Do we really need to buy newer Leica lenses?

[KM-25]

Too many "we" in there RAID, you mean do *you* need to buy newer Leica lenses, right?

It's too subjective to lump everyone in a one size fits all assumption and no offense but by saying "we" you come off sounding like some kind of authority figure.

I have a 50 Rigid I use on my M3, I have a 50 F2 V5 I use on my M10-P. I have a 35mm Summicron V4 I use on my M6 and M10P and I have a 35mm 1.4FLE I use on the same cameras. It's about the photos for me, that's about it.

 

[raid]

Like "we the people"? 🙂

I meant it as "we" since so many people have posted online suggestions that were meant to be for all photographers.
These suggestions made me use the term "we".
I was not told "Raid, get such lenses".
I was told that with such a camera such lenses are needed.
I took from it that "we" were advised ....

 

[ninadp]

It's too subjective to lump everyone in a one size fits all assumption and no offense but by saying "we" you come off sounding like some kind of authority figure.

The only way “we” can be read as an authority figure is if it were a Royal “We”. Since Raid is invoking the Preamble to the Constitution here, it should be safe to assume that it is, in fact, quite a republican framing and likely anti-monarchist. 😀 😛

 

[raid]

Anti monarchy of course!
When I submit a manuscript for publication , I submit also a cover letter to the editor. I always use “we” and not “I”.

Maybe this is why I used it here.

 

[jsrockit]

No, you do not need new lenses...not with 24mp, not with 40mp. It’s not like they suddenly become blurry at a certain megapixel.

 

[raid]

No, you do not need new lenses...not with 24mp, not with 40mp.

This is a good answer to my question.
It is what I was hoping for.

 

[Darthfeeble]

There is also the editorial We.........

 

[KM-25]

No, you do not need new lenses...not with 24mp, not with 40mp. It’s not like they suddenly become blurry at a certain megapixel.

Yes and no, kind of and it is subjective.

I found once I went above 36MP I noticed that previously good glass became a bit too "theatrical" in it's short comings in regards to making good use of the higher pixel density. Specifically this happened when I got my D850. I had to sell and replace some lenses that I had come to rely on quite a bit for high quality image making for commercial work.

When I use my version 4 35mm Summicron on my M10-P, I feel pretty limited in what I can use for in commercial work. It is more of an effect lens for documentary at that point. So I end up putting on my 35mm 1.4 FLE even though the extra size and weight is not always welcome. I have full confidence in it though and in the case of going back and forth within a given day with regards to commercial to documentary style work I need that corner to corner consistency.

I love the size of the 35mm V4 Summicron, but I wish it were sharper in the corners, I am not big on equipment effect like I am on what I put into the image effect.

So I think in theory your answer was suitable, but again, it is highly dependent on what the photographer is looking for out of the overall image and above all, is subjective.

There is no we, LOL!

 

[jsrockit]

Yes and no, kind of and it is subjective.

I found once I went above 36MP I noticed that previously good glass became a bit too "theatrical" in it's short comings in regards to making good use of the higher pixel density. Specifically this happened when I got my D850. I had to sell and replace some lenses that I had come to rely on quite a bit for high quality image making for commercial work.

I can understand that... if the commercial work has certain requirements, that makes sense. I was referring to Raid really. I could be wrong, but he seems more of the non-commercial, family photography type.

So I think in theory your answer was suitable, but again, it is highly dependent on what the photographer is looking for out of the overall image and above all, is subjective.

There is no we, LOL!

I will concede and agree. It really is dependent on the photographer and their needs. However, I think great photos can still be made with older lenses on high res sensors. The point I wanted to make was that a higher resolution sensor will not suddenly make your lens horrible... it will simply show its flaws a bit more. AND only if you are printing at full res or higher.

 

[raid]

I agree with both posts above. It depends what type of photography you do. I can also see what Cal means when he uses the latest lenses for his work related photography.

 

[zuiko85]

Ignorance is bliss. Not a Leica digital user but my mid 60’s Olympus Pen F half frame lenses are all I have for my m4:3 camera, the widest only a 20mm (40mm E). They are good enough for the 16MP sensor.

I have no doubt the $250 to $1000 M-Zuikos made for the camera are ‘better’ but short of traveling a couple hundred miles to find a store to try one out, I’ll never see that personally. (And not in my budget anyway.)

 

[taffy]

Hi Raid!

My suggestion would be for you to try on what you already own on your new M10 and seeing if you like the results. Like you, my upgrade path was from the CCD sensors (M8 in my case) to the M10 -- it actually took me a few weeks to fall in love with the M10 and I was using the same lenses as w the M8.

I think older lenses on sensors like that of the M10 have their own charm. Just yesterday I was shooting a 1936 5cm/1.5 Leitz with my M10 and the images were not as soft as they rendered on the M8. I think now it's pretty useable for my tastes. And having the 50 ZM Planar and the 35 C-Biogon, shot on the M10 they can render really clinical and ultra sharp images which I sometimes find a bit extreme. This is why I'm looking at maybe a vintage Canon 50 1.4 to get the look I currently desire.

This is why you may want to try out your big collection of lenses first and see if there's anything you objectively like and maybe search for a lens when you know your lineup doesn't get you there.

All the best!

Taffy

(That said, I'd still love to own a 50 Lux ASPH-- it's just such a handsome lens!)

 

[Rob-F]

Using legacy lenses with the M10 makes sense in the same way as playing a state of the art digital CD player through tube-type amplifiers. The clinical digital sound is tamed by the more pleasing musical sound of tubes. The clinical look of a digital photo could be softened by using legacy lenses with character.

You are the artist. If the gear you use gives you the look you wanted, then it's right. No one else can decide this.

 

[Benjamin Marks]

Raid: One more caveat - the lenses -- of whatever vintage -- ought to be internally clean to achieve their best performance on whatever medium. Case in point: I bought a Pentax K-1 a couple of years ago and "bought again" several manual focus prime lenses that I loved int the 1980's when using a K1000 and an LX. I was surprised when the 100/2.8 and the 120/2.8 delivered sub-par performance on the K-1's sensor. This presented itself as low-contrast across the frame, compared to new lenses. These older long-ish lenses had been a staple of my portrait photography for years back when Ilford Delta and HP-5+ were my go-to films.

I have a Summitar that Sherry K. cleaned up for me about ten years ago. Now that's a performer (just don't shoot into the light . . .)

 

[Benjamin Marks]

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.

LOL. "Good enough" for what? Once I can count individual eyebrow hairs on my subject, the system is performing at the resolution levels that I need. On a normal or tele lens, I think that old designs are fine -- or likely to be if the lenses are clean and the coatings are undamaged. Wide angles are another matter, as I think we have all found. The camera and lens need to be "talking" IMHO to get the results I want in the corners on anything wider than a 28.

 

[huddy]

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 wanted Leica for the rangefinder experience and expectation that I'd have a serviceable camera for FAR longer than what I might with the Ikon/Bessa. My budget only had room for something like a Voigtlander 35/2.4 or Zeiss ZM 35/2.8. I went with the latter and loved it. On the 2nd go round, I had about double the budget for a lens which was enough to consider something like a Summarit but I wanted a larger shooting window and ended up choosing the VM 35/1.7 based on TomA's photos/recommendations of the new at the time lens. It was and still is a great choice.

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.

Leica lenses (and the truly top end Nikon, Canon, etc.) lenses have always been expensive. The large amount of photo equipment produced allows older high end lenses to be within the reach of more photographers than they once were; 3rd party manufacturers have been hitting it out of the park on many lenses for the past 10+ years and don't carry all of the same manufacturing/business costs of Leica and are absolutely worth the cost. I'd enjoy owning and shooting some of the newer Summicron/Summilux lenses; however, they wouldn't make a meaningful difference in my photography and I enjoy deploying the financial resources for that elsewhere (film, chemicals, travels, SLR/MF systems, etc) so I focus on using 3rd party for my shooting.

In general, I don't see Leica gear collector/glass snobbery mindset here as this forum is pretty full of folks who are in pursuit of making great images and are glad to use all available tools for that end.

 

[Ricoh]

Older lenses with character are best, in my opinion, having looked at many images allowing a comparison between those and modern - near perfect - glass.
Anyway, from a personal perspective in the year of the “Covid”, I do not see sense in spending money on camera equipment that’s going to be underused.

 

[mcfingon]

Raid, I just finished reading a Reid Reviews comparison of a number of 28 and wider lenses on the M10-R, M10-P and M10M. My summary from his findings is that the older lenses are not shamed by the new sensors. He recommended the earlier version of the 28/2.8 Asph. Leica over the recently-revised one, even on the M10-R.
John Mc

 

[mapgraphs]

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.
...

G

To expand on this..., one must buy the native body that the very latest best lens was designed to work on; to get the most out of the in-camera software corrections, characteristics, that are applied for that specific lens... ; - )



The character of legacy lenses travels with them, regardless of whatever software corrections that might be available for them. The only caveat is that one must learn the lens... ; - )

 

[mapgraphs]

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.
...

G

To expand on this..., one must buy the native body that the very latest best lens was designed to work on; to get the most out of the in-camera software corrections, characteristics, that are applied for that specific lens... ; - )


The character of legacy lenses travels with them, regardless of whatever software corrections that might be available for them. The only caveat is that one must learn the lens... ; - )