Older, lower contrast lenses on digital Ms

[froyd]

Is there a loss of tonal range when using some of the older lower contrast M lenses on an M8? My frame of reference would be a Summaron with XP2 or Delta 100.

I'm concerned that digital sensor in the M8 would not be able to capture the subtleties of tonal gradation. I assume the Monochrom would be better, and perhaps even the M9, but I'm not sure.

PS not trolling or looking to start a film vs digital war. Just genuinely interested in the M8 and wondering out loud.

 

[maggieo]

The M8 and old glass is a fantastic combination. There's an entire thread over at the LUF devoted to images from that combination.

Here are two of my photosets with that combo, a '59 Summilux and a '51 Summaron:

Leica 50/1.4 Summilux (1st...


1951 Leica 35mm f3.5 Summaron

 

[Mcary]

A couple of M8+ Canon 35mm F-2 shots with no IR filter

Space

 

[johannielscom]

I'd say there is an increase of tonality with the use of uncoated low-contrast lenses, not a loss! Colors and tones get smoother in general.

Sharpness with a good-condition uncoated lens is not impaired.

 

[Monochrom]

Hi, digital (sensors) have less dynamic range than film...perhaps more than slides, but surely they have much less DR than xp2, or other wide latitude films...
In broad day light the sensor won´t be capable of capturing all the steps and gradations that can capture film....a good chance to do that is to use flash or lower the contrast of your sensor...

Another great way to improve is to use low contrast lenses...
Is not matter of which camera you use...the m9 or m8 have the same photodiodes density.

The thing will change as you use the monochrom, since it uses the whole set of photodiodes to capture only grayscale...also each photdiode i understand that can capture a wider variety of grayscales...
I´ve seen amaizing results wiht the sigma dp2 merrill, really astonishing....

Going back to the m8...you´ll surely gain from lower contrast glass, since the low contrast option will only work on jpgs as i recall, so no change will be noticed on raw format...
I used a lot a canon 35mm f1.8 on my last m8u, it´s a gem....but from 11 on it shows heavy dffraction...so avoid those appertures...
take into consideration these kind of glass suffer from heavy flaring....this is of course because tehy don´t have coatings or only are single coated so expect to use hoods no screwable filter can help you on this flaring matters...
The canon resists flaring very well...

Hopes this helps you to decide, bye!!!

 

[willie_901]

For tonal range the number of bits used to digitize the data is the most important variable (after exposure).

If you have 10 EV of dynamic range, then data with 14 bit depth would have at least four times the potential tonality (16384 levels) than 12 bit depth data (4096 levels).

Unfortunately some of the total bit depth is required to digitize the noise. This means proper exposure and sensors with inherently higher signal-to-noise ratios are more likely to give more tonality.

Proper exposure can more important than the sensor performance. If the noise level requires 4 bits, the tonality will be more limited than an exposure that only requires 2 bits to record the noise. Underexposure limits the signal level, but the noise remains constant. A perfectly exposed M8 image could easily have more tonality than underexposed images from the M9 or M9M. Of course the perfectly exposed M9M image should will have more tonality than the M8's. This is one advantage of increased sensor area... the signal-to-noise ratio goes up as sensor area increases.

If you choose to shoot jpeg images, the maximum tonality is limited by the jpeg compression unless the exposure and white balance is perfectly set (in which case the tonality of the rendered raw image will be similar to the in-camera jpeg.)

In my experience with the D300 and D700, lens contrast does matter and the difference is obvious.

 

[V-12]

The answer to the question is that using older lower contrast lenses on an M8 will improve the overall DR of the camera marginally, as Johan has already suggested. If you use RAW/DNG you will further improve the potential DR from a lower contrast lens simply because you aren't having the camera's small processor trying to sort out the higlights and shadows into something it thinks is what you want. And of course in post processing you can always increase the mid-tone contrast on its own, thereby protecting highlights and shadows.

As for lens flare, you can use a hood, or you can say what the heck, this is the true nature of this lens, lets experiment. Its about how you want the photograph to look, but you should have the option of a hood at least. And of course an older lower contrast lens will add its own character to colour, so making other creative choices possible.

So while XP-2 may be able to record a slightly wider DR than an M8, it all swings back towards the M8 when it comes to the extended possibilities, and the simple fact that you can adjust the tones in post processing if you haven't accidentally blown the highlights. A lot of people take a film and all their results are based on the inherent nature of the film. With an M8 a DNG file will deliver you something different, there is no inherent look other than what you get from Lightroom or Photoshop making a rough stab at it, so you have to decide for yourself what your look will be.