Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register 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 vs Zeiss ZE for stills and motion

A

Alberto Guglielmi

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 6, 2015
Messages
308
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Los Angeles
I have a bunch of M glass for my Leica, but I have been mainly using Zeiss ZE on my RED (Epic Dragon). I have the M mount, but it is limiting for the wide angles.
I have been able to pull decent stills out of footage using the Zeiss. But I am missing a bit of that Leica feel. My work is mainly narrative, but I need to be able to use the camera for stills.

Reason I went with the Zeiss in first place was price and their sharpness.
How do the Leica R compare to the Zeiss, on a RED, in term of sharpness?

I have seen plenty of beautiful shots in the other thread that is going on forever. But I was wondering if anyone compared ZE vs R directly with the focus on pulling stills and not only footage.
While I know that stills sharpness depends on many variables, I am trying to focus just on the lens part of it.
 
Hi Alberto - there's a wide range of Leica R's - early to late, collector condition vs rode hard and put away wet beat-down Lenses...

ZEs are darn sharp, Contax and Leica are sharp too if in great condition - biggest difference is "draw" or feeling. Coatings make a huge difference in color.

if you ever want to do a comparison - there are some CP2's (basically same exact thing as ZE with expanded focus) and vintage contax at Digital Film Studios - 818-771-0019 and also a decent selection of Leica R in EF and PL mount - for comparison.

hope that's helpful ! I enjoy the Leica coatings more generally, but there is something nice about Zeiss ze especially compared to Canon EF.... I'm also a giant Sigma Advocate... Art series to me personally are a spiritual "modern" successor to the Leica R's... Like if Leica purpose built a modern line of digital lenses for EF mount with the latest techniques for mass production. Great pricing too.
 
Thanks Dan.
I like the ART. Only plus of the Leica R for me is that I can use them on the Leica M if needed. I would buy the ART in a second if it wasn't for that.
I'll rent the R and do a comparison. I have the ZE with me, so that is easy enough. Thanks for the suggestion.
 
You'll want to check and make sure your m to r adaptor doesn't protrude too much to damage your epic. Most people have their R lenses fitted with a Leitex canon mount and then just use the canon mount on their epic.

You shouldn't think about R lenses about their straight up sharpness. While their are certain lenses in the series that are indeed amazingly sharp and clear its also about focus falloff, bokeh, and sharpness all together as a whole. If you want straight amazing sharp and cleanest you can get then you'll probably want Zeiss Otus. R series lenses have a vast range and depend on the model, version of that model, & year it was made.
 
If you are on a budget the Zeiss ZF/ZE are best value (apart from Sigma Art). Because to get good late Leica R's you have to spend a fair bit. Older Leica R's are not as sharp and the coating are pretty old and a lot flare in a way that's not so pleasing... and some flare beautiful and the look is great on them... They just render beautiful.. and are full manual which I like. Built quality is another thing which might or might not be important for you.
I got Leica R Zeiss ZF and Otus and they all have their place...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top