Do we really need to buy newer Leica lenses?

[raid]

In the age of large sensors in cameras such as the M10-R or SL-2, is it still OK to use older Leica lenses with such cameras? How about cameras with 24MP sensors? I know that my older lenses work will well with the M8 and the M9. Of course, old M lenses mount correctly on (say) a regular M10, but will I make good use of the 24MP snesor with lenses such as a Rigid Summicron or pre-asph Summilux or a 1936 Zeiss Sonnar?

Are we actually "losing" something when we use large sensor cameras or are we losing something when we use older lenses with such cameras? I do not think that I will sell my older lenses because I enjoy using them on any of my M mount cameras.

Thanks for your feedback.

 

[robert blu]

In your place I would use them on your new M10, without doubt. And you'll be pleased.

And I would be notafraid to use them on a 40 MP camera, just me!

 

[raid]

Hello Robert. I also believe that there is no need for the "ultimate" lenses that are made these days. I will use whatever Lenses I happen to own with my M10. You have an M10, and you know what works well with such a camera. Your 28mm lens is "modern". My newest lens may be the Zeiss ZM 35/2.

 

[Timmyjoe]

Well, from the guy who uses 1940's & 1950's Nikkor glass with my Leica M9M and ME, I'd say ABSOLUTELY NOT. But it all depends on what "look" you're going for.

Best,
-Tim

 

[Tim Gray]

Not conversant enough on the details, but high resolution sensors do benefit lenses with less resolution. That is not to say that old lenses necessarily have low resolution. But the basic idea is the final result is limited by the lowest resolution in the imaging chain. I think it is the product of the MTFs of the components? So bumping up the resolution of the sensor will boost performance of a lens.

The more important answer is that if you like the result...

 

[raid]

I associate Leica with vintage look in images, whatever this means to you.
I like to hear that larger sensors will benefit old lenses.

 

[Calzone]

Raid,

I own a 50 Lux-SL and the APO 35 Cron-L. As far perfection goes thes lenses are said to be "future-proofed" to 100-120 MP or three to four generations of sensor development out.

I still own my old SL, even though I own a SL2. The old SL is still a great camera as far as IQ goes, but the SL2 really exploits the newer glass the most.

The big difference in performance is not so much in IQ, but really in speed, ergonomics (layout), and menu. The SL gets left behind because it is rather primitive as the SL2 is really-really much more advanced.

I also will say that on my Monochrom (MM) that certain old lenses work wonderfully and are magical on my MM like the 35/1.8 Nikkor in LTM. As far as sharpness goes it has enough that I still can print big (20x30 image size on 24x36 sheet) and the single coated glass offers wonderful contrast.

Also my favorite lens for my MM is the first version 28 Cron. The second version is more perfect optically, but the rendering of the first version is mucho pretty.

I own lots of old single coated glass, but these lenses show off their limitations a bit too much. An example for me is the black version 28/3.5 Canon in LTM. I love this lens for film.

The rendering is retro with soft corners that somewhat sharpen up stopped down, the contrast is low, and perhaps the center sharpness is good enough, espcially if stopped down to F5.6 to utilize as a pancake like point and shoot using a "kill-zone" approach to make a digital a point and shoot.

In real life I mount the Nikkor 35/1.8 in LTM over the 28/3.5 Canon, while the 28 Cron V.1 provides me enough of the modern look.

In my case basically I use eaither the 35/1.8 Nikkor or the 28 Cron and don't need any other lenses.

No need to go too crazy. Just find out what works for you.

Also know that the way I expoit the SL2 is with modern glass, 50 Lux and 35 Cron mentioned, but it is really great to go with two rigged cameras with the APO 35 Cron on the SL and 50 Lux on the SL2.

I don't frequently downsize to MF lenses, mainly because I'm spoiled, also because it is faster, but also because I'm lazy.

Cal

 

[Godfrey]

In the age of large sensors in cameras such as the M10-R or SL-2, is it still OK to use older Leica lenses with such cameras? How about cameras with 24MP sensors? I know that my older lenses work will well with the M8 and the M9. Of course, old M lenses mount correctly on (say) a regular M10, but will I make good use of the 24MP snesor with lenses such as a Rigid Summicron or pre-asph Summilux or a 1936 Zeiss Sonnar?

Are we actually "losing" something when we use large sensor cameras or are we losing something when we use older lenses with such cameras? I do not think that I will sell my older lenses because I enjoy using them on any of my M mount cameras.

The answers to questions like these depend upon what you're trying to achieve. If you're looking for the absolute finest performance in your photographs, as measured by the specifications of resolution, lack of aberration, across the film plane illumination, lack of coma and astigmatism, etc etc etc, then you must (and I use the term tongue in cheek) go with the very latest, best lenses made for the sensor recording medium.

If, on the other hand, you are looking to develop expressive photography to the best of your abilities and you prefer (and I use the term with the same tongue in cheek intent as above) the look and feel of what your older lenses produce, with all their pleasant defects and aberrations, stick with what you have and see how you like it.

A higher resolution recording medium like the latest digital camera sensors will surface more lens defects, perhaps even to the point of calling them degradations, but it will also bring out the nice bits of the lenses that little bit more as well. Most of the stuff spoken in caveat about high resolution sensors and motivating anxiety about lens quality required, minimum aperture needed, shutter speed requirements for stability, etc etc, is just a bunch of hooey driven by some tiny grain of theoretical truth blown up into a big "OMG I need to buy everything NEW or I'm gonna get garbage!" hysteria. Equipment marketers love that thinking. LOL!

I use a range of Hasselblad and Leica lenses made from 1963 to the present on my Hasselblad 907x Special Edition's 2020 generation of the 33x44mm, 50Mpixel resolution sensor. And most of the lenses work very nicely indeed, warts and all, and look better than they did on lower resolution, older sensors. Newer models of the same lenses may indeed perform better, and the new Hasselblad XCD series lenses work best of all on this camera and sensor, but I'm not rushing to Ebay to offload all my beautiful lenses to buy one or two more of the XCDs any time soon. I like what I get out of the camera with these lovely old lenses.

Buy a body that you want to work with and try out what you have. Make decisions about what to keep and what to upgrade based upon what you see, not what others' opinions say. It's the only way to go, IMO.

G

 

[robert blu]

To clarify the thinking behind my previous post (#2) I think when you use an old lens you look for "the mood" more than for the high definitiona modern lens could give.

Edit: Godfrey expressed my idea better than I did, thanks G 🙂

 

[raid]

Thank you very much, gentlemen. This is very useful information to me. I am not a professional photographer, and I don't have pressure on me to create specific type photo prints.

Your wise words:

"But it all depends on what "look" you're going for."

"The more important answer is that if you like the result..."


"No need to go too crazy. Just find out what works for you."

"Make decisions about what to keep and what to upgrade based upon what you see, not what others' opinions say. It's the only way to go, IMO."

" I think when you use an old lens you look for "the mood" more than for the high definitiona modern lens could give."

 

[ninadp]

More than a few "new" Leica lenses have pretty old designs—decades old, in some cases. So if newer sensors indeed required newer lenses, then the only option would be to get the SL/SL2 and use those ginormous lenses that were evidently designed for "digital only." Even the 2012 APO Summicron 50 will not be good enough, nor would my 2020 Summicron 50.

 

[raid]

More than a few "new" Leica lenses have pretty old designs—decades old, in some cases. So if newer sensors indeed required newer lenses, then the only option would be to get the SL/SL2 and use those ginormous lenses that were evidently designed for "digital only." Even the 2012 APO Summicron 50 will not be good enough, nor would my 2020 Summicron 50.

I really considered getting SL/SL2 after a long thread in which Cal generously shared his experiences with his cameras. I went back and forth about it, until I chose the M10 for size and weight and not needing the L lenses for ultimate performance.

 

[Guth]

Interesting question. In the past I was under the impression that most people purchased a Leica camera primarily for the purpose of (as well as the association with) Leitz glass. Browsing about on the web these days I get the impression that few Leica camera owners today actually use Leica glass, so the answer would seem to be no. In which case leads me to ponder what exactly is the attraction to Leica cameras for those same owners today?

 

[Calzone]

Interesting question. In the past I was under the impression that most people purchased a Leica camera primarily for the purpose of (as well as the association with) Leitz glass. Browsing about on the web these days I get the impression that few Leica camera owners today actually use Leica glass, so the answer would seem to be no. In which case leads me to ponder what exactly is the attraction to Leica cameras for those same owners today?

Guth,

You ask a good question, but there are lots of answers.

I bought film M-bodies for the "Rangefinder" experience. With film M's I'll use any lens that fits, but I tend to love old retro lenses that are single coated and have a vintage look. I have mucho LTM glass of all kinds, and the only single coated Leica lense I own is a Version 1 50 Rigid with the narrow focus ring. I have a 50 nickle Elmar, but I think that lens has no coating.

For my Monochrom I use either the 28 Cron, V.1, the 35/1.8 Nikkor in LTM, or 50 Rigid.

The SL and SL2 I bought for 3 reasons: that I could mount all of my legacy glass I own, that I could exploit AF for shooting fashion and fo my gal's fashion blog (742K follower's and she is a GoDaddy girl), and for its speed and weatherproofing.

On the SL and SL2, even though I have all this lens compatability, I find I really only use just two MF lenses on my SL and SL2: a 58/1/2 Noct-Nikkor, and a 50 Lux-R "E60" both which are great enough that I don't have GAS for a Noctilux.

The IBIS on the SL2 is valuable and a good reason alone to buy a SL2.

For MF wides though a rangefinder I like best.

The APO 35 Cron is a crazy lens. Who else makes APO wides.

Cal

 

[ninadp]

Interesting question. In the past I was under the impression that most people purchased a Leica camera primarily for the purpose of (as well as the association with) Leitz glass. Browsing about on the web these days I get the impression that few Leica camera owners today actually use Leica glass, so the answer would seem to be no. In which case leads me to ponder what exactly is the attraction to Leica cameras for those same owners today?

I think it’s because Leica glass has become absurdly expensive. If a 3rd party lens can give you 90% of the performance at 20% of the cost, the argument for expensive lenses starts to fall apart. I think some specific 3rd party lenses are good enough that you would get an M body just to use those.

 

[raid]

Interesting question. In the past I was under the impression that most people purchased a Leica camera primarily for the purpose of (as well as the association with) Leitz glass. Browsing about on the web these days I get the impression that few Leica camera owners today actually use Leica glass, so the answer would seem to be no. In which case leads me to ponder what exactly is the attraction to Leica cameras for those same owners today?

I own many (older) Leica lenses. This is why I love using Leica cameras with them. I have 35mm, 50mm, 75mm, 90mm, and 135mm Leica lenses. Some are slow, like the Summaron 35/3.5 and some are fast, like the Summilux 75/1.4. I own also the Nikkor 35/1.8 LTM that Cal likes to use. I also have the Millenium 50/1.4 that can be used on on M camera with an adapter (which I do). I love using the Rigid Summicron 50/2. I don't know about Cal's special version with thin focus ring and single coating. I sometimes use a 1936 Zeiss 50/1.5 ltm, which most likely is uncoated.

 

[raydm6]

For me no. I haven't been compelled to but actually enjoy the signature/characteristic of older Leica glass.

 

[Bill Blackwell]

There was a time not long ago that if a certain FL could be had Leica branded I wouldn't settle for anything else. However, over the years I've done some extensive non-scientific tests between Leica and Zeiss lenses and found, in many cases, the only differences are color renditions. I do prefer the warmer/bluer color renderings Leica lenses offer, but not at their substantial cost differences. But I still have two "irreplaceable" Leica lenses: a 50mm Asph Summilux and a 90mm Elmarit-M.

CV lenses are a mixed bag though. Some are "good enough" while others are exceptional. Those "good enough" are < 5% lenses (28mm Ultron and 75mm Heliar Classic), but both render outstanding Bokeh.

There is one significant advantage to owning Leica lenses though - that is that they maintain their value!

 

[David Hughes]

A long, long time ago I realised that the film Leica II and the (coated) Summitar plus the Summaron and Elmarit 90mm would be more than enough.

Alas, by then I had a lot more...

On the digital side the Olympus E-500 and the mid range lenses and a little P&S for the pocket would do me nicely.


Regards, David


PS or even the FED-2 and Summitar...

 

[Darthfeeble]

I have a detail fetish so I bought a Fuji GFX, shot my 15mm VIII CV lens on it and couldn't find a flaw. I might not be the most critical out there but so far as I could tell it was superb. I found the GFX too heavy for my delicate condition so I bought a Nikon Z7 and used the same lens on it with even better results in that it doesn't vignette. I've used my CV 75, a Canon LTM 50/1.4, and a few other older CV lenses and all seem to do just fine on the large sensors.