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 R on RED: Pictures

Dominik Muench said:
The 28mm today, sorry probably NSFW:

sa1.jpg


sa2.jpg


sa4.jpg
Click to expand...

Fantastic. Sad my 28mm is broken at the moment. ;(
 
Very nice Dominik!!!
 
I have a question about sharpness of Leica-R summilux lenses vs Contax Zeiss 1.4s.

I recently purchased a set of Leica-R 35/1.4, 50/1.4 E55, and 80/1.4. Their serial numbers all start with 32xxx.

I tested their sharpness by shooting dollar bills on a flat wall, then I compared the result against my Contax 35/1.4 MMJ, Contax 85/1.4 AEJ, and Canon FD 50/1.2L.

Here is my result:
Leica-R 35/1.4 < Contax 35/1.4
The Leica is softer and lower in contrast than the Contax wide open. To the extend that f/1.4 looks like a light white promist. Contrast and sharpness picks up a bit at f/2 and f/2.8, but still quite a bit lower than the Contax. I understand low contrast can be easily confused with low sharpness, and I watched out for real details on the dollar bills. The Contax does indeed have more details in the dollar bills.


Leica-R 50/1.4 E55 > Canon FD 50/1.2L
This is a little to my surprise because the Canon is known to be one of the sharpest 50, if not THE sharpest. The Leica is sharper across the frame more evenly while the Canon has softer corners until f/2.8. But the different is small.


Leica-R 80/1.4 < Contax 85/1.4
Similar result as the 35mm but to a lesser extend. Again, the lens behaves differently wide open. It has a "white promist" look at f/1.4. At f/2.0 and up, it is actually slightly sharper than the Contax but still with lower contast.

In short, the 35 and 80 give me a rather different feel & look at f/1.4. I understand all lenses are softer wide open, but unlike my Contax and Canon, these two Leica lenses give me a diffused glow that almost brings me back to early 90's when wide open. I want my lenses to give me a usable, consistent look in a narrative setting. I don't want to throw off my audience and take them out of the story when I need to open up my lens. Otherwise they are only useful to me as f/2.0.

After all is said, my main question to you is, do you Leica-R lenses (especially the 35 and 80) behave like mine? Do you think I got a bad sample?

I don't have image at hand now since I am traveling out of town. I will upload them as soon as I get back.
 
Dominik Muench said:
thank you Vince :)

Cheers Mark.

I really want a complete set of these lenses now, so blown away by their look and feel.

a few more for the weekend ;)
Click to expand...

Duude, Dominik, these are fantastic. I am selling my Cooke Zoom and getting a set. I already have it arranged with the seller privately. What lenses do you have and shoot with? Is this the 28mm 2.8? I was offered this one but don't think i'll get it.

Instead I am looking at: 19mm 2.8 V2, 24mm 2.8, 35mm 2.0, 50mm 1.4, 80mm 1.4 and the 100mm APO. Is there anything you say I should add? How about the 60mm? Good?

Great work man. Im in love.. (Not just with your pictures :P )
 
Jack Lam said:
After all is said, my main question to you is, do you Leica-R lenses (especially the 35 and 80) behave like mine? Do you think I got a bad sample?
Click to expand...

In my experience the 80 Lux is noticeably softer wide open, but the 35 still holds its own. Also after having sampled older and newer copies almost 20 years apart along with several in-between (#31... up to #38...) I've found the latest copies seem to hold up a little better wide open (especially the 80) with less bloom.

Personally I often prefer less contrast for more flexibility in post with less clipping and more DR wiggle room.
 
The second set is beautiful Dominik!!

Here's a test pict on the amazing 180 2 apo taken yesterday. Beast of a prime – need to pony up for better lens support before putting her to work on my Dragon.


flowerglass_DSC6787.jpg
 
Jack,

i hear all that you are saying, but a lot of the reason we get into the older or vintage glass is "look and feel" and not just pure technical aspects. leica R glass has character. Pretty much all high speed glass aside from master primes, will begin to show weaknesses wide open. Maybe the contax less than the leica R.

As as an overall image look and feel the leica R glass is unique and the contrast and style of sharpness bring images to life. Just as with contax or Nikon.

Thats kinda what we are celebrating here. But I really appreciate your observations :)


Battistella
 
Last edited:
Mark M said:
In my experience the 80 Lux is noticeably softer wide open, but the 35 still holds its own. Also after having sampled older and newer copies almost 20 years apart along with several in-between (#31... up to #38...) I've found the latest copies seem to hold up a little better wide open (especially the 80) with less bloom.

Personally I often prefer less contrast for more flexibility in post with less clipping and more DR wiggle room.
Click to expand...

Same goes for Contax too (generally speaking)...Zeiss (I'm sure much like Leica) was always tweaking...and newer serials tend to perform a smidge better than older serials wide open...although with that refined "consistency" you lose some of the "character" of the old lenses. You win some, you lose some!

best
 
800mm Leica Focus Module 2x APO, no extender. 90 feet about 125 speed f16 250iso Click on image to see it big. Dragon 3D footage @6k.
 

Attachments

  • Leica-800mm.jpg
    Leica-800mm.jpg
    54 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:
Nick Morrison said:
PS John this is gorgeous!
Click to expand...

Thx Nick....

BTW I know you have a lot of exp w Contax and adapters.... I am having trouble getting inf in focus on a couple of my R's- was going to send all to Duclos...do you know if they can fix and get marks close?
I have have used Duclos for a few conversions and they had me send Leicas to Steves for any internal work...just not sure if worth spending a bunch more working on them.
Thx




i
 
Lakis, why don't use it with some NDs??

Series 6 filters are not easy to come by fir sure but it's worth it,
at least to lower the fstop and the shutter speed a bit...just sayin' ;)
 
Tommaso Alvisi said:
Lakis, why don't use it with some NDs??

Series 6 filters are not easy to come by for sure but it's worth it,
at least to lower the fstop and the shutter speed a bit...just sayin' ;)
Click to expand...

I will buy these very valuable filters, thanks for the suggestion. They are gold.

The depth of field of this fantastic and rare lens is extremely shallow so I like to shoot at as max numerically f-stop as I can afford at a reasonable speed. I like to shoot at 250iso anytime I can. Unfortunately as it's not a cine lens you need to be extremely careful with the focus. Even at f22 most of the times the field is shallow. So in general you don't want lower fstop in this case or speed. A lower speed can be a shaky picture. At 1600mm even a light blow of the wind or someone walking next to the tripod can move the very heavy setup (even on the 120ex O'Connor). However I agree with you that in specific shots ND's separate an amateur from a pro.

I'm greatly thankful to David Battistella, Mark Magnarella and everyone here for introducing me to the Leica experience. Now I don't think I'll look at any other lens with the same eyes save the Zeiss and Schneider.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top