Leica lenses and color

[chesapeake1787]

December 28, 2005

I have been a reader of this forum for some time.

Can anyone can give me advice on a Leica lens (or other) with rich color (yellows, blues and oranges). 15 years ago I had a bad experience with a used M4-P and 35mm summicron. The M4-P was a lemon and the summicron had been dropped or had oil leakage. Both are history, both were bought from major dealers.

In 2004, I purchased a new Olive Bessa R2 and a new 50mm summicron.

Which new or used Leica M mount and CV lenses have overly rich colors? How would one make photographs that have a stained glass or cubist painting type of color quality? Are Leica optics appropriate for this type of color? Can anyone comment on single-coated, multi-coated and super-coated optics?

As for focal length, I prefer normal to telephoto I was thinking 50mm, 75mm, 90mm or perhaps 35mm.

Best,

Dan Paul

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

Leica lenses are rather pretty neutral, with very few lenses with any color bias. So I'm sorry to disappoint, but you're not going to find a Leica M lens with "overly rich colors". Perhaps what you mean by this is contrast? Any modern Leica M lens has some pretty good contrast punch, specially the new ASPH lenses.

I don't know much about the CV lenses, except for the 35 Ultron that I own, which has good color and moderate contrast (some complain it's too low, I think it's just right).

 

[richard_l]

Which new or used Leica M mount and CV lenses have overly rich colors?

That's not what Leica or CV lenses are about. Certain films may exaggerate color, and you can always boost saturation in Photoshop; but high quality lenses are designed for accuracy.

 

[captainslack]

If you want to boost colors, shoot a slide film known like Fuji Velvia. I'd think (stress: my opinion) your Summicron with its fabled sharpness and Velvia's vaunted color might be what you're after.

 

[ray_g]

As others have mentioned, film and photoshop are variables you can manipulate to achieve the effect you desire. Color enhancing filters may also help.

All things being equal, the leica lenses are biased toward cyan, and may have a colder, more clinical look, especially the newer lenses. Zeiss lenses are biased toward red, and tend to give you warmer colors.

Re the zeiss lenses, I have no experience with the G or M mount lenses, only with C/Y mount lenses, but the examples I have seen showed the same tendency.

I don't know if that helps you. In the end, you may just have to experiment with different lenses and film combinations to get the effect you want.

 

[chesapeake1787]

Thanks, a clarification

Thanks, a clarification

A clarification. I am trying to find a lens(es) or technique that captures the light around subjects and that renders hues, reflections, or emitting or reflecting steady, suffused, or glowing light accurately – mostly available low light?

Best,

Daniel

 

[richard_l]

Daniel, I'll bet you would really like the Leica Noctilux wide open. It is amazing in that it almost never produces flare from light sources in the image, yet it epitomizes the legendary Leica glow. It's a bit pricey, however.

 

[jlw]

A clarification. I am trying to find a lens(es) or technique that captures the light around subjects and that renders hues, reflections, or emitting or reflecting steady, suffused, or glowing light accurately – mostly available low light?

I don't think I understand that at all. Do you have any example pictures you can post that would illustrate the effects you're trying to capture?

In terms of color, different lenses do have different color 'personalities' -- but the differences are much smaller than those caused by film and processing. If you're shooting color negative film and sending it to an automated mass marketer for processing, the type of lens you use is going to be mostly irrelevant to the color rendition you get.

 

[chesapeake1787]

examples of subject matter

examples of subject matter

Let me try to quantify it.

Let’s say you have an orange, grapefruit, apple and pears on a white kitchen counter top – the orange reflects light across the counter in a shadow and it reflects a hue around the fruit. I find it hard to capture this likeness or quality on film – both the color reflected down the counter and within the subject.

Another example is an incandescent light on a cherry table or desk against a wall – that glow or hue is tough to capture. Reflections of light on/off of face’s under colored awnings in the city.

Another thread on the M RFF forum on the 50 Elmar has beautiful shots of Bergen, Norway – so if one wanted to capture the quality of light reflecting off the street and diffusing from the storefronts and streetlights – in color?

Does that help?

Best,

Daniel

 

[peterc]

I think you'll mostly want to experiment with film (rather than glass) and find one that works the way you want. A good slide film (slightly underexposed ... maybe 1/3 stop) or a slightly overexposed print film might give you the result you're seeking, but experimentation will be required to get things right depending on metering style etc.

On the lens issue, I find older, single (or uncoated) lenses give the best (most accurate) colour rendition. However, most of my experience in this is with early Nikkors.

Peter

 

[jlw]

Yes, that does make it clearer: it sounds as if you're interested in being able to capture subtle secondary colors caused by the colored object's interaction with light reflected by other colored objects. (In 3D rendering software this multiple interaction sometimes is referred to as "radiosity.")

Since radiosity effects are subtle, any part of your imaging process that imposes an overall color cast or boosts saturation or contrast is likely to distort them or wipe them out. Some lens aberrations, such as excessive flare or color fringing, probably would overpower the effect you seek, so choosing a conservative lens design with low aberration levels would be a good starting point. (Such lenses don't necessarily have to have "Leica" engraved on the front rim!)

Still, I suspect that your capture method (film and processing or digital imager and software) will play a much bigger role in your ability to capture radiosity effects than the lens you choose. For example, most slide films now seem formulated on the assumption that everyone wants a vivid, highly saturated color rendition (you Velvia lovers know who you are.) Yet, within a given color space, there's no way to boost saturation without sacrificing color range -- colors that otherwise would be slightly separated have to be lumped together to produce that saturated, "punchy" rendition.

So, in addition to a lens that doesn't impose much of a color fingerprint, I'd guess that you also would want to choose a film that emphasizes "natural" rather than "enhanced" color rendition; make sure you expose it correctly (even fairly small exposure errors would tend to lump similar colors together) and do your printing or scanning with care to avoid wiping out the effects that the film might have captured.

Now that I know what you're talking about (I think) I can understand why you want to capture this elusive quality -- but be prepared for a challenge! Good luck.

 

[chesapeake1787]

Thanks, and a few more questions

Thanks, and a few more questions

Thanks for the excellent responses, your knowledge of the subject is impressive. As with many things it seems almost counter-intuitive.

What lenses are conservative lens design with low aberration levels? 50 1.4 ASPH, 75 2 ASPH, Tri-Elmar, 50 2.8? Which single coated lenses come to mind? Which Nikkors?

Brian, what is an IR focus index? Thanks for the examples, both are beautiful. What is a calcium fluorite lens? Is this an older glass or an application type thing? What is the standard glass used in manufacture? The subtle colors on your daughters face reflected from the toy toys and a bit more “glow” is nearer to what I am trying to achieve.

In terms of film, I see two directions on the type of film. What 35mm are NC or natural color? Is there a portra NC in 35mm?

Thanks for your time and help on this one.

Best,

Daniel

 

[Fred]

Daniel, welcome to the forum. And thanks for a most interesting question.

I guess my first thoughts are to initially pick a lens with a moderate contrast, unfortunately these are not regular items sold new in todays RF market, the emphasis being on accuracy and sharpness as already stated. Then I guess you'd need something along the lines of a lens with accurate colour focus such as an APO lens (or a wide angle where this is less of an issue). This fits with the initial question of your tele lens preference.

So to place the feline in the aviary the next question is how close do you need to focus. Your example sugests that this should be quite close. This might rule ou the 90 cron asph among others but the Elmar 2.8 (not APO) or a Voigtlander Lanthar 90 (not quite APO but close) should do the trick, the Lanthar is a fantastic lens, I have one.

If I were in a position with an RF only, looking for the qualities that I 'think' your looking for then the MACRO-ELMAR-M 90mm f/4 or the new 75 cron 'might' fit the bill.

If I was looking for the qualities that I 'think' your looking for but not just RF, I'd look into the SLR lens alternatives also, lower contrast certainly with zooms.

Personally, with an SLR outfit and RF I prefer the RF. I've tried the MACRO-ELMAR-M 90mm f/4 at Leica UK and was very impressed, its compact and with the rather expensive macro adapter is very good indeed. Maybe one day I'll afford it (still cheaper than the cron asph). The Tri-elmar looks too wide angle for your needs.

 

[kanoot]

I'd like to suggest a slightly different approach. As far as I can tell by your descriptions of the color you are looking for first I would suggest working with different films and processing (scanning adjustments if thats your thing). Second, I would suggest looking at some of the russian lenses. I suggest this because I don't think you should look at $1000+ lenses with the idea of creating a singular and particular color effect and the russians are super cheap these days. My experience with them is that they do some interesting (and odd) things with color. They really are hit or miss and it is entirely possible that you end up with a complete dud but hell, buy another one and see how it does.

The reason I suggest this is that some shots I've made with my Jupiter 8 50mm resemble what you are describing (sorry, I dont have any to share that are readily available). Mine tack-sharp though it does have an odd bokeh to it. If you look on ebay you can find it for less than $50 too. I promise if you buy three of them they will each be quite different too.

Good luck and post a shot when it matches what you are looking for!

 

[StuartR]

Your 50mm summicron (really, any 50mm summicron) should be able to handle any task of photography you throw at it. Really, you are not going to find many lenses that have appreciably better performance, and if you do, they are being used to photograph terrorist training camps from orbit. The 50 cron is one of the very very best lenses in production, so stop worrying about that. Your real issue is film choice and an understanding of how film records light differently than a human eye. Films, particularly slide films are balanced for daylight...5500 Kelvin. The eye (well, the brain) automatically adjusts its balance based on the lighting situation. So the first step in reproducing the colors you want is to choose the correct film...the one that is balanced closest to the lighting situation you are in. For example, if you are outside under bright sun, choose E100G, if it is cloudy, choose E100GX, and if you are inside choose E64T. From there you may be required to fine tune your film's color performance by using filters. If you are not interested in retaining an entirely accurate color palette, then choose films like Fuji Velvia or E100VS, as they will give you more color saturation. If you really want crazy colors you can choose Fuji Fortia if you can order it from Japan, as it is designed to overemphasize certain areas of the color spectrum for "artistic" rendition. For even weirder effects, look into cross-processing. Of all these things -- light, film choice, filter choice -- the lens has by far the least impact. If you are interested in controling the color of your images, the lens is the last place to look. Don't get me started on photoshop...you can accomplish anything you can imagine in there...

 

[dll927]

I've read more than once that Leica lenses shine on black & white negative film. Given that many of them were originally formulated back when b/w ruled the roost, that may figure. It may be that they weren't as concerned with color rendition.

However, lets' be real. Most of us nowadays use color of one type or another, and I'm sure the boys in Wetzlar have managed to keep reasonably up-to-date. Like any of the rest of the crowd, they re-formulate lenses periodically. So your situation may be mainly a choice of which film you're using. Experiment around.

On another note- the SLR Leicas still don't have auto-focus because they don't consider it accurate enough, and they say they would have to re-formulate the lenses to accommodate it. Funny most of the others don't feel that way.

 

[Bertram2]

December 28, 2005
Which new or used Leica M mount and CV lenses have overly rich colors? H Are Leica optics appropriate for this type of color?
Dan Paul

Dan,
in general one can say that Leica lenses tend to a warmer, less contrasty tone, a bit like pastel compared to CV. Not what you are looking for I'd say.

CV in general is more contrasty (Zeiss like) and a bit cool, VERY different from the Crons tho the 1,4/50 is closer to the CVs it seems.
Extremely cool (blueish) and saturated is my CV 4/25, the 2,5/50 Skopar is similar and so the 50mm Nokton is, maybe this is less saturated, like the 1,7/35 . CV 75mm is more on the contrasty side again.

Regards,
Bertram