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

[Ed Schwartzreic]

This is all very interesting. Regarding filter stacks, it was Tom Abrahamsson who very strongly suggested to me a dozen or more years ago that I should generally forego putting any filter on a Leica lens, o/w I would degrade the performance. I traveled with Tom for many years and never saw him use a filter. This was of course for b/w film. Tom had not really accepted digital, and he died just before the release of the M10. I truly think he might have changed his mind with that camera, or especially the M10 monochrome. It was Tom who pushed for the original monochrome Leica, although I did not think her ever tried one himself.

I rarely use filters.

Ed

 

[Erik van Straten]

I rarely use filters.

I never use filters.


Erik.

 

[shawn]

Different filter stack. The sensor has a glass cover over it, then a hot mirror (filter that blocks UV and IR) and sometimes an anti-aliasing filter. Those are the filter stacks that vary in width between manufacturers and can cause the smearing.

I always use a protective filter on any of my lenses that take them.

Shawn

 

[Erik van Straten]

Lovely environmental portrait Erik.

Dave (D&A)

Thanks Dave, yes I agree about the higher contrast of the 8 elements when compared to, say, the Summilux steel rim 35mm f1.4 (both the first and the second versions) although these lenses only have seven elements in them.
I find these Summiluxes more interesting to use, above all for portraits. Here is one:

Leica MP/Summilux 35mm f/1.4 steel rim v2/TMY400-2/AdoxMCC110.

Erik.

 

[raid]

I never use filters.


Erik.

Me too. Not even IR filter for the M8. If a lens has a UV filter on it, I leave it there when I bought it. This is only in very few of my lenses.

 

[D&A]

Another nice one Erik..It's a combination of the artistic merrit of the portrait itself along with how the lens captures the environmental elements (no pun intended). Agree, most of the Leica 35mmf1.4 pre asph lenses are of lower contrast than the 8 Element cron. Although the former can be very interesting when shot wide open, demonstrating the well known glow, the 8 Element as you say, often presents a more interesting image...and not only when shot wide open.

Dave (D&A)

 

[raid]

Yes, the angle of light is where the color shifts and vignetting come from. Film doesn't care what angle the light hits it from. Sensors are more like a collection of holes... if the light hits straight on the entire bottom of the hole is illuminated, if light hits from an angle not all of the bottom of the hole is illuminated. Microlenses and things like that try and fill the holes more evenly from off angle light.

Additionally the filter and glass on top of the sensor can act as another element in a lens which can alter field curvature and cause smearing in the image when the light from the lens isn't perpendicular to the filter stack. This smearing is more than just a lens that is soft in the corners. This stack, and smearing, varies between cameras too.

For example the same lens (Voigtlander 21f4) at f5.6 on a Sony A7RII and a Leica M240.

They both smear but the Sony does it more. On film this lens doesn't do that.

And here is the Voigtlander vs a Kobalux 21mm at f5.6 on the m240.

The Kobalux is retrofocus so the light is more perpendicular to the sensor and doesn't smear nearly as much on the Leica or Sony.

FWIW, the replica lens only has a touch of smearing right in the extreme corners wide open on the Leica.

Shawn

Thanks for this informative comparison and comments.
Before digital sensors were around, I recall that non-retro focus design wide angle lenses were suggested for better performance. Now we see the opposite done for sensors.

 

[raid]

This article talks a bit more about how light angle alters sensor performance.

http://gmpphoto.blogspot.com/2016/01/the-future-of-sensor-technology-at-leica.html

But it doesn't really get into the smearing aspects of the filter stack.

As far as older RF lens designs on digital sensors the issue tends to be worse the wider the lens but also depends upon the design of the lens itself as shown above. I've seen slight differences between 50mm on different sensors but they are minor.

Shawn

I see differences in my wide angle images when I go wider than 35mm. Using (large) SLR lenses seem to reduce the smearing effects, even for wide angle lenses. My Canon FD 17mm does better than my 16mm Hologon, say.

 

[Erik van Straten]

Before digital sensors were around, I recall that non-retro focus design wide angle lenses were suggested for better performance. Now we see the opposite done for sensors.

And for SLR's! But the big advantage of the rangefinders, their small size, is then gone.


Erik.

 

[shawn]

I see differences in my wide angle images when I go wider than 35mm. Using (large) SLR lenses seem to reduce the smearing effects, even for wide angle lenses. My Canon FD 17mm does better than my 16mm Hologon, say.

Yup, that makes sense. The SLR lenses are likely retrofocus designs as they need to be able to handle the longer flange focal length of a SLR to clear the mirror. The lenses have to be designed so that the light is more parallel to itself and perpendicular to the film/sensor. The result is the sensor filter stack won't alter the lens performance as much.

Shawn

 

[D&A]

Shawn and others...interesting reading. Yes, the wides and ultra wides are often problematic when used on digital bodies (especially at wider apertures) for which they weren't designed for...for many of the reason described above. That's why Voigtlander and others are making modification to existing designs of their M lenses to take into account the filter stacks and or sensor design (micro lenses etc) for the Sony digital cameras for example. The difference resulting increased performance on the sides and edges of the frame are quite dramatic. Italian flag color shift along the sides and edges of a frame can at least be corrected via programs like Corner Fix but smearing and extremely softness generally can't. Even when these M lenses are used on a Sony body, stopping down to f 9.5 only has a mild/moderate positive effect.

Dave (D&A)

 

[CharlesDAMorgan]

My Voigtlander Heliar 15mm f4.5 really smears on digital. So I don't use that one. The 21mm Super Angulon R doesn't. However, as I so rarely shoot digital or colour, it doesn't bother me much!

I'm running a roll of colour through the M5 with the LLL8, I'm expecting similar performance to that of my beautiful Summaron 35mm f2.8 that handles colour exquisitely.

 

[Erik van Straten]

Although the former can be very interesting when shot wide open, demonstrating the well known glow, the 8 Element as you say, often presents a more interesting image...and not only when shot wide open.

The Summilux 35mm f/1.4 steel rim, stopped down a bit, is excellent for architecture.


Erik.

 

[Erik van Straten]

I'm running a roll of colour through the M5 with the LLL8.

I'm sure the lens works excellent on the M5.

"LLL8" is a great short name for the lens. I think I keep using this.

Erik.

 

[f.hayek]

The Summilux 35mm f/1.4 steel rim......is excellent for architecture.


Erik.

Or a collector's showcase.

 

[shawn]

And for SLR's! But the big advantage of the rangefinders, their small size, is then gone.

The Kobalux is considerably wider than the Voigtlander (it lets in 2x the light after all) but isn't a monstrously large SLR lens either. On a digital body it performs dramatically better.

Shawn

 

[CharlesDAMorgan]

I'm sure the lens works excellent on the M5.

"LLL8" is a great short name for the lens. I think I keep using this.

Erik.

I'd rather wear out my fingers on a shutter button than typing out 8 Element 35mm Summicron Replica ever again...

 

[shawn]

My Voigtlander Heliar 15mm f4.5 really smears on digital. So I don't use that one.

If you ever do more digital the series III of that lens does very well on digital. Like Dave said, Voigtlander modified the design to work better with digital sensors.

Shawn

 

[raid]

I bought by wide angle lenses before I got my digital cameras, so mine are not optimized for use with digital sensors. Old 50mm lenses still work well with my M8 and M9.

 

[CharlesDAMorgan]

If you ever do more digital the series III of that lens does very well on digital. Like Dave said, Voigtlander modified the design to work better with digital sensors.

Shawn

Very much so - as I currently have absolutely no digital strategy it remains theoretical, but if I do go RF digital in the future, that will be one on the list.
It does work very beautifully on film though of both varieties!