p.24 #2 · Through Walter Mandler Glass (on FF Only)
One with the Elmarit-M 90 wide open, a much better landscape lens than the Summicron stopped down, and wide open, it still retains some of the 'cron charm without as many of the flaws.
p.24 #5 · Through Walter Mandler Glass (on FF Only)
Leica aficionados:
I recently picked up a Leica 50 Summicron-R (E55) to be used on my A7RII as my first introduction to Leica. After shooting some natural light portraits with it beside my Sony 55 1.8 (at f2), I quickly understood what the hype was all about. I very much preferred the Summicron, and I could understand why people wax poetic about Leica; the images had this artful beauty imparted on them, where the Sony was sharper, and more neutral, but to my eye, colder, and more sterile.
I once read something for an FM'er that hey liked to think Zeiss rendered like looking out a window and seeing the actual sight one photographed, while Leica rendered like a beautiful painting of it. I think that is a strong way of putting it, but in my case, I can see what he was getting at.
I am in the market for a Leica 90 M to to round out my travel kit, and when considering the 90 APO I came across this at Leica review (some pieces omitted for the sake of brevity).
"Leica Summicron f/2.0 APO is very sharp without any "character" rendering images much in the spirit of DSLR lenses from far eastern lens manufacturers. This approach to lens engineering perhaps minimizes the differences seen in lenses of same focal length from other makes. In another words, the days of the characteristic "Leica look" associated with lens designs of Dr.Walter Mandler are long gone."
A rapidly changing era of high mega pixel cameras and low cost manufacturing methods, achieved by advancements in computer design and technology, has made lenses indistinguishable in the way they render images.
I would say even seasoned professionals would be hard pressed to tell the difference between photographs taken with different lenses of the same focal length and speed from different manufacturers. From the point of view of Leica's marketing strategy this would make sense and mirrors the way car manufacturers copy one anothers designs, almost to the point where models can only be distinguished by the most minor differences. As we can see today, lens manufacturers are taken a similar approach. I am emphasızıng (sic) thıs point to highlight the differences in Leica's older lens and today's contemporary lenses. If you are seeking to capture images the way famous photographers once did, you may be out of luck. The highly differentiated nature of older lens desıgn actually helped to tell a story by adding "unique" visual elements to the images they captured. In today's oversaturated market however, visual homogeneity is the order of the day."
These days, accuracy and sharpness are the only things lenses seem to offer."
Does anyone have comments on this point? If you agree, do you prefer one era of Leica lenses over another?
Regarding the 90, I have heard that the 90 Elmarit-M is kind of a blend of the two worlds, some classic style, high performance, but not yet into the APO, modern departure. Thoughts in general?
p.24 #6 · Through Walter Mandler Glass (on FF Only)
NOt sure of elmarit but cron seems lovely to me
Jack Thompson wrote:
Leica aficionados:
I recently picked up a Leica 50 Summicron-R (E55) to be used on my A7RII as my first introduction to Leica. After shooting some natural light portraits with it beside my Sony 55 1.8 (at f2), I quickly understood what the hype was all about. I very much preferred the Summicron, and I could understand why people wax poetic about Leica; the images had this artful beauty imparted on them, where the Sony was sharper, and more neutral, but to my eye, colder, and more sterile.
I once read something for an FM'er that hey liked to think Zeiss rendered like looking out a window and seeing the actual sight one photographed, while Leica rendered like a beautiful painting of it. I think that is a strong way of putting it, but in my case, I can see what he was getting at.
I am in the market for a Leica 90 M to to round out my travel kit, and when considering the 90 APO I came across this at Leica review (some pieces omitted for the sake of brevity).
"Leica Summicron f/2.0 APO is very sharp without any "character" rendering images much in the spirit of DSLR lenses from far eastern lens manufacturers. This approach to lens engineering perhaps minimizes the differences seen in lenses of same focal length from other makes. In another words, the days of the characteristic "Leica look" associated with lens designs of Dr.Walter Mandler are long gone."
A rapidly changing era of high mega pixel cameras and low cost manufacturing methods, achieved by advancements in computer design and technology, has made lenses indistinguishable in the way they render images.
I would say even seasoned professionals would be hard pressed to tell the difference between photographs taken with different lenses of the same focal length and speed from different manufacturers. From the point of view of Leica's marketing strategy this would make sense and mirrors the way car manufacturers copy one anothers designs, almost to the point where models can only be distinguished by the most minor differences. As we can see today, lens manufacturers are taken a similar approach. I am emphasızıng (sic) thıs point to highlight the differences in Leica's older lens and today's contemporary lenses. If you are seeking to capture images the way famous photographers once did, you may be out of luck. The highly differentiated nature of older lens desıgn actually helped to tell a story by adding "unique" visual elements to the images they captured. In today's oversaturated market however, visual homogeneity is the order of the day."
These days, accuracy and sharpness are the only things lenses seem to offer."
Does anyone have comments on this point? If you agree, do you prefer one era of Leica lenses over another?
Regarding the 90, I have heard that the 90 Elmarit-M is kind of a blend of the two worlds, some classic style, high performance, but not yet into the APO, modern departure. Thoughts in general? ...Show more →
p.24 #8 · Through Walter Mandler Glass (on FF Only)
prashant wrote:
35mm M V4. Wide Open. A7ii
Quick question to anyone using this on A7x. Do you see double edge at high-contrast points sometimes? Or is that oft discussed glow?
do you mean at points that are in focus at wide aperture or oof focus lines?
if you see a double edge at in focus points (often with a ghost like appearance) that is indeed caused by spherical aberration and thus a side effect of the "leica glow". rays of light passing through the f/2 part of the lens converge at a slightly different point than those that pass through the smaller aperture parts of the lens, when you stop down the those rays are blocked by the aperture and the rays converge to a single point.
double edges at oof points are also consequence of how the lens is corrected for spherical aberration. typically over correction of SA results in the double lines appearing at high contrast points in the oof part of the image.
p.24 #9 · Through Walter Mandler Glass (on FF Only)
Thanks Sebboh. I mean area in focus. As on the right edge of the face in the one I posted.
I also see that sometimes in OOF.
I really like to use this at f2 though.
sebboh wrote:
do you mean at points that are in focus at wide aperture or oof focus lines?
if you see a double edge at in focus points (often with a ghost like appearance) that is indeed caused by spherical aberration and thus a side effect of the "leica glow". rays of light passing through the f/2 part of the lens converge at a slightly different point than those that pass through the smaller aperture parts of the lens, when you stop down the those rays are blocked by the aperture and the rays converge to a single point.
double edges at oof points are also consequence of how the lens is corrected for spherical aberration. typically over correction of SA results in the double lines appearing at high contrast points in the oof part of the image.
p.24 #10 · Through Walter Mandler Glass (on FF Only)
Jack Thompson wrote:
Leica aficionados:
I recently picked up a Leica 50 Summicron-R (E55) to be used on my A7RII as my first introduction to Leica. After shooting some natural light portraits with it beside my Sony 55 1.8 (at f2), I quickly understood what the hype was all about. I very much preferred the Summicron, and I could understand why people wax poetic about Leica; the images had this artful beauty imparted on them, where the Sony was sharper, and more neutral, but to my eye, colder, and more sterile.
I once read something for an FM'er that hey liked to think Zeiss rendered like looking out a window and seeing the actual sight one photographed, while Leica rendered like a beautiful painting of it. I think that is a strong way of putting it, but in my case, I can see what he was getting at.
I am in the market for a Leica 90 M to to round out my travel kit, and when considering the 90 APO I came across this at Leica review (some pieces omitted for the sake of brevity).
"Leica Summicron f/2.0 APO is very sharp without any "character" rendering images much in the spirit of DSLR lenses from far eastern lens manufacturers. This approach to lens engineering perhaps minimizes the differences seen in lenses of same focal length from other makes. In another words, the days of the characteristic "Leica look" associated with lens designs of Dr.Walter Mandler are long gone."
A rapidly changing era of high mega pixel cameras and low cost manufacturing methods, achieved by advancements in computer design and technology, has made lenses indistinguishable in the way they render images.
I would say even seasoned professionals would be hard pressed to tell the difference between photographs taken with different lenses of the same focal length and speed from different manufacturers. From the point of view of Leica's marketing strategy this would make sense and mirrors the way car manufacturers copy one anothers designs, almost to the point where models can only be distinguished by the most minor differences. As we can see today, lens manufacturers are taken a similar approach. I am emphasızıng (sic) thıs point to highlight the differences in Leica's older lens and today's contemporary lenses. If you are seeking to capture images the way famous photographers once did, you may be out of luck. The highly differentiated nature of older lens desıgn actually helped to tell a story by adding "unique" visual elements to the images they captured. In today's oversaturated market however, visual homogeneity is the order of the day."
These days, accuracy and sharpness are the only things lenses seem to offer."
Does anyone have comments on this point? If you agree, do you prefer one era of Leica lenses over another?
Regarding the 90, I have heard that the 90 Elmarit-M is kind of a blend of the two worlds, some classic style, high performance, but not yet into the APO, modern departure. Thoughts in general? ...Show more →
i would say that the pre-asph cron definitely has more character than the AA, but that the APO correction makes the AA stand out compared to other manufacturers modern offerings.
personally i find the 90 cron pre-asph to have a more attractive look for portraits, while the sharpness and contrast out to the corners as well as the extremely low CA make the APO better for landscape and certain other types of shooting.
p.24 #18 · Through Walter Mandler Glass (on FF Only)
Jack Thompson wrote:
Does anyone have comments on this point? If you agree, do you prefer one era of Leica lenses over another?
Regarding the 90, I have heard that the 90 Elmarit-M is kind of a blend of the two worlds, some classic style, high performance, but not yet into the APO, modern departure. Thoughts in general?
I've had the Summicron 90 AA, the Summicron 90 pre ASPH, the Summarit 90/2.5 and the Elamarit 90. For portraits i really preferred the Summicron 90 pre ASPH because of it's character. The 90 AA didn't really add anything that I needed and was much more expensive.
Now I have the Batis 85/1.8 that I like for portraits and the 90/2.5 Summarit for landscapes. For landscapes the Summarit is great. It is tiny, lightweight and renders incredible details stopped down.
The only one I didn't care for was the Elmarit. I've read a lot of good stuff about it, but I didn't like my sample.
p.24 #19 · Through Walter Mandler Glass (on FF Only)
Marve Almar wrote:
The 90 AA didn't really add anything that I needed and was much more expensive.
Hello Marve Almar,
The AA is quite different to Pre-Asph one IMHO. It's much sharper, much more contrasted, very precise at long distance focus and bokeh is less smooth..
Leica-R Apo Asph 90/2 on Pentax K-1.
Chess contest, Leica-R 90 AA. Iso100, 1/50s, W.O. SR on, hand held... vignetage added.
