Whoa- slow down pardners. Focus can shift with aperture changes.
http://www.vanwalree.com/optics/spherical.html

lots of articles on focus shift using Google.

If you calculate DOF you will get the same number for both Leica and Canon 50mm set at the same aperture, however my tests and the images posted here reveal something different.

I have read that the transition from in focus to out of focus is sharper with the leica glass and I think that is what I have been seeing. Until the original poster confirms his setting there is no way to know, but from my experience the usable or apparent DOF is smaller with the leica glass than with canon. I don't have a technical explanation, just empirical evidence.

Isn't there also a chance that the aperture on the Leica was not, in fact, stopping down as the OP turned the ring? I know I have seen it before due to either lack of holding aperture engage pin/lever, or due to sticky blades.

Like I said.. these where hardly scientific test.. and I'll concede that I did not look down the barrel and confirm the blades where in the proper position, so I will concede that it's possible the blades could have stuck open wider than the canon. I've only had the lens a few days now and this post was originally more about my first impressions of my new lens and my copy might have a sticking problem. I'll do a more rigourous test when I have a chance to set up my tripod under controlled conditions.. just bare with me work's kinda hectic right now

Jesse,
I understand your excitement and I understand you didn't do the comparison in a rigorous way. We are just avid photographers and not optical engineers.

Actually, Paul may be pointing at the right direction, explaining the difference in bokeh rendition between the two lenses. Since the shooting circumstances are close to be the same, you can look up the actual shutter speed used to take both shots. If the shutter speed of the Leica is different (faster) by one stop or even faster, then indeed the aperture used was not the same.

BTW, what version is your 50mm Summicron? There are 4 versions altogether.

Joshua

I have two 50mm summicrons, a type 2 and a type 4. Both are quite nice but the latest is razor sharp even at full aperture. I recently bought the 50mm summilux so am not using either of my 'crons right now and in fact have them both for sale. But I'd say that the type 4 cron is sharper at f/2 and may have more contrast and 3d to it. Really should do a test... The funny thing is when I got out to shoot with my 5D, I always take the zuiko 55 f/1.2 instead of the lux or cron. And oddly when I go out with the DMR, I use the 35-70 elmarit. I think I have too many lenses. Okay this firms it up. This weekend I will shoot with the cron, lux, and zuiko and report back...

Good idea Joshua, I'll look into that, the originals are on my workstation back at work. I'll post my findings tommorrow.

btw, my version is a 2 cam made in germany in 1968 if I'm translating the serial number right.

Why was this moved and not stated as such. I am really tiring of the constant nanny-like police state that my fellow posters have assumed. Really this belonged in Canon forum, but I give up.

If the moderator had read the thread instead of listening to all the whining he would have seen that it does, in fact, belong in the Canon forum.

People talk about all kinds of non-Canon crap over in the Canon forum, even tons of non-Canon lenses (as long as they have an EOS mount) but try to spread the word about a Zeiss of a Leica on your *Canon* body and "poof", it gets dumped into a forum where nobody cares because they all know it already. Only politics could explain it.

If the moderators think this thread belongs in the Alt forum, so be it, it's their forum, not mine and I have to respect that. They've put together a great site that I've gotten a ridiculous amount of help from, so I'm not going to be pissed if we differ in opinions, oh well its not the end of the world. And I give them credit for being able to do their job and make up their own minds, there are those that posted here saying it should be moved and gave constructive reasons why.. and those that didn't agree with my assesment.. GOOD, I'm not always right.. no one is, and if there weren't those here that could constructively disagree who knows what kind of false information would be floating around. Just don't post "This shouldnt be here" and that's it.. it's not constructive and it doesn't teach anyone anything.

And if you dont agree with me.. well.. just remember.. I've got a Leica 50mm that's already beat down a puma.. you want to be next

Two years ago before the Alt Forum was created, all threads on the Canon board that had to do with Leica or Zeiss were "banned" to the "Forum & Miscellaneous" without any warning. We thought they were just deleted by the mods until somebody found them there. When was the last time you visited that section ? At least now we know where it ended up....

So why aren't discussions of Sigma or Tamron lenses on Canon kicked to this forum as well.

If we are talking about a lens that works on a Canon camera, then I'd say that's pretty relevant to the Canon forum.

If the Board nazis had not complained to the mods... That is why it was moved. That is why after almost four years here I am starting to chaffe. I mean, we have to go searching for something in who knows where because some control freak has to cry to the mods. I love the mods and tend to always agree with them, but sometimes things are moved simply because some one complains! My problem is with the control freak board citizens patrol that want to stiffle any discussion when they simply could have IGNORED OR BOYCOTTED THE THREAD.

That said, I apologise to the OP for the hijack and thank him for INFORMING me of an option that I did not even think about. More use in this thread than the 1000's of what lens next a 300mm or 8mm fisheye?

Whayne,
The explanation I got from Jeff at that time was that Sigma, Tamron, etc lenses were designed and manufactured to work on Canon bodies. With other words, you don't need any adapter to mount them on Canon bodies. The mods have to draw a line somewhere and that's what they did. We have to respect that and play by the rule.

Starting in 2004 more and more people (remember Guy Mancuso?) embraced the alternative lens route and on any given time, more than 50% of the threads on the Canon board pertained to Leica or CZ lenses. There was quite a bit of lively "discussions" between more "conservative" Canon shooters and Alternative followers. At the end, peace was restored when the new Alternative Board was created for that particular reason. Let's face it the vast majority of people that frequent the Alternative Board are Canon shooters anyway...

Well... whats done is done and if the mods want the thread here.. that's fine by me.. so on to more discussion about the lens's themselves.

I'd like to ask those here what they think about other Leica lens's. Alot of them ARE out of reach of most.. in the thousands. I'd like to hear which other of the "cheaper" leica's are a good value. I've been looking at the 90mm's.. either the 2.8 or the 2.. anyone care to give a breif summary of the difference between the two.. they're both reasonably affordable and I was leaning towards the 90mm f2.8 because it's the cheaper of the two.. is it worth it to go to the f2?

Try contax zeiss lenses also.

SmegHead:

I'd recommend you the 90/2.8 second version. It's an amazing lens. It's very shap wide open and has very good close up performance. I remembered someone did a comparison before. The 90 elmarit is very close to 100/2.8 APO in sharpness at medium/long distance. In my own experience, they are very close in sharpness, except the 100 macro has the edge on micro contrast.


90 Elmarit @ 2.8

AGeoJO wrote:
Let's face it the vast majority of people that frequent the Alternative Board are Canon shooters anyway...

True. This indicates that there is a lot for Canon shooters to discover over here (in the Alt. forum).

Maybe there aught to be a sticky in the Canon forum that briefly discusses other alternatives, a list of mounts that can be adapted, etc. and then a link to the Alt. Forum. I think all Canon shooters should know what they may be missing out on. Using these lenses is a great opportunity to learn and to appreciate old craftsmanship, and enjoy photography in a different way. Not necessarily better, but wonderfully different.

wow.. that rose is gorgeous. The tones are what really caught my eye.. I cant beleive how well that lens renders the subtle variations in tone and shadow as well as preserving the fine detail in the vien like parts of the petal.

There is no doubt that the latest version of the 90 Elmarit is not only astoundingly sharp but also resolves a level of per-pixel detail that puts most modern equivalents to shame, not to mention the smooth bokeh. Here is a test shot wide open and a 100% crop. There is no doubt in my mind that this lens is outresolving my 1DMK2 sensor by some considerable margin.

This was my first Leica-on-Canon lens. Needless to say the slippery slope started soon afterwards...

Test scene:

While I'm at it I'll also add my vote to the appreciation for the latest revision of the 50 Summicron. This is now my "default" lens in that it's attached to my 1DMK2 whenever I go out and about hiking because I have 100% confidence that it will deliver a superb image. It's not just the sharpness - of course it has that - but there is something else that makes me smile as I remember the moment when I see the image in the raw converter. It has depth, like I could step into the monitor and be back there again.

Here's an example from last year (handheld at f/2.8):

Yes, I agree with all above posts. If you think the images look good on screen wait until you see the prints. Something about the Leica rendering that gives them more life than many of the canon lenses I have used. Same may be true about the zeiss / contax lenses.

SmegHead wrote:
Well... whats done is done and if the mods want the thread here.. that's fine by me.. so on to more discussion about the lens's themselves.

I'd like to ask those here what they think about other Leica lens's. Alot of them ARE out of reach of most.. in the thousands. I'd like to hear which other of the "cheaper" leica's are a good value.

Consider the latest revision of the small and light 35mm Elmarit. It's quite cheap these days and delivers the sharpness, colours and contrast that you expect from a recent Leica. Here's a shot from last year with hardly any post processing:

Hi SmegHead
The Summi 2/50 is a very nice lens and I do agree which most of what you said except that I think the new ZF lens is at least as sharp stopped down and has better bokeh (IMO) than the Summicron, it is also a stop faster and may have thinner DOF. The Summicron is the best lens when it comes to corner sharpness between f2 and f2.8.

The summi has a similar aperture blades as the 1.8/50mm. Both lenses show rings rather than discs in the OOF light spots. Stopped down the Summi may have 6-edged discs.

Normaly I dont care too much for those things. Bokeh is more a thing you have to think of before you take the photograph. The OOF discs do not matter so much to me, it is just what people understand by Bokeh. Playing around with these alternative lenses is always fun, however most of the 50mm lenses are very well corrected and have a similar planar design.