[New test photos released] Leica Summicron 35/2 Eight Element copy made in China

[D&A]

This is of course not a lens designed for digital photography. Digital photography was not yet invented in 1958 when the lens was designed. It can be used on a digital camera, but then miracles can not be expected.


Erik.

Much agree Erik! I am just illustrating one particular combination at the moment....the replica lens on the Leica M9 and things to take note of. There are many lenses designed in the 1950's, 60's & 70's that work well with todays M mount digitals with little or few artifacts of note but again there are so many variables to consider, that not all are known or uncovered (observed).

Dave (D&A)

 

[D&A]

Well after posting my comments (to Erik) I then searched through my digital M9 files from years past for the few test images I took with the original Leica 8 element cron (all tests performed from wide open f2 through f8....I can conclude the following in what I observed:

1. The images do render "cool" in color temp with the original Leica 8 element. Not quite as cool/cyan as the replica (as suspected) but never the less the original 8 element need warming up a bit when used on the M9.

2. Absolutely no evidence of cyan areas or blobs through or among leaves with the original 8 Element lens. Areas of sky are very confluent and even in tone except for a bit of vignette in the corners wide open.

3. It appears the replica might even have a higher resolution in the central part of the frame when shot wide open, but the corners of the frame I would give to the original 8 element with less corner astigmatism in the Leica original. Resolution away from the central part of the frame, appears about equal.

4. As discussed previously, whether due to field curvature or something else, the out of focus background appears "MUCH" sharper in the replica than the Leica original 8 element cron.

Of course only those who have the replica and original 8 element Leica on hand to do simultaneous side by side tests, could make a definitive comparison. Unfortunately I no longer have the Leica 8 element cron. These are just my observations.

If time permits and someone would like to see one or two images taken wide open with the original Leica 8 element cron and M9, I'll post them.

Dave (D&A)

 

[Erik van Straten]

A problem is that some lenses use lead containing flint glass and/or purple coating wile others have lead-free glass and/or amber coating, or the reverse. The situation is a bit chaotic, so a systematic approach for testing seems impossible. In the end, lenses are not being made for scientific testing, but for using.


Lets use the lenses, that is fun.


Erik.

 

[raid]

This is also the way I see it. Use the lens and adjust what you see needs adjusting. I will try out the replica on my M10 next.

 

[D&A]

I hope I'm not being misunderstood. Lenses are made to be used and enjoyed. I test newly acquired lenses in order to assess its characteristics and know it's quirks well, if there are any. Some lenses have anomalies when shot wide open and thus if it's an important shoot for a client and I know a particular quirk, anomaly or characteristic will create an image problem in that situation, I'll know to only use it stopped down. This is important where the shot might be fleeting like in a professional performance.

It's not different than testing certain newly acquired digital cameras to learn of their strength and weaknesses and possibly circumstances when they might not be the camera/tool to use. One last example, if someone is shooting architecture for a job and a lens has wavy type distortion which is near impossible to fix in post processing, then they know not to use that lens for that circumstance. Doesn't mean the lens cannot be used and enjoyed for other types of imagery.

I was just trying to illustrate some pitfalls with the replica when used on a digital body like a M9, that's all. In order to be informative for those that might like or need such info. Otherwise I'll just post images in general as I have enjoyed those already posted by others.

As an aside, not everything can be corrected in post processing and although I'm no Photoshop guru, I've worked with it since Ver. 1 many years ago.

Lastly let me express as I have on many occasions, the replica lens is a gem and a pleasure to use and it's imagery is both impressive with regards to its performance and the way it draws an image. I am very fortunate to have the opportunity to own it.

Dave (D&A)

 

[teddy]

In sunshine neither lens has a color cast. I don't recall seeing such a blue cast in the Summicron.

I made a couple of brief tests, the Replica was warmer, the Original is cooler. This will vary because of lens coatings. Even original Leica lenses have different lens coatings in their productions.

 

[raid]

The original Summicron has a cool rendering, but my replica gives a blue cast in the shade or in overcast days. It could be different from example to example.

 

[D&A]

Raid, a cool or blue cast in shade (which I've seen in the sky and white items) with the replica in mine, yours and a number of other posted images doesn't bother me at all as a 2 second adjustment of color temp in PS takes care of it. What is a bit of concern is the blue cyan blobs that sometimes shows surrounding leaves in high trees against a blue and white cloud sky as illustrated in my last posted image (the image which can be clicked on and enlarged). It actually renders those green leave blue with the rest of the tree leaves green! There is no easy way at the moment to adjust for their elimination or turn those blue leaves green without grossly affecting the color of all the other leaves. Again it's not major in the scheme of things considering all the wonderful positives of the replica but I think it's worthy of noting it and I've seen the same phenomenon in other individual replica images. It's simply about sharing info.

Dave (D&A)

 

[D&A]

This is a crop of the full image of the park I posted on the previous page. I circled a few of the areas (in gray) where there appears to be sort of a blue/cyan blob around or behind parts of the tree leaves. Just an illustration of what I was referring to in previous posts.

Dave (D&A)

 

[jonmanjiro]

Looks like colour fringing caused by chromatic aberrations.

 

[D&A]

I agree Jon but instead of say CA and its reddish/purplish color, its blue/cyan. and instead of surrounding the parameter of the leaves, its around and behind them and unlike CA ,cannot be eliminated like CA easily can be in PS etc.

Dave (D&A)

 

[raid]

Looks like colour fringing caused by chromatic aberrations.

What does this mean in English? Is this a really serious defect?

 

[eckhardf]

This is a crop of the full image of the park I posted on the previous page. I circled a few of the areas (in gray) where there appears to be sort of a blue/cyan blob around or behind parts of the tree leaves. Just an illustration of what I was referring to in previous posts.

Dave (D&A)

It does look like CA but it might also be diffused lens flare... particularly if it appears here and there in a line across the image and lines up with the predominant light source (sun) in the image.

...just my two cents...

eck.

 

[D&A]

It does look like CA but it might also be diffused lens flare... particularly if it appears here and there in a line across the image and lines up with the predominant light source (sun) in the image.

...just my two cents...

eck.

No, never in a line...it's random like in CA, in that regard. Even in the crops of tree leaves taken in a completely different image a page or so back (here on RRF)...those images illustrated flare in a predominate light source (sun)…. yet there was no cyan/blue blobs (for lack of a better term) in that particular image. It's random when it shows up and in this particular cropped image where the blue cyan blobs are illustrated, it didn't matter if lens was shot wide open or well stopped down. It was the same regardless. In the image illustrating flare between leaves, it was predominantly in the wide aperture images.

Dave (D&A)

 

[D&A]

What does this mean in English? Is this a really serious defect?

Not serious (depending on the intended use of the lens), but an optical property of the lens such as those lenses that display a high degree of CA....and maybe these areas of cyan/blue are only seen when used on a digital SLR, not film. Yet unlike CA, I haven't found an easily way to deal with it in post processing.

Dave (D&A)

 

[Erik van Straten]

Looks more as spots. If so, then it would be a defect of the screen and not of the lens. When it was a defect of the lens, it would have on effect on the whole image, not only locally.



Erik.

 

[D&A]

Erik, when you say defect of the screen...did you mean the cameras sensor? If so, I've ruled this out having tested the lens on another (different) M9. Additionally I've seen the same phenomenon on a couple of others posted replica images elsewhere. Again, I'm sure we'll eventually get to the source and eventually (and hopefully) it can be resolved.

Dave (D&A)

 

[teddy]

I'll give my opinion about these blue areas that seem to affect some fine leafy sections in pictures that have very high contrast patterns close together - it could possibly be a "moire" effect on the sensor from the lens resolution, specially on super duper high res lenses. I see this on my Fuji XE-1 and Sony a7. I see this effect of leaves from trees also on film like Provia and Velvia that looks more natural on these films than say digital... But I don't really know.

Also, I think those "spots" could also be patches of blue showing through the clouds behind the trees, influencing that colour "phenomenon".

Mmm, the next test I will do is using Velvia 50 on the Replica. My favourite film.

 

[Erik van Straten]

it could possibly be a "moire" effect on the sensor from the lens resolution, specially on super duper high res lenses

Yes, it must be something like that, the lens is indeed super duper high res.

Maybe a - kind of - soft focus filter could help on a digital camera.

Erik.

On film it draws beautifully, see the very small light holes in the arcs of the railway station (on Flickr @ 1600 × 1195 even better to see).

 

[teddy]

Yes, it must be something like that, the lens is indeed super duper high res.

Maybe a - kind of - soft focus filter could help on a digital camera.

Erik.

On film it draws beautifully, see the very small light holes in the arcs of the railway station (on Flickr @ 1600 × 1195 even better to see).

I would like to one day replicate your prowess with your photographs Erik, they are flawless technicaly, but many of your photos are very artful.

Yes, I think the Replica Summicron is fine fine on film. No issues for me that I have seen. I will shoot some Velvia now that there's more sun down under.