This topic is in the 2011 archive. You can read it and like its posts here. It is read only.
Archive 2011Leica R 80 Summilux; ROM vs 3-CAM
p.1 #1Leica R 80 Summilux; ROM vs 3-CAM
Anyone know whether they are optically identical?
Apr 27, 2011 at 06:15 PM
p.1 #2Leica R 80 Summilux; ROM vs 3-CAM
I believe they are? Man, i didnt realize they were so pricy...almost in line with the 85 1.2 jahre..wonder whats better. 
Apr 27, 2011 at 06:19 PM
p.1 #3Leica R 80 Summilux; ROM vs 3-CAM
Identical. There was only ever one version. The cams are irrelevant. Even 3 or R cam lenses can be retrofitted to ROM, but unless you are using an R body it is pointless. In fact I was using an R body and I think it's still largely pointless.
JJ
JJ
Apr 27, 2011 at 06:40 PM
p.1 #4Leica R 80 Summilux; ROM vs 3-CAM
The mount type are of course no interest to me since I would be converting it to Nikon F with a Leitax. The price differential between the ROM and 3-CAM are nonetheless substantial.
Apr 27, 2011 at 07:10 PM
p.1 #5Leica R 80 Summilux; ROM vs 3-CAM
They are two different coatings where new one is sharper and more color corrected.
Many prefer the old look for portrait while new look for landscape photography
Many prefer the old look for portrait while new look for landscape photography
Apr 27, 2011 at 07:16 PM
p.1 #6Leica R 80 Summilux; ROM vs 3-CAM
s23chang wrote:
They are two different coatings where new one is sharper and more color corrected.
Many prefer the old look for portrait while new look for landscape photography
Now that's interesting.
They are two different coatings where new one is sharper and more color corrected.
Many prefer the old look for portrait while new look for landscape photography
Now that's interesting.
Apr 27, 2011 at 07:22 PM
p.1 #7Leica R 80 Summilux; ROM vs 3-CAM
crazeazn wrote:
Man, i didnt realize they were so pricy...almost in line with the 85 1.2 jahre..wonder whats better.
Not too long ago, they were not so pricy. Around December, I saw a number of them selling for $1200 - $1500. They seem to have jumped dramatically in price in the past 4-5 months.
Man, i didnt realize they were so pricy...almost in line with the 85 1.2 jahre..wonder whats better.
Not too long ago, they were not so pricy. Around December, I saw a number of them selling for $1200 - $1500. They seem to have jumped dramatically in price in the past 4-5 months.
Apr 27, 2011 at 07:56 PM
p.1 #8Leica R 80 Summilux; ROM vs 3-CAM
Tariq Gibran wrote:
Not too long ago, they were not so pricy. Around December, I saw a number of them selling for $1200 - $1500. They seem to have jumped dramatically in price in the past 4-5 months.
Anyone know why?
Not too long ago, they were not so pricy. Around December, I saw a number of them selling for $1200 - $1500. They seem to have jumped dramatically in price in the past 4-5 months.
Anyone know why?
Apr 27, 2011 at 09:15 PM
p.1 #9Leica R 80 Summilux; ROM vs 3-CAM
j.liam wrote:
Anyone know why?
Wasn't it you that mentioned you were told videographers were swooping up the faster/ more desirable Leica R glass? Perhaps the 80 is one of them as well.
Tariq Gibran wrote
Not too long ago, they were not so pricy. Around December, I saw a number of them selling for $1200 - $1500. They seem to have jumped dramatically in price in the past 4-5 months.Wasn't it you that mentioned you were told videographers were swooping up the faster/ more desirable Leica R glass? Perhaps the 80 is one of them as well.
Apr 27, 2011 at 09:30 PM
p.1 #10Leica R 80 Summilux; ROM vs 3-CAM
The 90 Summicron & 180 Elmarit APOs and 50 Summilux E60 in particular were going, and that's what I implied in my comment. Those were not made in large numbers. Haven't a clue whether the 80 is among of the most desirable. The 80 in particular was manufactured for a longer period of time, akin to the 100 Makro but the latter has been selling for about the same price for some time.
Apr 27, 2011 at 10:20 PM
p.1 #11Leica R 80 Summilux; ROM vs 3-CAM
j.liam wrote:
The 90 Summicron & 180 Elmarit APOs and 50 Summilux E60 in particular were going, and that's what I implied in my comment. Those were not made in large numbers. Haven't a clue whether the 80 is among of the most desirable. The 80 in particular was manufactured for a longer period of time, akin to the 100 Makro but the latter has been selling for about the same price for some time.
videographers makes sense then. i imagine f/1.4 lens would be much more attractive to them than a f/2.8 macro even if it is sharpest and best corrected macro in that focal length.
The 90 Summicron & 180 Elmarit APOs and 50 Summilux E60 in particular were going, and that's what I implied in my comment. Those were not made in large numbers. Haven't a clue whether the 80 is among of the most desirable. The 80 in particular was manufactured for a longer period of time, akin to the 100 Makro but the latter has been selling for about the same price for some time.
videographers makes sense then. i imagine f/1.4 lens would be much more attractive to them than a f/2.8 macro even if it is sharpest and best corrected macro in that focal length.
Apr 27, 2011 at 10:53 PM
p.1 #12Leica R 80 Summilux; ROM vs 3-CAM
sebboh wrote:
videographers makes sense then. i imagine f/1.4 lens would be much more attractive to them than a f/2.8 macro even if it is sharpest and best corrected macro in that focal length.
Point well taken on the 100. But the 80 priced at or above the 85/1.2?!? Don't see it.
videographers makes sense then. i imagine f/1.4 lens would be much more attractive to them than a f/2.8 macro even if it is sharpest and best corrected macro in that focal length.
Point well taken on the 100. But the 80 priced at or above the 85/1.2?!? Don't see it.
Apr 27, 2011 at 11:05 PM
p.1 #13Leica R 80 Summilux; ROM vs 3-CAM
j.liam wrote:
Point well taken on the 100. But the 80 priced at or above the 85/1.2?!? Don't see it.
no, definitely not. i had not seen that, the last one i saw sell went for under $2000.
sebboh wrote
videographers makes sense then. i imagine f/1.4 lens would be much more attractive to them than a f/2.8 macro even if it is sharpest and best corrected macro in that focal length.no, definitely not. i had not seen that, the last one i saw sell went for under $2000.
Apr 27, 2011 at 11:12 PM
p.1 #14Leica R 80 Summilux; ROM vs 3-CAM
j.liam wrote:
Anyone know whether they are optically identical?
Yes they are.
Anyone know whether they are optically identical?
Yes they are.
Apr 28, 2011 at 05:10 AM
p.1 #15Leica R 80 Summilux; ROM vs 3-CAM
j.liam wrote:
Point well taken on the 100. But the 80 priced at or above the 85/1.2?!? Don't see it.
Of course, people can price things at whatever they want. I don't think they are actually being sold at these crazy prices, unlike say the APO Summicron 90.
sebboh wrote
videographers makes sense then. i imagine f/1.4 lens would be much more attractive to them than a f/2.8 macro even if it is sharpest and best corrected macro in that focal length.Of course, people can price things at whatever they want. I don't think they are actually being sold at these crazy prices, unlike say the APO Summicron 90.
Apr 28, 2011 at 05:16 AM
p.1 #16Leica R 80 Summilux; ROM vs 3-CAM
It seems to me all Leica R glass has gone up about 25-30% over the last 6 months or so, and some specific lenses even more so. I don't know whether the increase is because no more Leica R glass is being produced, they are easier to adapt including on Nikon cameras with the Leitax conversions and with adapters for Nex and m4/3rds, or whether they are being picked up by videographers, or something else. But it seems to me that it is clear that the supply won't increase and there are some pressures on demand (more than just Canon users) so basic economics would suggest a price increase.
Apr 28, 2011 at 05:29 AM
p.1 #17Leica R 80 Summilux; ROM vs 3-CAM
s23chang wrote:
They are two different coatings where new one is sharper and more color corrected.
Many prefer the old look for portrait while new look for landscape photography
Do you have any reliable/respectable references or sources to support this?
JJ
They are two different coatings where new one is sharper and more color corrected.
Many prefer the old look for portrait while new look for landscape photography
Do you have any reliable/respectable references or sources to support this?
JJ
Apr 28, 2011 at 05:57 AM
p.1 #18Leica R 80 Summilux; ROM vs 3-CAM
JohnJ wrote:
Many prefer the old look for portrait while new look for landscape photographyDo you have any reliable/respectable references or sources to support this?
JJ
In fact, nobody knows for sure but rumor has it that both the glass and the coating was changed but no change to the optical formula.
The only way to find out would be to take the same shot with two or three different year batches versions of the Lux80 i.e. the 11880, 11881 and 11349
Frankly, this is being anal about the issue and I personally don't think it will manifest itself on picture level.
I would assume that when the DMR came out, the R lenses got a coating of some kind when new batches were produced. But this is just an assumption.
The Gods of Leica do not discuss openly such matters.
To feel better about it, try to buy a German version v a Canadian one and try to buy the 11349.
I know, I did, and I replaced my old one with this one...
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v233/Duke_1/_DSC4946.jpg
s23chang wrote
They are two different coatings where new one is sharper and more color corrected.Many prefer the old look for portrait while new look for landscape photography
JJ
In fact, nobody knows for sure but rumor has it that both the glass and the coating was changed but no change to the optical formula.
The only way to find out would be to take the same shot with two or three different year batches versions of the Lux80 i.e. the 11880, 11881 and 11349
Frankly, this is being anal about the issue and I personally don't think it will manifest itself on picture level.
I would assume that when the DMR came out, the R lenses got a coating of some kind when new batches were produced. But this is just an assumption.
The Gods of Leica do not discuss openly such matters.
To feel better about it, try to buy a German version v a Canadian one and try to buy the 11349.
I know, I did, and I replaced my old one with this one...
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v233/Duke_1/_DSC4946.jpg
Apr 28, 2011 at 01:00 PM
p.1 #19Leica R 80 Summilux; ROM vs 3-CAM
Almass wrote:
I know, I did, and I replaced my old one with this one...
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v233/Duke_1/_DSC4946.jpg
...and did you notice any difference?
I know, I did, and I replaced my old one with this one...
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v233/Duke_1/_DSC4946.jpg
...and did you notice any difference?
Apr 28, 2011 at 01:42 PM
p.1 #20Leica R 80 Summilux; ROM vs 3-CAM
Yeah. Dat one is more expensive...
.
..
...
I used the old one on different cameras and the parallel is not fair.
The whole ethos of the Lux80 is the beautiful rendition of the picture WOT and not the technical prowess of the lens.
In this regards, I prefer the new one but maybe simply that it plays better on the Nikon D3x and D3s.
The only other R Lux that can be used without mirror surgery is the Lux50 E60.
We are talking about a Schizo Lux80 lens with two distinct personalities:
The first wide open with a fantastic Leica style color rendition and smooth Bokeh and the second sharp as it comes for landscape and stuff. The ZF2/85 plays the same game. The difference is the temp of the picture or call it the rendition quality or the ethos of the lens.
It is how you use the lens with ClaroScuro penumbra and make your camera weep...
.
..
...
I used the old one on different cameras and the parallel is not fair.
The whole ethos of the Lux80 is the beautiful rendition of the picture WOT and not the technical prowess of the lens.
In this regards, I prefer the new one but maybe simply that it plays better on the Nikon D3x and D3s.
The only other R Lux that can be used without mirror surgery is the Lux50 E60.
We are talking about a Schizo Lux80 lens with two distinct personalities:
The first wide open with a fantastic Leica style color rendition and smooth Bokeh and the second sharp as it comes for landscape and stuff. The ZF2/85 plays the same game. The difference is the temp of the picture or call it the rendition quality or the ethos of the lens.
It is how you use the lens with ClaroScuro penumbra and make your camera weep...
Apr 28, 2011 at 02:12 PM