Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Leica lens... Hype, Science or Art?

Sanjin... Where are you? Nobody can explain it better than Sanjin :)
 
They are optically superb lenses with a distinct, creamy beautiful look that is UNIQUE. They have a storied history. They are like the jaguars of photography: refined, elite, elegant, and powerhouse performers.
 
I get kind of confused on this too, On the RED website for the mount option it says :

"Due to mechanical limitations, M series lenses with rear elements that project beyond the rearmost face of the lens’ bayonet lugs are not compatible with this lens mount. Attempting to mount a lens with projecting rear elements could result in damage to the lens, mount, or brain"

How do I tell which Leica lenses have this problem?
I see a Leica SUMILUX-M lens for 21,24,28,35 mm (at f1.4) which look like real beauties ... which ones of those work with the epic leica mount? Also will all the 50mm noctilux, summilux, summicron all work ? Also ... and sorry for bugging ... will the leica Summicron-m 75 and 90 work ?

-------------------------

EDIT/ADD ... what I think is that only the 50+ mm lenses work ... and one of the high f stop 35 (none of the low f-stop lenses below 50 mm work ) ... that right ?
 
Last edited:
Leicas are very well made with tight tolerances generally not found in mass produced lenses.

I have and use Leica Apo Telyt R. The precision, the mechanics and the optics are second to none. The MTF is very high across the entire frame. There is nothing out there that would come close to the optical quality of those lenses.
 
Which Leica lenses are we talking about ?

– There are the Leica-R lenses. Still lenses which have a long flange distance since they were constructed for a SLR. Out of production, but still can be found with some patience and money. They can be modified to PL and all of them will fit.

– Then there is Leica-M glass. Made for rangefinder cameras with a small flange distance. Still in production. Most 50+ mm should fit. They are pretty small and it can be hard to fit any gear on them.

– And then there are Summicron-C. They exist in the stratosphere of cine lenses. I once had the pleasure to test them and it felt like touching jewelry from a masters hand…

Oh, and BTW, there are Minolta-SR lenses. Some call them poor man's Leicas. Have a look at my thread.
 
Charlie Hohenshilt said:
Can anyone explain why Leica lens are considered so good or why they are so expansive?
Click to expand...

Leica has a very long history with their lenses, and not just about their built quality, but the consistency in their manufacturing process, which is the industry's best, were Zeiss comes, this has started way back when they were only best known as a Range Finder camera manufacturer, were every known Photojournalist in the world, will own and preciously carry a Leica Range Finder camera, with their super precious "M" series lenses, super small, and capable of producing great images in the most demanding environments, and when they came out with the first Noctilux f/0.95 50mm lens, which was the standard lens any one will always carry, and for most the only lens, then it was a sensational event.

Fast forward to today, and you now have an incredible following of aficionados, which can only be pleased by the particular Leica look, and will not can not be happy with nothing else.

Currently their absolute best still glass is the Medium Format S series Glass, and it is in fact widely excepted as the best Still glass i the world of any format.

With their entry in the world of Cine Glass they bring the very same high build quality and unique look of their glass to the ends of the shooters.


Now, why so expensive?

They are all hand built, not manufactured like all other companies do, their process is pain-sticking slow, and extremely expensive in itself, also production volumes are low, materials used are high quality and expensive, orders are far superior to their manufacturing capacity... All of this influences the final price.
 
Here are a couple of user understanding of Leica lenses. Leica aimed for balance in a lens and tended to wards contrast rather than sharpness. Zeiss apparently preferred sharpness. Leica lenses also have a 3D feel to the image, its said to be achieved by the contrast and focus plane being offset. I don't know this is achieved but this is what is mentioned in various lens reports. The mechanical build quality is exceptional, also Leica's QA process is very good so there is very good consistency between lenses of similar type and sets.

Just as a subjective view of how the image looks, it much more like looking directly at the action rather than looking through the lens some how. If you look at the Ludwig trailers or the film it self which are shot on Leica Summilux C and Alexa you can see the sort of look that can be expected.

They are expensive....
 
Leica lenses...it's a very long history...and it's about "Hype, Science and Art" combined together in a very nice but always expensive package...to get an idea...Germans always want to be paid well for what they mostly do well like a car, an optics or a machine,..also you can talk about Leica glass for hours, days, weeks, months, years even decades...it's a whole universe for itself...

Read more from a Dutch Leica expert Erwin Puts:

http://www.imx.nl
 
I love this idea of "Science" and "Art" when we talk about Leica, because that's what I think I admire the most about them. They DO FEEL like the confluence of Science and Art. Technically superb, Leica is also known for having an opinion on what they believe looks "beautiful". Their approach to contrast and color betrays a philosophy that suggests they know strongly what is beautiful. And after 100 years of designing lenses and coatings, their approach to color and their reproduction of it is second to none. Leica colors, are, in a word, GORGEOUS.

The only thing I like more is the older Zeiss look from Super Speed era, which betrays a restraint and latitude that I find just as admirable.
 
The only thing that outperforms Leica are 40.000$ military spec lenses.
And those are made by leica too!
 
Thank You everyone who has posted on this topic.

I have no opinion on Leica lenses. I have never used them, which is why I'm asking for opinions. At one point I was almost willing to lay down 200K for a set of the Summilux C primes. My opinion, at the time was based; on hype and the market having a low number of lens sets in the world. Since then, I decided I want to make an objective opinion on Leica lenses.


SALT II results... (Part 1,2,3,4 Bokeh, Breathing & Flare and Part 5: Impressions)

Post #6

Part 5: Impressions
Matt Duclos
Leica - Everyone loves Leica. They are romantic, pleasing, exotic, and make gorgeous images. Mostly because their optics are technically poor. The "Leica Look" that everyone desires is really just 20 year old optical design. Mechanically solid but with 99% of the lenses available being used, it's very difficult to find a truly good example.
Click to expand...

Matt states that the 'optics are technically poor'. How can this be.
 
Last edited:
Charlie Hohenshilt said:
Thank You everyone who has posted on this topic.

I have no opinion on Leica lenses. I have never used them, which is why I asked for opinions. At one point I was almost willing to lay down 200K for a set of the Summilux C primes. My opinion, at the time was based, on hype. And the market. Low number of lens sets in the world and a high demand, if you can come up with the rental money.

Matt states that the 'optics are technically poor'. How can this be.
Click to expand...

Charlie, this SALT test you are referencing (and Duclos's related comment) are about LEICA R's. NOT LEICA C PRIMES.

The Leica C Primes (the 200k set you are referring too) are optically superb.

The "tecnically poor" comment from Matt is in reference to the fact that Leica did not always design R lenses to be "sharp" in the way we technically perceive it, so that they technically sometimes did poorly on some tests; even though visually what was being seen was sharp and often beautiful. The Leica R's (which are 35mm Full Frame stills lenses) had a tendency of doing this at times...

But the Leica C's are supposed much more optically exacting, at least according to people's early tests. They are being compared by many to Master Primes...and some are even saying they are better (which is scary).

Clearly the thought of the fabled Leica look coupled with incredible resolution and speed is making many people drool.
 
Dave Blackham
Just as a subjective view of how the image looks, it much more like looking directly at the action rather than looking through the lens some how. If you look at the Ludwig trailers or the film it self which are shot on Leica Summilux C and Alexa you can see the sort of look that can be expected.
Click to expand...


Is this the Ludwig II trailer you are referring to?

If so I watched it in 720p

Thanks
 
Last edited:
Nick Morrison said:
Charlie, this SALT test you are referencing (and Duclos's related comment) are about LEICA R's. NOT LEICA C PRIMES.
Click to expand...

Sorry, if I seamed to lump the 2 lens sets together. I know clearly that the Cs and Rs are not the same lenses.

I have always heard that the Rs, as all Leicas, have amazing contrast and are very sharp. I was surprised to hear that the Rs are not as sharp as reported. This made me wonder why they are so highly praised. Do the particular artifacts, made from not being sharp, along with the contrast, make the images very beautiful and the lenses so revered? I will admit, I suspected that Leica's special sauce would be applied to the Summilux C primes, in some degree. You said, the Cs are "optically superb" that would make the look of the images much different form the Rs.

Thank you for your comment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top