CheshireCat wrote:
Has anyone compared the VM version to Leica’s APO Summicron 35 ?
Not that I could afford the latter, but I am curiouser and curiouser.
I have not yet seen this. If it happens, it might be over at LUF. There are a couple 35 Cron APO threads there. Based on those and what I’ve seen from the VM here, if money were not a factor, I’d get the Cron hands down. IMO its OOF background rendering and focus transition is smoother and more graceful. Yet it’s still extremely sharp in the plane of focus.
To my eyes, it looks like (modern) Leica rendering, whereas the VM does not. Jono Slack aptly described it as an iron fist in a velvet glove.
Other advantages for the Cron, IMO, include smaller size and ergonomics more consistent with Leica’s M lenses. Also the super close 30cm MFD for an M lens without use of a tube.
My opinion is based on the hypothetical use of such a lens for people/reportage type work. If it’s strictly technical applications like urban/natural landscapes where great across-frame sharpness is desired, architecture, etc., I’m convinced by the images here that the VM would be eminently capable. The only optical flaw I’ve noticed from the Cron APO so far is what appears to be fairly strong pincushion distortion. But without knowing how others have processed their images, errors or profile mismatches can’t be ruled out.
Originally intended to pick up a used copy of the Apo-Lanthar 110/2.5 from the local camera shop but there's one last copy of the 35/2 sitting on the shelf so the 110/2.5 have to wait...
It's my first Apo-Lanthar and I am quite impressed by the performance/size ratio. Correction for fringing is very impressive wide open especially when I calibrated my fringing tolerance level to the other Nokton series lenses (21/1.4 & Nokton 50/1.2) in my kit.
They will be regarded as poor man's cult lenses soon enough, and they will open users to the other great Voigts. At the moment they fall between the cloistered M world and the very loyal mainstream brand groups.
CV might just spark a minor revival in manual focus photography - if more people knew how easy they are to achieve accurate focus with at wide apertures, that massive focal plane contrast. We are reaping the benefits from CV measuring their lenses against Leica M lenses, having to satisfy those holding very high standards.
Wait a bit… he’ll be sure to find all the faults and document them in excruciating detail for the masochists who pay for the pain and the pleasure of reading him.
Fred Miranda wrote:
@diglloyd@ is very impressed with it!
For those who want Adobe profiles for the new APO and Ultron lenses,
give it few months, profiles will indeed become available.
Stephen
The beauty of the CV 35 and 50 APO is they really don't need them There seems to be very little distortion, at least for infinity horizons. And the vignetting is very even – no dog-eared corners like the Canon RF 28-70 that would require a custom vignette mask. The standard/generic light falloff correction tool in Capture One works perfectly.
philip_pj wrote:
...CV might just spark a minor revival in manual focus photography - if more people knew how easy they are to achieve accurate focus with at wide apertures, that massive focal plane contrast...
If more people knew how easy it was to shoot manual focus lenses like these on the Leica M bodies – with perfect infinity focus at the hard stop – more people might buy an M body to supplement their mirrorless systems. With my M10-R and these APOs, all I have to do is frame up the scene through the optical viewfinder, set my aperture, and spin the lens to the hard stop. It stays at the hard stop as I shoot. With my AF cameras + AF lenses, I can't trust AF-infinity for one shot will be optimal for another.
I'll have to respectfully disagree with you on that. I had an M246 monochrome for a little while, and quite honestly, I didn't get any of the draw of it. Did it have nice pictures? Sure. Was it worth what I paid for it? Not really. Was it worth lugging around in addition to my Sony gear? Nope. Would I buy a pure monochrome A7riv if Sony made one? Probably.
Maybe it's because I'm "younger" and never seriously shot film before getting a digital camera, but I honestly do not get the Leica obsession. Do I understand that it's a legacy brand with a storied history filled with famous photographers? Yes. Do I realize that for decades, they had some of (if not the) best lenses out there? Yes. Do I think that now, it's purely a brand resting on its past name and is just an overpriced brand that rich people buy because it denotes status? Yep.
Sorry to the Leica lovers out there. That's my personal opinion. Take it for what it's worth.
motorhead9999 wrote:
I'll have to respectfully disagree with you on that. I had an M246 monochrome for a little while, and quite honestly, I didn't get any of the draw of it. Did it have nice pictures? Sure. Was it worth what I paid for it? Not really. Was it worth lugging around in addition to my Sony gear? Nope. Would I buy a pure monochrome A7riv if Sony made one? Probably.
Maybe it's because I'm "younger" and never seriously shot film before getting a digital camera, but I honestly do not get the Leica obsession. Do I understand that it's a legacy brand with a storied history filled with famous photographers? Yes. Do I realize that for decades, they had some of (if not the) best lenses out there? Yes. Do I think that now, it's purely a brand resting on its past name and is just an overpriced brand that rich people buy because it denotes status? Yep.
Sorry to the Leica lovers out there. That's my personal opinion. Take it for what it's worth....Show more →
I love shooting with the Sony A7R IV, but I do appreciate Leica M bodies as well. Like you, I started with digital cameras and never shot film seriously. My first camera was the Nikon Coolpix 900, one of the first digital cameras ever produced with a good lens and advanced settings. I've been shooting Canon and Sony for a couple decades now, and went through many models. My first SLR was the Canon D30, one the first digital SLRs!
My point is that for me, there is zero nostalgia because I never shot film or rangefinders in the past.
A couple years ago, I picked up a Leica M240 here on FM, added a couple Voigtlander lenses, and have been enjoying the experience ever since. Lately, I upgraded to the M10 and then M10P. To me, shooting with a rangefinder with manual lenses is a nice break from all the high tech and computerized cameras, but it really depends on the shooting.
For many folks here on FM, photography is a hobby and there must be enjoyment in a hobby. If someone picks up a rangefinder and get great pictures while enjoying the process, the goal is achieved. There is no reason to attack something that works for so many of us.
We want a broad church in photography. The Leica experience is not for everyone, because nothing is. But the M cameras click with very many enthusiasts, it's like using really good tools, very refined. And the lenses are exceptional (so Voigtlanders have to be too) in both SL and M. The best of them are the best.
The Japanese designers love them, as Leica and Zeiss (and others like Schneider and Rodenstock) make different trade-offs that affect the images, based on back when they had most of the knowledge handed down. The M lenses are cutting edge and have haptics and aesthetics to go with the camera. There is also that they tend to go from the image look they want and work back to find how to produce it, rather than just trying to get everything right.
And, very important - without Leica we would not have Voigtlander.
motorhead9999 wrote:
I'll have to respectfully disagree with you on that. I had an M246 monochrome for a little while, and quite honestly, I didn't get any of the draw of it. Did it have nice pictures? Sure. Was it worth what I paid for it? Not really. Was it worth lugging around in addition to my Sony gear? Nope. Would I buy a pure monochrome A7riv if Sony made one? Probably.
Maybe it's because I'm "younger" and never seriously shot film before getting a digital camera, but I honestly do not get the Leica obsession. Do I understand that it's a legacy brand with a storied history filled with famous photographers? Yes. Do I realize that for decades, they had some of (if not the) best lenses out there? Yes. Do I think that now, it's purely a brand resting on its past name and is just an overpriced brand that rich people buy because it denotes status? Yep.
Sorry to the Leica lovers out there. That's my personal opinion. Take it for what it's worth....Show more →
99 times out of a hundred, the correct answer to the question "Should I get a Leica M camera?" is "No".
No big deal, you're part of the overwhelming majority of potential (or even actual) Leica M purchasers who realise that it's just not the right camera for them. Those of us who understand and appreciate what the Leica M has to offer and, more importantly, possess both the aptitude and the patience to learn how to use one successfully have no regrets about our choice. We are amply rewarded every time we pick it up and make photographs. But the Leica M is a harsh mistress—few are called and even fewer are chosen.
FWIW, Cosina made lenses for every mount under the Sun and would have lived on in one form or other. It does not need the defunct M mount to bring out quality lenses at 1/10of the price an existing Leica lens.
The Sony is an exciting platform and is very innovative. An antithesis of Leica M.
motorhead9999 wrote:
I'll have to respectfully disagree with you on that. I had an M246 monochrome for a little while, and quite honestly, I didn't get any of the draw of it. Did it have nice pictures? Sure. Was it worth what I paid for it? Not really. Was it worth lugging around in addition to my Sony gear? Nope. Would I buy a pure monochrome A7riv if Sony made one? Probably.
Maybe it's because I'm "younger" and never seriously shot film before getting a digital camera, but I honestly do not get the Leica obsession. Do I understand that it's a legacy brand with a storied history filled with famous photographers? Yes. Do I realize that for decades, they had some of (if not the) best lenses out there? Yes. Do I think that now, it's purely a brand resting on its past name and is just an overpriced brand that rich people buy because it denotes status? Yep.
Sorry to the Leica lovers out there. That's my personal opinion. Take it for what it's worth....Show more →
After a good week using this lens my conclusion is the same as everyone else. Excellent lens...
But more important than that; range finder bashing!
If it wasn’t for Leica glass would the rf system still around?
With mirrorless you see what the sensor is seeing. How can you improve on this?
I see what the sensor sees. That’s it. Period.
If you can’t see what you are capturing how can you say you saw it?
Edited: my post is simply one opinion I have and is meant in a tongue in cheek way to stimulate debate. I respect anyone’s choices of gear from pin hole to medium format. I hope everyone enjoys themselves with their gear.
tzhang.wk wrote:
Originally intended to pick up a used copy of the Apo-Lanthar 110/2.5 from the local camera shop but there's one last copy of the 35/2 sitting on the shelf so the 110/2.5 have to wait...
It's my first Apo-Lanthar and I am quite impressed by the performance/size ratio. Correction for fringing is very impressive wide open especially when I calibrated my fringing tolerance level to the other Nokton series lenses (21/1.4 & Nokton 50/1.2) in my kit.
The light captured in these images really shows off the capabilities of this lens.
genji wrote:
99 times out of a hundred, the correct answer to the question "Should I get a Leica M camera?" is "No".
No big deal, you're part of the overwhelming majority of potential (or even actual) Leica M purchasers who realise that it's just not the right camera for them. Those of us who understand and appreciate what the Leica M has to offer and, more importantly, possess both the aptitude and the patience to learn how to use one successfully have no regrets about our choice. We are amply rewarded every time we pick it up and make photographs. But the Leica M is a harsh mistress—few are called and even fewer are chosen....Show more →
"Those of us who understand and appreciate what the Leica M has to offer and, more importantly, possess both the aptitude and the patience to learn how to use one successfully have no regrets about our choice."
Probably not intended but this quote is possibly the exact root of the problem some have with Leica in general in my opinion. It's not the actual camera or equipment. There is this underlying tone "intended or not" sometimes that we Leica users "get it" and have some type of higher photography IQ. I my self started in film and have attempted multiple times to "understand" why people love them. Each attempt ended in head scratching. What was I missing? As it turns out they are just not a good fit for me and it has nothing to do with the money side. That said I have no problem if someone thinks otherwise. The point of any equipment we buy and use is that you feel comfortable with it and it inspires you to go out and shoot. Luckily in 2021 we have so many options still that can fill the needs of every photographer.
As far as motorhead9999 "attacking" I think that is a stretch. It was fairly clear (at least to me) he was just expressing a personal opinion. Which I think we are allowed to do here?
nhsonyshooter wrote:
"Those of us who understand and appreciate what the Leica M has to offer and, more importantly, possess both the aptitude and the patience to learn how to use one successfully have no regrets about our choice."
Probably not intended but this quote is possibly the exact root of the problem some have with Leica in general in my opinion. It's not the actual camera or equipment. There is this underlying tone "intended or not" sometimes that we Leica users "get it" and have some type of higher photography IQ. I my self started in film and have attempted multiple times to "understand" why people love them. Each attempt ended in head scratching. What was I missing? As it turns out they are just not a good fit for me and it has nothing to do with the money side. That said I have no problem if someone thinks otherwise. The point of any equipment we buy and use is that you feel comfortable with it and it inspires you to go out and shoot. Luckily in 2021 we have so many options still that can fill the needs of every photographer.
As far as motorhead9999 "attacking" I think that is a stretch. It was fairly clear (at least to me) he was just expressing a personal opinion. Which I think we are allowed to do here?...Show more →
Is there any other way to justify an overpriced and very underwhelming system?
And just to clarify, I’m not mocking or begrudging anyone who chooses to have a Leica. You’re absolutely right that in the end, it’s the pictures that matter. All I’m just saying is that having had a Leica, and having a Sony with terrific lenses, I certainly don’t get the appeal (and much higher expense). But that’s ok. I sold my Leica and am quite happy staying pure Sony, and those who enjoy Leica are happy with their gear, and in the end, that’s what matters.
Fred Miranda wrote:
I love shooting with the Sony A7R IV, but I do appreciate Leica M bodies as well. Like you, I started with digital cameras and never shot film seriously. My first camera was the Nikon Coolpix 900, one of the first digital cameras ever produced with a good lens and advanced settings. I've been shooting Canon and Sony for a couple decades now, and went through many models. My first SLR was the Canon D30, one the first digital SLRs!
My point is that for me, there is zero nostalgia because I've never shot film or rangefinders in the past.
A couple years ago, I picked up a Leica M240 here on FM, added a couple Voigtlander lenses, and have been enjoying the experience ever since. Lately, I upgraded to the M10 and then M10P. To me, shooting with a rangefinder with manual lenses is a nice break from all the high tech and computerized cameras, but it really depends on the shooting.
For many folks here at FM, photography is a hobby and there must be enjoyment in a hobby. If someone picks up a rangefinder and get great pictures while enjoying the process, the goal is achieved. There is no reason to attack something that works for so many of us....Show more →
There seems to be very little distortion, at least for infinity horizons. And the vignetting is very even – no dog-eared corners like the Canon RF 28-70 that would require a custom vignette mask. The standard/generic light falloff correction tool in Capture One works perfectly.