Archive 2014 · Through Walter Mandler Glass (on FF Only)
p.24 #1Through Walter Mandler Glass (on FF Only)
prashant wrote:
Lovely images!
I take that is M90 summicron you mean?
sebboh wrote:
congrats greg! that lens is probably my favorite portrait lens ever.
actually, i believe i was talking about the m 50 summilux pre-asph with greg, though i am quite fond of the m 90 cron pre-asph.
a shot with the 50 lux from long ago:
http://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8240/8663383967_b9fc7b34d5_o.jpg
Lovely images!
I take that is M90 summicron you mean?
sebboh wrote:
congrats greg! that lens is probably my favorite portrait lens ever.
actually, i believe i was talking about the m 50 summilux pre-asph with greg, though i am quite fond of the m 90 cron pre-asph.
a shot with the 50 lux from long ago:
http://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8240/8663383967_b9fc7b34d5_o.jpg
Sep 26, 2016 at 10:20 AM
p.24 #2Through 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.
a7rII_ElmaritM90_JackHandsome by Bradley Clemens, on Flickr
a7rII_ElmaritM90_JackHandsome by Bradley Clemens, on FlickrOct 02, 2016 at 11:59 PM
p.24 #4Through Walter Mandler Glass (on FF Only)
m 35 lux pre-asph:
http://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5627/30145569171_6daf84768f_o.jpg
http://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5627/30145569171_6daf84768f_o.jpg
Oct 10, 2016 at 11:09 PM
p.24 #5Through 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?
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?
Oct 13, 2016 at 09:47 AM
p.24 #6Through 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...Show more →
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...Show more →
Oct 13, 2016 at 02:53 PM
p.24 #7Through Walter Mandler Glass (on FF Only)
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?
Weekend_161015_030 by Prashant Khapane, on Flickr
Quick question to anyone using this on A7x. Do you see double edge at high-contrast points sometimes? Or is that oft discussed glow?
Weekend_161015_030 by Prashant Khapane, on FlickrOct 15, 2016 at 09:55 AM
p.24 #8Through 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.
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.
Oct 15, 2016 at 11:31 AM
p.24 #9Through 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:
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...Show more →
I also see that sometimes in OOF.
I really like to use this at f2 though.
sebboh wrote:
prashant wrote
35mm M V4. Wide Open. A7iiQuick question to anyone using this on A7x. Do you see double edge at high-contrast points sometimes? Or is that oft discussed glow?
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...Show more →
Oct 15, 2016 at 11:57 AM
p.24 #10Through 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...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.
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...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.
Oct 15, 2016 at 11:58 AM
p.24 #11Through Walter Mandler Glass (on FF Only)
m 35 lux pre-asph:
http://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8555/30196283606_15e0402998_o.jpg
http://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8555/30196283606_15e0402998_o.jpg
Oct 15, 2016 at 12:00 PM
p.24 #12Through Walter Mandler Glass (on FF Only)
35mm Summicron V4. Sony A7ii. Wide Open. After long time an image which reminded me of fuji film in a MF camera.
Weekend_161015_016 by Prashant Khapane, on Flickr
Weekend_161015_016 by Prashant Khapane, on FlickrOct 16, 2016 at 06:42 AM
p.24 #14Through Walter Mandler Glass (on FF Only)
Summicron 35 Type 1 8-element on Leica M9, at f2 or 2.4
Grevillea with Sydney Opera House backdrop by David M, on Flickr
Grevillea with Sydney Opera House backdrop by David M, on FlickrOct 29, 2016 at 05:56 AM
p.24 #15Through Walter Mandler Glass (on FF Only)
APO-Telyt-R 180 f3.4, newly Leitaxed for use on my K-1
All wide open:
evening flowers by David M, on Flickr
Icelandic Poppies by David M, on Flickr
Half-moon, 7 Nov 2016 by David M, on Flickr
Icelandic Poppies by David M, on Flickr
All wide open:
evening flowers by David M, on FlickrIcelandic Poppies by David M, on FlickrHalf-moon, 7 Nov 2016 by David M, on FlickrIcelandic Poppies by David M, on FlickrNov 18, 2016 at 07:25 PM
p.24 #16Through Walter Mandler Glass (on FF Only)
Hello,
Leica-R 50/2 W.O
Edited on Dec 10, 2016 at 08:51 AM · View previous versions
Leica-R 50/2 W.O
Edited on Dec 10, 2016 at 08:51 AM · View previous versions
Nov 20, 2016 at 12:33 AM
p.24 #17Through Walter Mandler Glass (on FF Only)
At River Run by unoh7, Elmarit 135
DSC09297-2 by unoh7, 75 Lux
These two remind me alot of each other, though the Elmarit is a bit sweeter. The Lux makes a very fast transition from glowy WO to unforgiving razor
Nov 20, 2016 at 05:02 PM
p.24 #18Through 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.
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.
Nov 21, 2016 at 03:42 AM
p.24 #19Through 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.
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.
Nov 21, 2016 at 06:50 AM