LEICA R on RED: Pictures

[Jack Lam]

thank you David. Looking forward to your insights.

When you said you have three 35mm, are they all Summilux-R 35/1.4?
thanks,

jack

 

[Robin K]

Here is a lens test chart I shot yesterday on the 35mm Summilux F1.4 @ F1.4. Serial nr starting at 32xxxxx. Shot well lit (although somewhat uneven) at 100 iso. 1/500 s, Fullframe on A7s.

And here below is the same test on Leica R Summilux 80mm F1.4 at F1.4. Serial nr starting at 32xxxxx.

I could eventually do more test from various focus distances due to them behaving different if you have the chart in focus or not.
Not only so, but they create different CA depending whether focus is further into or away from the chart. To my suprise,
only the 80mm blooms compared to the 35mm, I originally thought they both did. Guess not.

Edit: Would someone else try the same observations? Would be nice to see if there are any variations!

 

[David Battistella]

No I mean that of the 35, 50 and 80 the 35 is my favorite and overall best image wide open.

 

[Matt Hartle]

wow, what a gorgeous piece!! I love the variety on the camera work and the exposure choices... sometimes exposing for silhouette, sometimes for a balanced frame. Beautiful!

-m

 

[Matt Hartle]

Dragon - Leica R's - Mainly 19mm, 35mm Summicron, 50mm Summilux, 80mm Summilux and 180mm (also a vintage Nikon 400mm f3.5)

cheers




-dane

wow, what a gorgeous piece!! I love the variety on the camera work and the exposure choices... sometimes exposing for silhouette, sometimes for a balanced frame. Beautiful!

-m

 

[Mark M]

...A little background about my current situation. I recently acquired three Summilux-R lenses 35/1.4, 50/1.4, and 80/1.4 from my friend. All with serial numbers starting with 32xxxxx. I believe they were all manufactured around 1983. I tested it by shooting some dollar bills and portraits. While the 50mm and, to a lesser degree, the 80mm both perform very well even wide open, the 35/1.4 seems to be quite soft wide open when compared to a Contax Zeiss 35/1.4.

The softness is especially pronounced and unnatural when I begins to pull focus slightly away from critical focus. A halo begins to show around the edge of the subject (especially noticeable on a brighter subject against darker background). Micro details on the skin quickly smooth out. It reminds me the look of a diffusion filter that has tiny stipples / micro-lenses, like the Tiffen Class Soft. To recall David Mullen's excellent article on the principle of diffusion filters, filters that feature micro-lenses would throw a slightly out-of-focus image on an otherwise in-focus image. It seems to be exactly what is happening on my Summilux 35. The halo that grows around the edge of the subject makes it rather unnatural and distracting when I begins to pull focus away. The purple/green fringing on the halo makes it even worst...

I've used several 35 Lux between #31... and #38... and found them all to render very well wide open and excellent towards the center. The main difference I've noticed were color tweaks: the older are a little more 'classic' (gold/green) whereas newer seem to have a more balanced color-palette (a bit more blue). Newer ones may be a tad sharper but from what you've described it sounds like there could be more going on since you're not seeing it in the 50 or 80. An especially hazy element or lots of cleaning marks can have a noticeable effect similar to what you've described wide open, which may not show up in a standard lens test.

Otherwise going with a much newer copy may help solve it, but the color won't match the older two as well.

 

[Jack Lam]

Hi Robin,

For some reasons Dropbox isn't displaying your photos correctly.
Can you post again?

Thanks a lot for your help.

Jack

 

[Mark M]

Lewis-M, Dominik, Lakis, Jacob & Michael – great recent additions to the thread!

Keep em coming...

 

[Jamon Lewis]

35 Cron W/O Scarlet X

 

[Robin K]

Summilux-R 35mm F1.4

Summilux-R 35mm F1.4

Seeing the interest, I chose to do a more indepth analysis on this particular lens. The 35mm F1.4. Serial nr 32xxxxx.


First one out is a few cm before critical focus. More specifically the very minimum focus distance possible. ~0.45cm. Green CA.

Second is at absolute focus. No visual signs of CA overall. Most likely resolving more than 4K at center. ~0.55cm.

Third is just beyond focus. ~0.6cm. Exhibits Blue CA.

Fourth is again at minimum focus distance, although this time shot at F2. Smaller amounts of green CA.

Fifth is at absolute focus, although this time shot at F2. No visual CA at absolute focus & -Beyond-.

I should add that ALL these observations are done at the center point, and that it is important to notice that the CA dissapears towards the edges.
More or less, the effects shown here are the same when shot towards sharp edges on a strong lightsource. I already tried that, so these charts should be quite accurate, no?

And at very last. Where it performs without flaws. The summilux 35mm at F8.

 

[Dimitri Boschma]

Ok 'Dom' made me do it... (And the rest of you guys ofcourse)

I got the 60mm 2.8 Macro.
Tomorrow I hope to add some more Leicas.

Some quick test shots..

 

[Mark M]

Great 60 macro additions Dimitri!

Believe I have that exact C3PO action figure stored in a closet somewhere

 

[Lakis Amarantithis]

The legendary Leica Noctilux 0.95 with the http://kippertie.com/ FS Infrared olpf. The 0.95 is creamy, creamy and creamy! 31%, 200%, 1752%

 

[Dominik Muench]

yeh yeh blame it on the german

good choice Dimitri you will love em

 

[Dominik Muench]

the 135mm this afternoon.

 

[vincent kardasik]

the 135mm this afternoon.

Aïe... I need a 135mm...

 

[Lewis-M Soucy]

Aïe... I need a 135mm...

You mean this? ;P

 

[Mark M]

Wow Lakis! Has similarities to both the 80 lux and 180 cron. Do you find it can matches your Leica Rs well?

And very nice series with the 135 Dom!

 

[Mark M]

playing with the 180 f2 apo wide open.

 

[Lakis Amarantithis]

Wow Lakis! Has similarities to both the 80 lux and 180 cron. Do you find it can matches your Leica Rs well?

And very nice series with the 135 Dom!

You are very right Mark! It's 5-30% better than the 80 lux though at night, 10-30% better than the Nikon noct 1.2, it feels very much like an 180mm f2 but a mini me. It's a beast for the night. No comparison with te Canon 50mm F:1.0 or the Nikon Noct 58mm 1.2 I use. It sees 20% more at least than your eyes can see at night without grain! It matches the Rs perfectly, actually is better than most Rs except the asp and some top of the line ones.

You can film fine all night at 0.95. Daytime you need an ND and a circular Pol. Then you can do lots of very unique shots. In moody and cloudy days it should be pure heaven to film with this lens!

However... I think is r-i-d-iculously and unacceptably overpriced. I value it at 5k but we don't live in a fair world. so 11k it is. I have the GH4 and the Voigtlanders 17, 25, 42mm and soon the 10mm all F:0.95 all for 6k (including 2 xlrs) and can take same or Better shots (night and lightwise) but in 4k only.

You get better dynamic range and 6k with Dragon for a Lot LOT LOT more $. So overall Dragon + Leica 0.95 wins but you need to pay really good....
It feels like is made from lead also. Very heavy. Does not bother me at all (for that quality I'll take double that weight) but it is heavy.

These are some quick and dirty shots I took yesterday night: http://3dmovies.com/Gal/4-Mk/ In the videos you do Not see any grain!