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

[raid]

Haven't played with the coding much but I set it to the same in the m240. Don't mind vignetting at f2, typically I like the look since my corners aren't typically in the plane of focus anyway.

Shoot with the lens on a light table and you can see/test the different codings easily.

Shawn

Thanks for this tip, Shawn. I have never tested any lens coding.

 

[CharlesDAMorgan]

Brent Tor Church from the Mary Tavy road. LLL8, Leica M5, Fomapan 200 at 125 in PMk Pyro, orange filter

 

[andyturk]

@Emile, @raid, @D&A: Thanks for the kind comments!

@Erik: Yes, there is vignetting when the lens is open. I didn't use a shade (don't like 'em), but I do have a B+W filter on the lens.

My M10 was set to use the 35mm f/2 11310/11311 profile for an uncoded lens. Lightroom doesn't appear to do anything with that information other than to simply record the lens type. I.e., no profile corrections were applied.

So far, I'm really liking the somewhat dreamy wide-open rendering of this lens. The vignetting is nice too, depending on the composition. So far, I've only shot in late afternoon or evening light, and I don't have a feeling for how normal colors come through. But the B&W conversions look great to me.

A couple of other comments on using the lens... The size is perfect, IMO. It's only a little larger than a f/3.5 Summaron and having the extra 1.5 stops is very nice. Both lenses have a painterly effect that's pleasing. The replica doesn't flare as much though.

The infinity lock is nice for mounting/dismounting the lens, since you apply torque via the lens tab. The locking mechanism trips me up while shooting though, because it locks when I don't want it to. My habit has been to move the focusing tab to infinity as a starting reference and then dial it back as needed. Now I have to remember to keep my finger on the unlock mechanism while doing so.

The near focus "throw" of the tab is more extreme than I'm used to. That is, racking the lens to focus at the minimum distance requires rotating the tab all the way to 3 o'clock. My other lenses seem to hit minimum focus around 4 o'clock. Not a big deal, but I find myself having to adjust my left hand to do it confidently.

The 12585H hood that came with my Summaron also fits the replica perfectly. But as I said before, I'm not a fan of hoods and I tend to walk around with just a filter on my lenses (unless they have a built-in hood). The replica will definitely flare if pointed into a bright source, but the effect is somewhat artistic (see below). Some of my other lenses (which are older) lose significant contrast due to flare and maybe it's more to do with age and internal dust than optical design.



Lastly, the front lens cap that came with my lens is pretty loose and falls of easily. I replaced it with an aluminum slip-on cap that has "Leica" embossed. Frankly, the cheap cap looks much better anyway without the strange graphics. I'm not really a fan of the storage case either, so that just stays in my closet.

But the lens itself is beautiful, both in its use and in the images that it produces. I'm super happy to be able to shoot with one.

 

[Erik van Straten]

Andy, nice shot of the Saab. The internal reflections in the lens of the sun in the picture have a amber/orange color. Does this mean that the coating of your lens is of the amber variation?

I agree with you about the lens cap and the storage case.

Erik.

 

[andyturk]

@Erik: Yup, amber coatings on my lens.

 

[shawn]

My M10 was set to use the 35mm f/2 11310/11311 profile for an uncoded lens. Lightroom doesn't appear to do anything with that information other than to simply record the lens type. I.e., no profile corrections were applied..

The coding doesn't tell Lightroom to apply a profile correction. My understanding is that the corrections are applied in camera to the DNG data itself.

Shawn

 

[D&A]

The coding doesn't tell Lightroom to apply a profile correction. My understanding is that the corrections are applied in camera to the DNG data itself.

Shawn

A few comments:

1. Charles lovely landscape show! Lens shines at both close up and infinity shooting.

2. Shawn & Raid....your understanding is correct...lens coding correction applied to the cameras DNG data. Interestingly the Leica code 11134 is for the Leica 21mm f2.8 pre-asph. This code has been the most effective code for the majority of wide angle lenses (28 and 35mm lens included) that appear to vignette heavily wide open, especially on the M9 but I suppose on the M240 too. I haven't yet tested the replica with this code on the M9 but hope to soon (with lens at f2). Of course the Exif data will record the shot taken with a 21mm lens.

3. Andy, just curious, what f-stop was the lens set to with the image of the Saab demonstrating flare? In my testing (shown in one of my posted images a few pages back), the flare is well controlled even by f2.8 but at f2.0 is can be easily provoked at the sides/corners of the frame. Would have been interesting to see the same shot taken wide open. We of course have to keep in mind our versions of the replica are only single coated (like the original?).

Dave (D&A)

 

[andyturk]

3. Andy, just curious, what f-stop was the lens set to with the image of the Saab demonstrating flare? In my testing (shown in one of my posted images a few pages back), the flare is well controlled even by f2.8 but at f2.0 is can be easily provoked at the sides/corners of the frame. Would have been interesting to see the same shot taken wide open. We of course have to keep in mind our versions of the replica are only single coated (like the original?).

Dave (D&A)

It was either f/11 or f/16. It's recorded in the .dng as f/9.5, but that's just an estimate made by the camera. That shot was an intentional torture test though. It was difficult to frame because the sun was so bright.

 

[Erik van Straten]

It was either f/11 or f/16. It's recorded in the .dng as f/9.5, but that's just an estimate made by the camera. That shot was an intentional torture test though. It was difficult to frame because the sun was so bright.

Here we touch a subject that is not mentioned yet in this tread (I guess): the uneven spacing of the f-stop numbers on the f-stop ring. Like on a very old lens, the space between the numbers gets smaller when the f-stop gets smaller. This has to do, of course, with the form of the f-stop blades. On the original Leitz-lens the spacing of the numbers between the f-stops is on the whole range equal, wich is, in my opinion, very handy.

Erik.

 

[D&A]

Here we touch a subject that is not mentioned yet in this tread (I guess): the uneven spacing of the f-stop numbers on the f-stop ring. Like on a very old lens, the space between the numbers gets smaller when the f-stop gets smaller. This has to do, of course, with the form of the f-stop blades. On the original Leitz-lens the spacing of the numbers between the f-stops is on the whole range equal, wich is, in my opinion, very handy.

Erik.

I wondered about this and why the decision was made to make changes to the aperture blades and consequently the spacing of the aperture stops. I agree, equal spacing is somewhat more convenient.

Dave (D&A)

 

[D&A]

It was either f/11 or f/16. It's recorded in the .dng as f/9.5, but that's just an estimate made by the camera. That shot was an intentional torture test though. It was difficult to frame because the sun was so bright.

The sun star pattern seems to indicate that the lens was stopped down. I realize shooting towards the sun isn't easy but it would have been interesting to see how it handled flare at the more open apertures. Thanks!

Dave (&A)

 

[jonmanjiro]

The unevenly spaced aperture scale reminds me of MS Optics lenses. Since MS Optics lenses don't have aperture click stops, can we assume that this lens doesn't have click stops either???

Good question!

The final version of the Replica 8-element does have aperture click stops, just like the original one.

The maker choose the unevenly spaced aperture scale style for a reason. It is related to the meniscus type of the aperture blade. In order to make the bokeh in round shape from f/2.0 all the way down to the smallest aperture, the current replica 8-element is using meniscus type aperture blades. The original aperture blade is a straight edge type so that the aperture blade movement distance will be different.

Here we touch a subject that is not mentioned yet in this tread (I guess): the uneven spacing of the f-stop numbers on the f-stop ring. Like on a very old lens, the space between the numbers gets smaller when the f-stop gets smaller. This has to do, of course, with the form of the f-stop blades. On the original Leitz-lens the spacing of the numbers between the f-stops is on the whole range equal, wich is, in my opinion, very handy.

Erik.

Has been mentioned before, Erik 😉 Kevin gave us the reason LLL chose this type (post quoted above).

 

[raid]

Yes, I recall such a discussion. I am not concerned about it.

 

[bucs]

Sorry but where is the google order form and what is the going rate for this lens? 🙂

 

[Erik van Straten]

Has been mentioned before, Erik 😉 Kevin gave us the reason LLL chose this type (post quoted above).

O, yes! Sorry, I remember now! The thread is however very long.

I would like to know how the users think about this. A more rounded opening can be nice, but evenly spaced f-stop numbers are also nice.

The Color-Skopar 50mm f/2.5 is rather special here as it has a quite round opening and only slightly uneven spaced f-stop numbers, so the best of both worlds.

Erik.

 

[andyturk]

I would like to know how the users think about this. A more rounded opening can be nice, but evenly spaced f-stop numbers are also nice.

The uneven spacing on the replica doesn't bother me that much, but I've always simply counted clicks. Mentally, f/8 is two stops from closed. On my Leica lenses, one stop is "click-click", and here's it just "click" but the process is the same. I never actually used half-stops anyway.

Doing the same with a Zeiss lens might require more brain power than I possess.

 

[xmas_one]

Brent Tor Church from the Mary Tavy road. LLL8, Leica M5, Fomapan 200 at 125 in PMk Pyro, orange filter

Very nice Charles!

 

[D&A]

The uneven spacing on the replica doesn't bother me that much, but I've always simply counted clicks. Mentally, f/8 is two stops from closed. On my Leica lenses, one stop is "click-click", and here's it just "click" but the process is the same. I never actually used half-stops anyway.

Doing the same with a Zeiss lens might require more brain power than I possess.

The uneven spacing doesn't bother me either and my feelings about it mirror Andy's. Comparing the original 8 element vs the replica in this regard means they present slightly different design considerations...each having slight advantages. I had forgotten this was discussed before earlier in this thread.

Dave (D&A)

 

[jonmanjiro]

My RF Nikkors also have uneven spacing. Doesn't bother me at all.

No click-stops like the MS Optics lenses would be annoying though. Would have been a deal breaker for me if the replica didn't have click-stops.

 

[CharlesDAMorgan]

Very nice Charles!

Thanks xmas_one!