Samuli Vahonen wrote:
EDIT: Oh, crap, checked MTF - stupid fault, should have checked before purchasing...can't understand how Leica puts their name to this kind of lenses...
EDIT2: And these are Leica calculated MTFs, not comparable to Zeiss style, which are based to real measurements. So real performance is worse than these MTFs make it look like.
Samuli
Samuli, for future reference check the photodo lens review site, there are MTF charts for some of the older Leica R's.
FWIW when researching which alt lens system to invest in, for my needs, I do recollect that some of the photodo MTF test charts correlated favourably with Leica's own MTF charts. Which is something of a relief, seeing what I could have unwisely invested in, if I relied on manufacturers charts only ....
JonPB wrote:
I like Jack's shot of the chairs. The field curvature works really well there. But then, I'd say Jack's photography is along the lines of editorial portraiture of the urban environment, where there's a lot of foreground-background interaction and bringing a few bits of the background into focus adds pop and story to the photo. On the other hand, Sumuli's photography leans heavily on a predictable focal plane (and the blur in front of and behind it) to add depth and emphasize single points of interest from the complex repetition of the forest. That effect is ruined by this field curvature. In other words, the character of the lens lends itself to Jack's work but detracts from Samuli's....Show more →
Pretty good analysis. Haven't been thinking it this way, but this kind of explains why I have no issues with field curvature, which happen over the whole image, not with sudden changes. For example I haven't had much issues with Zeiss ZE/ZF series 28mm lens, but many people really hate the lens for field curvature. On other hand I almost puke when I see photos from Zeiss ZE/ZF series makro-planar 50mm, which has similar disgusting field curvature as Summilux-R 35mm v2, which hits suddenly in corners.
JonPB wrote:
And isn't learning about this gear, where it works best and where it becomes a liability, a wonderful feature of this forum?
+1000
Jon Tainton wrote:
The 35/2 does appear to be a 'look' lens, so you might want to look at the 35/2.8 instead, MTF is here http://www.photodo.com/lens/Leica-ElmaritR-35mm-f28-937/images
Hmmm, I'm not so sure about Elmarit-R 35mm. I was looking for lens to pair with similar character as Elmarit-R 90mm, as Summicron-R 50 has completely different in rendering style. Looking Elmarit-R 35mm photodo-MTFs I think that the tangential and sagittal curves separate too much too early. Also I was hoping for faster than f/2.8, as lenses usually need to be closed down a little, and then DOF is so gigantic in wide-angles with slow maximum aperture of f/2.8. Of course übergood (like Elmarit-R 28mm v2) make exception, as they can be shoot wide open.
As I got lucky and found cheap Elmarit-R 28mm v2, just few days after ordered Summicron-R 35, I think I'm all good now with my Leica R-family:
- 2.8/28 v2
- 2.8/90 E55
- 2.8/180 APO (1st version)
Just having slightly larger "gap" between 90mm and 28mm as I would prefer to have. At some point I want to try the M-series Summicron-M 50mm, if it would be little smoother than it's R-brother. I would assume Leica M and R share similar color rendering.
JonPB wrote:
I like Jack's shot of the chairs. The field curvature works really well there. But then, I'd say Jack's photography is along the lines of editorial portraiture of the urban environment, where there's a lot of foreground-background interaction and bringing a few bits of the background into focus adds pop and story to the photo. On the other hand, Sumuli's photography leans heavily on a predictable focal plane (and the blur in front of and behind it) to add depth and emphasize single points of interest from the complex repetition of the forest. That effect is ruined by this field curvature. In other words, the character of the lens lends itself to Jack's work but detracts from Samuli's.
And isn't learning about this gear, where it works best and where it becomes a liability, a wonderful feature of this forum?
Thank you Jon
Everyone here has given rights to like, dislike and, evidently, to have different level of tolerance for others work and subjects.
Your responses above just saved me posting a regrettable reply.
Edit: FM is a friendly place and members like myself and Samuli always manage to find a common ground.
Funny I have just noticed this on my Summicron 35/2 3 weeks ago when put on Canon 1Ds MKI and now this topic pops up here. I have had the lens for 1,5 year and never noticed this on my 5D MKI I was mostly using it, I have to double check on 5D in same scenerio.
I'm tempted to sell my ZE Makro-Planar 50mm for the 60mm Macro Elmarit! Should I...I dunno, I'm on the fence.
I have the E55 35mm Cron-R and haven't noticed (or paid attention) to the FC of that lens...and now you have to pee in my cereal!!!
I use to shoot landscapes years ago, and the 35 Cron-R might have put me off if I knew then what I just learned a page ago, but I've been doing a lot of family portraiture and flower shots which the FC of the 35mm Cron-R wouldn't be a factor in buying/keeping the lens. From Putts narrative, it seems like the photo journalistic nature of the lens suits my style.
Besides, I can always fall back on my 35-70mm Vario-Elmar f/4 for some landscape fun when (or if!) needed.
As I got lucky and found cheap Elmarit-R 28mm v2, just few days after ordered Summicron-R 35, I think I'm all good now with my Leica R-family:
- 2.8/28 v2
- 2.8/90 E55
- 2.8/180 APO (1st version)
Just having slightly larger "gap" between 90mm and 28mm as I would prefer to have. At some point I want to try the M-series Summicron-M 50mm, if it would be little smoother than it's R-brother. I would assume Leica M and R share similar color rendering.
Samuli
Samuli, if I were to look into the 180/2.8 APO, which version should I be looking at/for? As you mentioned the 1st version, is there something that makes it stand out over the succeeding version(s)?
The 35mm f/1.4 Summilux-R - 180mm f/2 APO-Summicron-R have been superceded by other brands.
I believe the 50mm Summilux-R you refer to is the E60 version, which is optically distinct from the Series VII and E55 versions. Some might be confused by calling this lens version II, because the first optical version was made with two different barrels.
Alpha_Geist wrote:
Samuli, if I were to look into the 180/2.8 APO, which version should I be looking at/for? As you mentioned the 1st version, is there something that makes it stand out over the succeeding version(s)?
Get v2, v1 has annoying "broken ninjastar boke" @ f/4 = why I shoot either wide open or f/8.
I just want to thank Aleksandr (worldinlens) for getting me into Leica lenses. He was my earliest inspiration to get in touch with colour photography. Its been years since we have spoken but I am very grateful for his help during my start in photography.
I think Leica R lens can be divided to two group quality, Bench quality and real world quality.
In Almass's lens recommendation list, other than 50lux and 80lux, I think rest all belong to Bench quality, (certainly having real world quality at the same time) which usually require a huge prime to getting them.
But for me, real world quality are the main reason I pick R. they come from 50lux any version, 80lux (portrait only), 35cron(other than f8 landscape), 35lux, 50cron, 90cron.. I found them perform extreme good WO at f1.4 or f2 most of the frame, smooth transition, no SA,(except 80lux) no CA, gentle color. Rest 20% of frame, when use at WO you can see jittery bokeh, soft corner etc (example: 35, 50cron, 35lux at f1.4, 50lux VI/II at f1.4...)
I won't claim I can pass blind test but general speaking I can trace Leica R's specialty in rendering. That is the reason I would pick several R lens over M equivalent, even M may(most likely) have better bench quality.
I believe its inherent render quality can be traced in good hand with right subject. For my photography, I use R lens for my family pics, They suit me perfectly. 100% case I don't require bench quality, I love the lens I have and plan to keep them life long....
The beautiful rendering in DOF and color and moment in life are priceless.
zhangyue wrote:
... I have and plan to keep them life long....
I think something that's often missed when discussing 'stellar' or 'lesser' R lenses, is the overall engineering design and build quality - irrespective of model - and Leica's continued commitment to servicing them, which means that your plan has a solid foundation.
Wood Sorrel an indicator plant of ancient woodland in the UK - 100 AME
Regarding my experience of Leica r lenses. I have owned 19mm v2 , 28-90mm asph , 35 F2 cron last version.
Leica 28mm is the only one I continue with.
Leica 19mm is a wonderful lens but slightly soft in extreme corners.
35 cron wonderful colour but not for my landscapes, didn't have great corners.
Leica r 28-90 asph proved a disappointment for me, 28-40 range produced colour fringing.
