going down to f/1.4 and there is something about the photos my Q3 makes that just look different incomparison to my Sony, Canon and Fuji lenses.

Edited by AussieQ
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I was wondering about the same thing this weekend, not the "Leica look" really just the bokeh of the Q3 at f1.7 and general low light performance. This is at ISO 2000 inside a dark bar.  It ended up being a pic I liked a lot more than I thought I would.  Only LrC adjustment was "Auto"

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!

Edited by ALScott
  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, ALScott said:

I was wondering about the same thing this weekend, not the "Leica look" really just the bokeh of the Q3 at f1.7 and general low light performance. This is at ISO 2000 inside a dark bar.  It ended up being a pic I liked a lot more than I thought I would.  Only LrC adjustment was "Auto"

Ok, so the Leica look may actually be the Bokeh that is produced due to the lens design and manufacturing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
34 minutes ago, AussieQ said:

...I have lenses going down to f/1.4 and there is something about the photos my Q3 makes that just look different incomparison to my Sony, Canon and Fuji lenses...

First-off, AQ, thanks for taking my post in the lighthearted way as was intended.

Secondly as far as the pic is concerned? Even although they are different focal-length lenses the Voigt. 40mm f1.4 uses almost the same optical design as Leitz used for their 35mm Summilux(*) for 35 years from 1960 - 1995 so it shouldn't be a surprise if images shot with the lens do resemble those taken using similar Leica products.

Lastly I'm sure there are differences between all the lenses you mention. I don't own M-fit modern lenses made by those companies so couldn't possibly comment. At the same time I have some Leica lenses which don't render anything at all like 'The Leica Look' whilst I also have some lenses which do render with 'The Leica Look' which were not made by Leica...including some made by Canon in the 1950's...😺...

Philip.

* Just for Fits'n'Giggles here are the optical designs for the 40mm f1.5 Nokton and the 35mm Summilux (1960-'95). Which is which?......

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!

Edited by pippy
Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, jaapv said:

That has certainly something to do with the specific lens design. :However, other brands can produce a similar smoothness.

 

4 minutes ago, jaapv said:

That has certainly something to do with the specific lens design. :However, other brands can produce a similar smoothness.

valid point.

Link to post
Share on other sites

To me it is more of the Zeiss look, but really who cares? I've personally "defined for my purposes" the old Leica look as having good tonality, center sharpness fading into a background blur, and a certain glow for the out of focus areas if they are light vs dark areas. FWIW I've found similar looks with some 1950s Canon lenses. Again, not that it matters to me...I just like my keepers and don't care whether they are Leica, Canon, Nikon, Zeiss, Voightlander, Yashica, Ricoh, et al.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, AussieQ said:

Ok, so the Leica look may actually be the Bokeh that is produced due to the lens design and manufacturing.

Well; a bit simplistic, perhaps, but essentially-speaking you absolutely correct.

Without turning your thread into a History Lesson the origins of 'The Leica Look' can sort-of be traced to the mid-to-late 1930s.

Germany had two giants of the World of Optics who were both manufacturing 35mm rangefinder cameras; Ernst Leitz and Carl Zeiss. The former, obviously, made the Leica and the latter made the Zeiss Contax. Their cameras were rather different and so was the central thrust of their optical design philosophies. Photographs taken with Leica kit had a different 'feel' to those images shot using a Contax.

And so 'The Legend' came into being...

Philip.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

As someone new to Leica and only ever using Canon I got the Q3 because I wanted a smaller camera that felt real, not like a plastic point and shoot.  I was going after Fuji x100vi but saw the stupid mark ups people were getting then saw the Q3.  I had always wanted a Leica and thought it would be a good place to start and it has not disappointed in the least.  The colors are gorgeous to my eye, sharpness, low light ability, and the simple UI ticked every box for me and as I learn more, it just gets better and better.  I am relearning LrC, now it's really like just using it for the first time, but I don't feel like I have to do hardly anything to the pics.  They are near perfect to me OOC.  I could not say that about my old Canon 6D, again, not to my eye and what I like.  All of this to say I did not go down this road because of the "Leica look" people talk about but isn't that simply what it is if you are taking pics with a Leica camera and lens?  Just like there is a Sony, Nikon, Canon and on and on look?  I didn't know there was supposed to be a Leica look when I bought the camera.  It was only after I got it and got online and here just trying to learn more about the camera from other real users.  Enough rambling...

  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

Leica Look Long time ago. Film M Body + Kodak Film + some old Leitz Lens. 
Modern Leica Look. Digital M Body + Sony Sensor + Voigtländer Lens 😂🙏

and i dont know how Much Panasonic Engineering is in the Q. 
For me the picture of the beginning is simple an empty trashcan Look. 

  • Like 2
  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely any photo taken with any Leica lens has the 'Leica look' ? u

The OP photo could be taken with any similar lens wide open and look much the same.

I've said it many times here before but the Leica look (IMHO) is more to do with the style of shooting when the first Leica photographers started using these tiny 35mm cameras instead of medium/large format cameras. The quicker approach and viewfinder framing led to a more casual style of shooting, sometimes described as 'reportage' or 'street'.

I might write a short article about my thoughts so I can repost it every time this topic comes up (which is quite a lot!).

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I think in the past there was a Leica look.  Maybe not so much a Leica look but, but a German look.  The Rolleiflex TLR’s also had a special glow that was just different from what came out of the rest (Nikon, Canon, Miranda etc).

But now they are all using the same computers to design their lenses so the difference (IMO) is less, and any differences now (again IMO) likely have more to do with how the different companies set up their firmware.

For example in the early 2000’s Fuji’s early DSLR’s were rebranded Nikon cameras and sensors.   But the way Fuji handled colors (firmware) led many to believe the Fuji had more pleasant skin tones…they were extremely popular with wedding/portrait photographers.

 

Edited by bobtodrick
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...