Zero Leica lens

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Because this thread turned into a focus shift thread at an early stage. Maybe the title should be changed. 

[lct]

Just now, jaapv said:

Because this thread turned into a focus shift thread at an early stage. Maybe the title should be changed. 

I have just posted a couple of links (not images) that have been deleted. This is not allowed by admin as i understand it, so better delete the whole thread.

[SrMi]

I think this thread has some interesting discussion about non-Leica M mount lenses and experience with the Sonnar.

Edited May 5, 2024 by SrMi

[lct]

I understand that the thread title is not to everyone's liking, so I'll leave it to the mods to change it.

[Ko.Fe.]

On 4/30/2024 at 3:30 AM, lct said:

Zero Leica lens in my bag. First time it happens to me in half a century. Not that i dislike Leica lenses but for the first time i prefer ZM or VM lenses.
• Sonnar 50/1.5 thanks to the M11 that reduces focus shift, or the effect of it. Now the Sonnar has become my favorite 50 for portraiture, replacing my good old Summilux 50/1.4 v2 or v3 in a smaller package. Only issue is 0.9m MFD but a close focus adapter fixes the issue in LV mode.
• Nokton 35/1.4 SC v2, sort of Summilux 35/1.4 v2 w/o the drawbacks of it. I still use the Summilux but for glow only at f/1.4.
• Nokton 75/1.5. Same comment more or less.
Incredible that i can cram those fast lenses with a 61mp camera and its EVF in a tiny bag BTW. Like in my youth with M4, K25 and f/2 or f/2.8 lenses but i could not dream of carrying a bulky 75/1.4 plus an optical Visoflex in the same bag then. The Leica spirit at its best in Japan 🙂
Do we need really monstrous 90/1.5 and 75/1.25 enses, let alone Godzilla SL lenses?
I'll stop here because I don't want to add my voice to the LUF's chorus of wailers 😄

Zero 75 or 90 not even in my bag, but they are useless for my possession. 

Wait....currently I have zero of camera bags. 

I wear one camera, one lens . The rest is useless distraction 🙃 

[pippy]

9 hours ago, SrMi said:

Let's get it back on track. Why would you choose a non-Leica lens (cost not being an issue), and which one?

Speaking for myself? Back in post #11 I mentioned that I had recently been out with three non-Leica lenses so I may as well explain my decision.

The 28mm f5.6 TTArtisan, I admit, was bought mainly out of curiosity. Its appeal was that although it resembled - physically - the Leica 28mm Summaron its performance was reckoned to be far more akin to that offered by a modern ASPH optical design. Having shot mine side-by-side with a 28mm Elmarit ASPH I can attest that such is the case. There are no ASPH elements in its construction but two are made using High Refractive Index glass and one other made from Low Dispersion stuff. Don't know what all that really does but it's probably a contributing factor.

Being 'only' an f5.6 lens isn't really an issue for me as I usually shoot at f5.6 / f8.0 with a 28mm. There are only two nigh-on insignificant downsides that I can mention. The filter-thread is 37mm diameter which is a rather unusual size. I have managed to acquire a UVa and a Circ. Pola but that's about it. The other little niggle is that the cinch-clip fitting hood - which is pretty much a copy of the rectangulad Leitz 'original' - can ping-off if the lens is accidentally knocked against a hard object.

That's it. In every other respect this tiny thing is an absolute delight to use and provides images which are incredibly sharp all across the frame from edge-to-edge and corner-to-corner.

The 35mm f2.0 Light Lens Lab '8 Element' was bought after I had read through Al Brown's review of this lens when compared directly with an original Leitz 35mm f2.0 Summicron v1. I had been half-heartedly been keeping an eye out for a Leitz copy myself but the ones which I had seen all suffered from haze to some extent and, in fact, had abandoned the hunt when I found a particularly clean 1974 v2 Summilux. However, just a few weeks after buying this 35 I happened to see an example of the LLL in a London dealership. It was in Black-Paint finish, came with the matching B-Paint IROOA-copy hood and was simply too hard to pass up.

In terms of rendering it didn't disappoint in the least. My own experience when shooting with this lens matched everything I had read in the comparison-review. At f2.0 it has its own 'look' and past f2.8 it has the performance one would expect from such a classic design. Because it is also a brand-new lens it also has the advantage - unlike the Summicrons I had looked-at - of being perfectly clean internally.

The 40mm f1.4 Voigtlander Nokton was bought back in the days when I had my M8.2 and I was after a lens which would act as a 50mm. Allowing for the 1.33 crop-factor the Nokton would work out as being 53mm which was close enough for me. I already had a 35mm Summaron - which I had owned since 1980 - so that '47mm' base was already covered.

The funny thing is that - as I've written elsewhere previously - once I bought my M9 I realised that for me 40mm sort-of turned out to be my 'Goldilocks' focal-length. As we all know there is no equivalent in the Leica catalogue. Back in the mid-to-late 1970s Leica DID make a 40mm lens for the Leica CL; the 40mm f2.0. There was also a never-to-be-commercially-offered 40mm f2.8 but, those lenses apart, the 40mm f/length is something that, if desired by a photographer, will require the snapper to seek from a Non-Leica manufacturer.

I do have other non-L lenses and there are other lenses which I would LOVE to have - the LLL 50mm f2.0 ELCAN amongst them - but that's probably enough from me to be going along with for the time being...

Philip.

Edited May 5, 2024 by pippy

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

My M9M is used with non-Leica lenses only - Zeis Biogon-C 35, Voigtlǎnder Nokton ii 50, Zeiss Tele-Tessar 85. I find that the rendering matches the sensor perfectly.

[pippy]

9 hours ago, SrMi said:

I think this thread has some interesting discussion about non-Leica M mount lenses and experience with the Sonnar.

Oddly enough at this very moment there is a 40mm f2.8 Rollei Sonnar - which, recently, I was very kindly given - up with a repair-tech in order for it to have its barrel-thingies tightened-up. I've never shot with it but am very much looking forward to its return as I've heard a great many positive reports about how it renders.

Philip.

Edited May 5, 2024 by pippy

[pippy]

1 hour ago, jaapv said:

My M9M is used with non-Leica lenses only - Zeis Biogon-C 35, Voigtlǎnder Nokton ii 50, Zeiss Tele-Tessar 85. I find that the rendering matches the sensor perfectly.

Oh, I'm not so particular. I'll use anything!......😸......

Actually there are a couple of manufacturers whose lenses don't really appeal at all and that is because their aperture-rings work with 1/3-stop increments. That detail drives me nuts! One of those manufacturers whose lens I tried out just the other week - Thypoch - also received a big No-No from me because it focusses closer than 0.7m and the 'detent' which is meant to alert the user that from that point onwards the OVF would not work was far too subtle. So much so that I didn't even notice it!

Philip.

[Danner]

It's a bit like painters discussing paint brushes, when what makes a great painting has much more to do with the selected subject matter and the painter, as opposed to the specific paint brush used.  At the end of the day this is a Leica forum, and I think most here feel a sense of loyalty to the brand and its history, so discussions of brand-X components wander a bit off the genre of this place.

[lct]

5 hours ago, pippy said:

One of those manufacturers whose lens I tried out just the other week - Thypoch - also received a big No-No from me because it focusses closer than 0.7m and the 'detent' which is meant to alert the user that from that point onwards the OVF would not work was far too subtle. So much so that I didn't even notice it

Reminds me of a Thypoch-like 😉 lens, the Super-Angulon 21/3.4 that focuses down to 0.4m with no detent at all. Quite a compact lens compared to the current SEM 21/3.4 but both are beaten size wise by the tiny ZM Biogon 21/4.5 that focuses, with no detent either, down to 0.5m. Great lens as sharp as the S-A with almost zero distortion . Vignetting is high in both lenses, although it is easy to adjust in PP, but the Biogon exhibits significantly less color fringing. Its aperture ring works with 1/3-stop increments like other ZM lenses though.

[pippy]

6 hours ago, Danner said:

It's a bit like painters discussing paint brushes, when what makes a great painting has much more to do with the selected subject matter and the painter, as opposed to the specific paint brush used.  At the end of the day this is a Leica forum, and I think most here feel a sense of loyalty to the brand and its history, so discussions of brand-X components wander a bit off the genre of this place.

Whist I agree that, ultimately, the subject matter and its treatment is of paramount importance - far more so than which 'kit' is being used - this doesn't mean that 'kit' doesn't matter. Before I became a professional snapper I was a graphic designer and, believe me, I selected my brushes with a great deal of care.

Leica lenses? I have a fair number of them - twenty-odd? - but that doesn't mean I won't try something from another manufacturer if I fancy having one.

Philip.

[costa43]

Although i do think there is something nice about owning Leica glass (especially vintage). I’m a big fan of 3rd party lenses and own a fair few. I’ve just repurchased a lens I always regretted selling at the beginning of my journey with Leica, the Voigtlander 50mm f1.5 Nokton ltm. 

[lct]

Bit of history
In my youth (sixties), the only way to get compact M-mount lenses was to buy expensive Leica M's or to adapt LTM lenses through LTM to M adapters. Minolta and Konica tried to compete with lenses that were some sort of clones of Leica's. Rokkor 40/2 and 90/4 come to mind or Konica 35/2 and 50/2. They were very well made but not more compact than Leica's. With one exception though, the tiny Rokkor 28/2.8 that was one of the most compact 28/2.8 ever made besides the Elmarit 28/2.8 asph v1 which came 2 decades later and is still a bit smaller. Since then, or was it at the same time?, Zeiss issued its compact aka "C" lenses (ZM 21/4.5, 35/2.8, 50/1.5) but its Tele-Tessar 85/4, let alone the impressive Sonnar 85/2, were bigger than their Leica counterparts. Voigtländer did it with the Apo-Skopar 90/2.8 that has apparently the same size as the "fat" Tele-Elmarit 90/2.8 but the "thin" version is still unrivaled size wise besides 2 other Leica M-mount lenses, the Elmar-C 90/4 and the Macro-Elmar-M 90/4. Otherwise we all know the compact WA and UWA Voigtländer lenses but there is one that is perhaps the smaller 50mm lens ever made, besides the Elmar 50/2.8 in collapsed position, the Skopar 50/2.5. It is not an M-mount lens though and i wonder if the Summarit 50/2.5 is not on par if not smaller. There's certainly a lot more to say, but i'll leave that to colleagues who are more competent and/or have a better memory than i do.

[IkarusJohn]

21 hours ago, pippy said:

At what point - and why - did this thread become a discussion about sensor-placement etc...etc...etc...?

Just curious as to why this potentially very interesing thread was destroyed.

Philip.

My bad.  Sorry.

I’ve had Zeiss lenses - 15/2.8 Distagon-ZM (great on the Monochrom, Italian flag on colour Ms) and 35/1.4 Distagon-ZM (beautifully made, if large).  Both I’ve found cold in rendering and very contrasty.

I’ve found I prefer having variation in age and styles of Leica lenses - Summaron and Summlux in 28mm and Summitar, Summilux ASPH, Noctilux & APO Summicron in 50mm.  Not tried the Voigtlanders or any of the Chinese lenses.  My lens ownership can be fluid.

While many flinch at the price of Leica lenses, the older lenses can be very cost effective.  My Summitar is from 1948 and my Elmar 135/4 is from 1960,and neither caused an intake of breath.

[pippy]

58 minutes ago, IkarusJohn said:

My bad.  Sorry.

As far as I see it there is absolutely no apology from yourself required, John, because this particular thread, for some reason, just went off on a peculiarly long-running tangent but very generous of you to attempt to take the blame!......😸......

What this does highlight is that there is, perhaps, a need to start a different thread whereby 'Sensor-Placement' (etc...etc...) would be of interest?

Philip.

Edited May 5, 2024 by pippy

[pippy]

3 hours ago, Al Brown said:

True. I think every M user should *at least* try......OR vintage Russian LTM (Jupiter etc.) lens.

My absolute favourite lens to use with my 1930 Leica 1 (Model A to C conversion) is this 1975 35mm f2.8 Jupiter 12 in Black Paint finish;

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!

As has been discussed many times the J-12 is a FSU(*) post-WWII copy of the pre-war Zeiss Biogon (for their Contax 35mm rangefinders) and renders in exactly the way one might imagine from a Zeiss design of that era; high contrast and very sharp in the centre with a gradual drop-off in sharpness towards the edges / corners.

In the past few years I have posted quite a few snaps here which were taken with this combination. Not only does it work perfectly with the Leica 1 it is also a superb performer with my current digi-M cameras; especially the Monochrom.

From memory it was acquired for around £40 / $55 and is in perfect condition.

In my heart it's never going to take the place of my '74 Summilux but for a 'Just For the Hell Of It' lens it provides a great many smiles-per-mile. Highly Recommended!!!

Philip.

* 'Former Soviet Union'

Edited May 5, 2024 by pippy

[lct]

On 5/5/2024 at 3:12 AM, lct said:

I have just posted a couple of links (not images) that have been deleted [...]

I have posted again those links here for those interested.

[RexGig0]

My most-favored M-mount lens is the one that lured me to add the Leica M system, six years ago, the Summilux-M 50mm ASPH, but, I soon started adding Zeiss and Voigtlander lenses, brands which were already familiar to me, as SLR lenses. I believe that I have shot more total images with my Zeiss Distagon 35mm f/1,4 ZM than all of my other M-mount lenses, combined. When the monochrome images shot with my Zeiss C Biogon 21mm f/4,5 ZM are included, I seem to be more of a Zeiss shooter, than a Leica shooter, if one considers the optic more important than the sensor.

Notably, on that day in April 2018, when I decided to scuttle plans to acquire a Nikon Nikkor “super telephoto” lens, for bird photography, I bought pre-owned Summilux, the new M10, and, a new Zeiss Otus 85mm ZF.2, with the funds I would have used for the monster telephoto lens. (ZF.2 = Nikon F mount, with electronic contacts to communicate with the camera.) An injured rotator cuff, in my left shoulder, would have prevented me from using the tele for birds, for some time, anyway, and by the time my shoulder was healed and rehabilitated, my wife and I had both refocused our nature photography on the macro and close-range aspects of being “citizen scientists.” (She has, since then, attained the status of Texas Master Naturalist, which requires much continuing education and volunteer work to maintain. I remain at the pack mule level*. 😉 )

Liking the idea of using the compression of short telephoto lenses, for landscapes, I soon added a Zeiss Tele Tessar 85mm f/4 ZM.

I am still trying to decide how I feel about the 18mm ZM, which I acquired pre-owned. Vignetting is heavy, and, 21mm is almost always wide enough. My most-recent Zeiss addition is a pre-owned 25mm ZM, which I have yet to use much. (My 21mm and 35mm lenses tend to such all of the oxygen from the room.)

My early Voigtlander acquisitions were/are more about size than performance. The Snapshot Skopar 25mm has seen some amount of action simply because it has been serving as a glorified body cap, when the camera was being toted inside a very small pouch, at the time. This one is not rangefinder-coupled, but, Distance/Scale focusing works well enough, at 25mm. The 35mm f/2.5 Color Skopar II is a like-able little lens, suited for the times that its compactness has been more importance than the well-corrected optics or fast aperture of the Distagon.

In early 2022, I seriously considered acquiring an M10 Monochrom, but, then decided to turn my attention to lenses. I did plenty of “homework” on the Noctilux f/0.95, and the several versions of the f/1 50mm Noctilux, before deciding to buy a pre-owned APO Summicron-M 75mm ASPH, then, Voigtlander 50mm f/1.0 and 21mm f/1.4 Nokton lenses. Thus far, I have no regrets about not getting a Noctilux.

Last August, I added a Voigtlander 50mm APO Lanthar, a truly mighty lens, but not a “threat” to my Summilux. The focus fall-off and background blur of the Summilux ASPH are why I added the Leica M system. The Summilux “character” is caused by its perfect level of imperfectly-corrected optics. The tendency of the Summilux ASPH to flare is “a feature, not a bug.” Sometimes, however, I need the superb coatings of the APO Lanthar, when flare must be prevented/mitigated, and/or I may want the more-perfectly-corrected optics for scientific/technical images, or, may The Lord forbid, forensic/evidentiary reasons. (The original reason I started using interchangeable-lens cameras was to get close-range and macro images of assault victims, and to a lesser degree, suicide victims, during my career in public service. Let’s just say it became a passion, to perform this sad duty with a high degree of technical skill. I added the Leica M system to re-learn how to want to photograph people.)

If circumstances compelled me to drastically thin the Leica M herd, in order to raise funds, the Summilux-M ASPH could be the only Leica lens that I keep. I could do everything else with Zeiss and Voigtlander lenses.

*Nothing wrong with being the assistant. From the time we met, in 1997, until I finally started serious shooting, in 2010, I was the one with binoculars, a steering wheel, a canoe paddle, a snake stick, and/or her camera bag/case in my hands. I am still better at spotting/locating subjects in nature, especially the wee beasties.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Eoin]

I have zero Leica lenses for mounts other than M.

I shot Canon glass on FD and Eos mount, shot Sony / Zeiss on Sony A Mount, shot more Sony G Master on the FE mount.
Subjectively, I was always happy with the output given the media available (again) at that time, with any of the systems.
With Leica M, I've always chosen recent (at the time of purchase) versions of focal lengths, Primarily all Summiluxes, for the maximum aperture.   
I find the detail, micro contrast and colour saturation of Leica lenses appeal to my eye. But overall, it is the mechanical feel and texture of the Leica system in hand, that makes it a joy to use for me on a very personal level.

Were I advising anyone today, choose Voightlander, Zeiss ... what ever, Leica has gone stratospheric, the minute or subtle differences IMO are very often not worth the entry price. I question myself on this, but when I take my camera out, it's just such a perfect tool to achieve what I want from my photography.

 

Edited May 8, 2024 by Eoin