how special of leica glass?

M

monster

Established
Local time
2:48 PM
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
82
hi

i think about leica lens. so obsess:p


looking to pricelist in camera store catalogue and think the price that more expensive than competitors that delivered more spacial glass. more quality.


not so true, but i see many leica glass that produce different result.

how they do that. or this is my bias.
 
In todays world, unlike the 30's through the 50's, there are many excellent lens makers making equal if not better lenses. No one manufacture makes the "best" of every lens. Leica may have it in one FL and another maker in another FL. Leica have an advantage in one focal length and Zeiss in another where Canon or Nikon in another.
 
Last edited:
x-ray said:
In todays world, unlike the 30's through the 50's, there are many excellent lens makers making equal if not better lenses. No one manufacture makes the "best" of every lens. Leica may have it in one FL and another maker in another FL. Leica have an advantage in one focal length and Zeiss in another where Canon or Nikon in another.
Click to expand...

I'm trying to buy some lenses for the M6 I purchased about 2 weeks ago. Where do these advantages lay?
 
I'm going to guess from your grammar you're Asian or a native Asian language speaker.

You want these lenses for the same reason my Japanese wife is obsessed with Louis Vuitton bags, which are just overpriced plastic.

They have done their marketing extremely well, plus the high price creates a situation where you think "something HAS to be better about them", and in terms of societal status/face, you want badly to own them.

This desire transcends reason and intellect, and those who sell luxury goods understand your mentality VERY well.
 
M. Valdemar said:
I'm going to guess from your grammar you're Asian or a native Asian language speaker.

You want these lenses for the same reason my Japanese wife is obsessed with Louis Vuitton bags, which are just overpriced plastic.

They have done their marketing extremely well, plus the high price creates a situation where you think "something HAS to be better about them", and in terms of societal status/face, you want badly to own them.

This desire transcends reason and intellect, and those who sell luxury goods understand your mentality VERY well.
Click to expand...

Blasphemy!

Of course since I don't own any Leica glass or cameras, I can speak with total confidence. :D I have never been enthralled with the idea of owning Leica. I have found cameras and lenses that I think rival Leica in quality. Remember, I don't have any for comparison, I can only go with what I read here and elsewhere. Even if I were to conceed Leica were better, it would be an insignificant amount compared to the price difference.

For all who own and prefer Leica, good for you. It just isn't for me. If I want to splurge, I will go for Zeiss glass for my Kiev. I have a 50mm f/1.4 T* lens for SLR that I am very fond of. But even there, I don't think they are worth the price difference. Canon, Minolta, Nikon, and (of course) Fujica have all produced good glass.

I think if you get a good quality but less expensive lens, technique will be more important than glass.

Just my 2 cents.
 
It's just a desire to own the fantasized equipment.

Hours and years will be spent analyzing the qualities of various lenses, debating the "bokeh", testing the "sharpness", but I think less than one in a million is even capable of coming close to exploiting the full quality of any brand name lens.

Call it for what it is, this whole Leica thing is a fetish. Nothing wrong with that. You might like leather corsets, rubber boots or cling wrap, the language of "Leica" is the same as any other otaku fetish group.

Most hard core Leicaphiles love the gear collecting more than the photos. More interesting than collecting stamps for sure, a big online support group to agree with you, and one can dress up in "photography" regalia such as fancy carry bags, vests, big hats and spend the day indulging your fetish with an expensive totem hanging around your neck. Maybe even snap a photo of the dog or a sleeping bum once in a while too.

Make's 'ya feel grand and superior, and all that, look down the nose at the clueless dweebs with their Canon digital point and shoots.....
 
Exactly. Up until the late 1950's some name-brand lenses could boast a clear superiority over lesser lenses.

By the mid 1970's, any major differences between any brand of lens was gone.

Even cheap no-name lenses were not that much worse than those ten or twenty times as expensive.


leicasniper said:
Once computers entered the lens design process, significant differences went away where decent quality lenses were concerned. Even cheap kit lenses blow away some of the "celebrity glass" of an earlier era. Yes, more expensive lenses use better plastic or more substantial metal construction. But, optically, computer design has leveled the playing field greatly. Where it might take years to produce a new design "back in the day," a designer with a computer can run through hundreds of permutations of the design in hours.

As long as you don't bottom feed, most modern lenses are as good as we are with handheld cameras.
Click to expand...
 
CharlesBoyer said:
I'm trying to buy some lenses for the M6 I purchased about 2 weeks ago. Where do these advantages lay?
Click to expand...
Within your own eye. For a newcomer to RFs there is a dizzying choice. I would get one or at the most two lenses to begin with. Rangefinders excel at the middle distances, good choices for a pair are 28/50 or 35/75. Good choice for three is 35/50/90. What do you like in an image? The low contrast "softer" look of vintage lenses or the higher contrast and much sharper modern lenses?
 
I confess that my skill level doesn't merit anything even close to leica economics, at least the currently in vogue items. So, I'm in the process of selling that portion of my kit (acquired when I was flush with cash and GAS). I'll keep several Canon LTM and 70s vintage Leica lenses I like, and concentrate on better shooting ...
 
monster,
If you want some special lenses, that are as good or better than Leica, there's no problem, you can buy ANY of the current Zeiss ZM lenses to start with, then you could try lenses like CV 35/1.2 Nokton or 28/1.9 Ultron, and if still not satisfied, I'd suggest you buy a Leica lens, which is actually "better" than today's Leica lens and costs not much: a rigid or DR Summicron from the early sixties. But above all, buy ANY lens and start taking pictures...
 
Leica glass is special. You can count on exceptional quality, performance, and reliability for all their lenses. Of course they must be compared with other lenses made during their time, but I've found their reliability and performance superior overall to most other lens makers, particularly starting in the 1950's. Zeiss and Nikon are very close to Leica in overall performance, Canon and a few others are very good. Modern Voigtlander exhibits very good performance, *especially for the money*, but it's not quite up to Leica standards. The problem with Leica of course is that it's expensive -- very expensive sometimes. (Sorry if these opinions ruffle a few feathers)

Some experts content that the differences are not due to the basic optical technologies used (designs, coating, materials, etc.) which are available to all, but to the quality control that Leica exerts in manufacturing, such as going beyond the ordinary to align and collimate the final lens. This sort of work of course is very labor intensive and this is reflected in the price of Leica products.
 
Last edited:
M. Valdemar said:
It's just a desire to own the fantasized equipment.

Hours and years will be spent analyzing the qualities of various lenses, debating the "bokeh", testing the "sharpness", but I think less than one in a million is even capable of coming close to exploiting the full quality of any brand name lens.

Call it for what it is, this whole Leica thing is a fetish. Nothing wrong with that. You might like leather corsets, rubber boots or cling wrap, the language of "Leica" is the same as any other otaku fetish group.

Most hard core Leicaphiles love the gear collecting more than the photos. More interesting than collecting stamps for sure, a big online support group to agree with you, and one can dress up in "photography" regalia such as fancy carry bags, vests, big hats and spend the day indulging your fetish with an expensive totem hanging around your neck. Maybe even snap a photo of the dog or a sleeping bum once in a while too.

Make's 'ya feel grand and superior, and all that, look down the nose at the clueless dweebs with their Canon digital point and shoots.....
Click to expand...

I'd love to disagree with you. Really, I would. But unfortunately, I agree with you.:)
 
M. Valdem ar
You are Fierce like your Avatar :)
but Spot on in your Critique :cool:

Loved the Fred Spira article

Best-Helen
 
M. Valdemar said:
It's just a desire to own the fantasized equipment.

Hours and years will be spent analyzing the qualities of various lenses, debating the "bokeh", testing the "sharpness", but I think less than one in a million is even capable of coming close to exploiting the full quality of any brand name lens.

Call it for what it is, this whole Leica thing is a fetish. Nothing wrong with that. You might like leather corsets, rubber boots or cling wrap, the language of "Leica" is the same as any other otaku fetish group.

Most hard core Leicaphiles love the gear collecting more than the photos. More interesting than collecting stamps for sure, a big online support group to agree with you, and one can dress up in "photography" regalia such as fancy carry bags, vests, big hats and spend the day indulging your fetish with an expensive totem hanging around your neck. Maybe even snap a photo of the dog or a sleeping bum once in a while too.

Make's 'ya feel grand and superior, and all that, look down the nose at the clueless dweebs with their Canon digital point and shoots.....
Click to expand...
I do not agree with these statements. I own only two Leica lenses at the moment as I cannot afford more (although I've had more in the past), and that is enough for me to understand why they they command the prices they do. Leica's popularity with photographers who make a living at what they do attests to this as well. I don't know any Leica owners who like to look down on people and carry an attitude about what they own. I do know a lot of Leica owners however who understand what professional quality glass and metal is about and know how to use it.

A lot of Leica dissing is really envy by those who cannot afford Leica, or have a misunderstanding of what Leica is by those who have no experience with the Leica system. One can do excellent work without Leica of course, but that's no reason to disrespect those who can purchase or are willing to sacrifice to afford the best. I certainly don't disdain those with full Leica kits -- my ambition is to join them -- I think they have it right.
 
David Murphy said:
I do not agree with these statements. I own only two Leica lenses at the moment as I cannot afford more (although I've had more in the past), and that is enough for me to understand why they they command the prices they do. Leica's popularity with photographers who make a living at what they do attests to this as well. I don't know any Leica owners who like to look down on people and carry an attitude about what they own. I do know a lot of Leica owners however who understand what professional quality glass and metal is about and know how to use it.

A lot of Leica dissing is really envy by those who cannot afford Leica, or have a misunderstanding of what Leica is by those who have no experience with the Leica system. One can do excellent work without Leica of course, but that's no reason to disrespect those who can purchase or are willing to sacrifice to afford the best. I certainly don't disdain those with full Leica kits -- my ambition is to join them -- I think they have it right.
Click to expand...

Leica is not popular with people who make a living as photographers. I've lived all over the country and met thousands of photographers and not one of the pros I have met over the last 14 yrs that I myself have been a professional has been a Leica user. Not one. Virtually ALL of them use either Canon or Nikon if they shoot 35mm or digital, and Hasselblad or Mamiya if they still use medium format film. Even in the realm of journalism or documentary photography only a handful (a few hundred likely) of the many thousands of professional photojournalists in the world shoot Leicas. The rest use digital SLRs and that means Nikon or Canon. Here and there you'll meet a pro, like me, who shoots Olympus's old OM system and the occasional Minolta or Pentax user. They're rare though.

Why don't many pros shoot Leica? The cameras are beautifully made and the lenses are top-notch, but the prices are simply way out of the budget for professionals who have to earn more money than they spend for gear to feed themselves. Few pros make enough to afford Leica, and that's sad that the company has priced the most important buyers out of its system. I'd like to have a Leica, but if I buy one it'll be 50 yrs old and beat up, not a new one. I can buy a Nikon D3 that works with the many Nikon AF lenses I own for less than a Leica MP with 50mm lens costs new, and the Nikon is a more useful, versatile camera for professional use.
 
Yes well I do not agree. I am talking about classical artists not photojournalists or wedding/portrait/newspaper folks. I can name a lot of names, just check out the books and galleries, but I think the general Leica bashing here has gone on long enough so that's the last I'm going to say.



Chriscrawfordphoto said:
Leica is not popular with people who make a living as photographers. I've lived all over the country and met thousands of photographers and not one of the pros I have met over the last 14 yrs that I myself have been a professional has been a Leica user. Not one. Virtually ALL of them use either Canon or Nikon if they shoot 35mm or digital, and Hasselblad or Mamiya if they still use medium format film. Even in the realm of journalism or documentary photography only a handful (a few hundred likely) of the many thousands of professional photojournalists in the world shoot Leicas. The rest use digital SLRs and that means Nikon or Canon. Here and there you'll meet a pro, like me, who shoots Olympus's old OM system and the occasional Minolta or Pentax user. They're rare though.

Why don't many pros shoot Leica? The cameras are beautifully made and the lenses are top-notch, but the prices are simply way out of the budget for professionals who have to earn more money than they spend for gear to feed themselves. Few pros make enough to afford Leica, and that's sad that the company has priced the most important buyers out of its system. I'd like to have a Leica, but if I buy one it'll be 50 yrs old and beat up, not a new one. I can buy a Nikon D3 that works with the many Nikon AF lenses I own for less than a Leica MP with 50mm lens costs new, and the Nikon is a more useful, versatile camera for professional use.
Click to expand...
 
Chriscrawfordphoto said:
I'd like to have a Leica, but if I buy one it'll be 50 yrs old and beat up, not a new one.
Click to expand...

lucky you! Leica lenses from the late 50's, early sixties, are my favourite glass by far.

i love Leica glass but then again there are so many other brands out there i can't wait to discover. i'm into the character of the glass, the feel of the focus, the weight balance on my camera.

to trash Leica is ridiculous. to say it is the only way to go is ridiculous. to each his own.

is Leica glass special? yes! but so are many others. the best thin to do is actually get your hands on different lenses and see what feels right and gives you the look you want. if you find a lens you love, you're likely to take more pictures...

i'd personally rather have one piece of glass that i'm mad about than waste my money on a few different bargain lenses that i'm not satisfied with. the best of both worlds, would be to fall in love with a bargain lens, and in this day and age it seems easy to do. you'll only ever know if you try.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom