The Leica "Glow"....any pics!

[Sonnar Brian]

At a normal viewing distance sometimes I’ll see a photograph that looks very sharp and detailed, but on closer inspection it is not as sharp as I thought, it doesn’t have the resolution I thought. I’ve also seen high resolution low contrast images. What I don’t understand is why a higher contrast image doesn’t have the same or higher resolution. Is it that fine grain detail is lost when the exposure produces higher contrast - that fewer grains contribute to the resolution? What about digital - can contrast be increased without losing resolution?

You want to find the 1973 edition of Photographic Lenses by CB Neblette.

But this one is free:

https://ia903006.us.archive.org/6/items/aa024/aa024.pdf

The 1931 edition.

 

[Rayt]

35mm Summilux pre-a v2 Canada @1.4 M10M. I like classic lenses on digital. No hard edged harsh contrast.

 

[Padaq]

I just saw this post now trying to figure out what exactly glow was supposed to be when I purchased my first Summar recently, the lens was in really horrible condition, there were haze in the inner elements just between where the blades are, and the front element was all scratched up. But after a clean up. this is what I get. I have edited the pictures with LR to bring out the contrast and dehaze, otherwise the pictures would seem to have a veil of greyish mask which make the whole picture dull.

When I first saw these picture, I wasnt impressed at all, the lens was so difficult to use and has to be in the right condition to bring out the "essence" of it. But once I got used to the rendition, I see these picture on totally another level unlike my crons and luxs, these look like paintings and have the dreamy look on them..

Upon inspecting the front element, I reckon the so called "glow" was actually partly caused by the imprefect and dirt ridden on it so im not sure should i clean it through and through... I think the images are sharp enough consider the lens was made early 1930. I really quite impressed.

But again, how to tell if its too much glow or too dreamy when its the character of the Summar???

 

[Mos6502]

Use Kentmere films and any lens can produce Leica glow. 😉

 

[CMur12]

View attachment 4882698View attachment 4882700View attachment 4882701View attachment 4882702 I just saw this post now trying to figure out what exactly glow was supposed to be when I purchased my first Summar recently, the lens was in really horrible condition, there were haze in the inner elements just between where the blades are, and the front element was all scratched up. But after a clean up. this is what I get. I have edited the pictures with LR to bring out the contrast and dehaze, otherwise the pictures would seem to have a veil of greyish mask which make the whole picture dull.

When I first saw these picture, I wasnt impressed at all, the lens was so difficult to use and has to be in the right condition to bring out the "essence" of it. But once I got used to the rendition, I see these picture on totally another level unlike my crons and luxs, these look like paintings and have the dreamy look on them..

Upon inspecting the front element, I reckon the so called "glow" was actually partly caused by the imprefect and dirt ridden on it so im not sure should i clean it through and through... I think the images are sharp enough consider the lens was made early 1930. I really quite impressed.

But again, how to tell if its too much glow or too dreamy when its the character of the Summar???

Welcome to RFF, Padaq!

Excellent first post!

- Murray

 

[Padaq]

Welcome to RFF, Padaq!

Excellent first post!

- Murray

Thanks Murray

Its exciting to connect with other who share common interest. Particularly the Summar is an amazing lens that I take a bit of a challenge to master, but the results are facinating and rewarding.

 

[Ray Vonn 2023]

Another Summar example with the M9. Took a while getting familiar with how to use this lens in differing light, but all part of the fun.

 

[Padaq]

Just thought it would be interesting to share, shots at f2 vs f4.5.

 

[Godfrey]

The "Leica Glow" is the look you get on your face when you find a mint M2 at a yard sale for $15.00.

I know that glow. A bazillion years ago I bought a Minox enlarger for $10 at a yard sale... It was in pieces in a big box. When I got it home, I found that inside the main enlarger tube someone had wrapped up a Minox IIIS and stuffed it in. The enlarger went back together with no problems, just needed a little cleaning, and the IIIS was/is in perfect condition (still) ... I tried to give the seller some more money, but he said, "Nah, just old junk I want to get rid of. Have fun with it!"

G

 

[Padaq]

Summar glow at f2 vs Summarit glow at f1.5.

 

[Padaq]

Summar vs Summitar vs Summarit all at f2.