Leica LTM Lenses with a vintage look?

[landsknechte]

Here's my own strange twist on the standard issue "which lens is sharpest" thread... Which screwmount Leica lens(es) seems to most reliably create images that look "vintage" to your eyes?

 

[Chaser]

My pick is the Summitar. Does the trick for me.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/chaseallgood/153161815/

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=62582&ppuser=711

 

[mr_phillip]

I don't own one, but every time I see images that I think have that 'magical' vintage look to them, they inevitably came from a Summitar.

 

[payasam]

The Summitar, of course, but perhaps more so the otherwise inadequate Summar. I wouldn't rule out the Summaron 35/3.5 either.

 

[laptoprob]

Uncoated prewar Elmar, the lens that made Leica, what else?

 

[rover]

Well, upstairs I the following lenses have that "look"
Canon 35/2.8
Canon 50/1.5
Nikkor 50/2
Jupiter 8
50/3.5 Elmar
Then of course the Zeiss Sonnars for Contax, and the Tessar
I think the collapsible and rigid Summicrons fit my definition of the classic look that I like. The 35 Ultron is close, perhaps a reason I like it as much as I do.

I have admired the Summitar and 35/2.8 Summaron, but so far have resisted temptation.

 

[Marc-A.]

One more vote for the Summitar.

Some pictures from my gallery:

 

[Michael I.]

summitar,jupiter 8

 

[ray_g]

Summar, Summitar, collapsible Summicron, and for me, even the Rigid. In terms of "vintage" I like the Summar the most.

Aside from the lens, a lot of it also has to do with the film and developer you use, your exposure and development, whether you use a filter, and so on. In these examples, I shot the Summar wide open, with a med yellow filter, on plus x over-exposed by a stop and developed 20-25% less in HC110.

 

[Todd.Hanz]

agree with Chase and the others,

Summitar:

but also the 35/3.5 summaron:

Todd

 

[sirius]

I've been completely enjoying my Summitar lens. It's a fasinating little contraption. I look into the lens glass and there are actually BUBBLES in the glass!! I love the pictures that it takes. Even though mine are a little soft---an inner element has some haze---it does beautiful things to people when it's wide open. The tones are lovely and rich and their skin seems to glow. I think mine is a coated version as there is a bluish sheen to the outside element.

I've used 3 of the Canon screw-mounts and perhaps a better question with those lenses is which does not look vintage? I think the 35mm f2 is the only one that has a more modern look in terms of contrast and sharpness.

It's strange with these old screw-mount lenses as you have to be careful what subject matter you photograph in black and white. If you photograph a guy in a hoodie on the street it looks like a photo with character. If you photograph a guy in a suit with no other context it looks like a photo from the 1950's!

 

[Marc-A.]

Summar, Summitar, collapsible Summicron, and for me, even the Rigid.

I agree with Ray about the Summicron even the Rigid; I've been particularly struck by the vintage look of one my latest shots with the Rigid Summicron:

 

[sirius]

Yes Marc, that does look like it could be from the turn of the 20th century, fascinating!

 

[ferider]

Any of the classic Sonnar variants. Here is a Nikkor 85/2:

And here the Planar that looks like a Sonnar (Canon 50/1.2)

Cheers,

Roland.

 

[payasam]

Some good pictures in this thread -- and the lenses alone didn't make them good.

 

[richard_l]

Some good pictures in this thread -- and the lenses alone didn't make them good.

I agree. In fact, some of the lenses seem to flare so badly and have such low contrast and definition that they may actually detract from the otherwise excellent work of the photographers.

I have a 5cm/3.5 Elmar and a 3.5cm/3.5 Summaron, and they produce sharp images with good contrast. A lot of vintage lenses have defective coatings (or no coating) and are prone to haze. Maybe this accounts for the look of some 'vintage' images. Of course, some of it could also be due to the film processing.

Of course, ultimately beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

 

[furcafe]

Anything uncoated, though I think choice of medium (e.g., old school or vintage-style films) makes a bigger difference.

Here's my own strange twist on the standard issue "which lens is sharpest" thread... Which screwmount Leica lens(es) seems to most reliably create images that look "vintage" to your eyes?

 

[350D_user]

Aside from the lens, a lot of it also has to do with the film and developer you use, your exposure and development, whether you use a filter, and so on.

Last night, I was wondering what look I'd get by using Efke R100 film, ADOX AP H09 developer and a Summitar (or pre-war uncoated Elmar) lens.

Time to do a bit of saving, methinks.

 

[ray_g]

I agree with Ray about the Summicron even the Rigid; I've been particularly struck by the vintage look of one my latest shots with the Rigid Summicron:

That's a beauty!

 

[richard_l]

That's a beauty!

The 'vintage' look of this picture (which seems almost nostalgic) is due to the skill of the photographer (exploiting the excellence of the lens) and the charm of the model. It is an exercise in futility to look for a lens which will automatically give an image this old-fashioned ambience. The rigid is simply one of the great Leitz lenses, not specifically associated with any so-called 'vintage' look.