gkl Loc: Old Lyme, CT

After reading and commented on a posting on lenses, Leitz vs. Zeiss, which is better? I thought of continuing the discussion from a different direction.

There have been numerous postings asking advice on the choice of a camera by beginners as well as more experienced photographer but few, far too few, about lenses. The lens must see the scene that we wish to record collects and projects the information/analog data on to the film plane to be recorded. If the details and nuances were not resolved by the lens, no amount of post processing will add to ground truth. Post processing enhances the data but cannot create new “facts”, although one can easily remove unwanted details.

The lens and camera sensor should form a partnership, be compatible. For example, it makes no sense to pair a high-resolution lens that can image over 40 line-pairs/mm with an AA filter (OLPF) mounted camera sensor. This low pass filter cuts off the fine details (high frequency) one paid for with the $$ lens then pay again in the camera to remove it!! Remember it wasn’t too long ago we were encouraged to trade-in 1970’s or earlier Zeiss or Leitz glass for digital-ready lenses – I sincerely hope that you did not.

I plan to post three sets of comparisons with images recorded in 12MP, 36MP, and 42MP mirrorless cameras using the following set of lenses:
Kern macro Switar, APO, 50mm/f 1.8 – lens for ALPA SLR, 1975
Leitz Summicron Symmetric IV, 35mm/f 2.0 – classic M mount for Leica RFMP
Carl Zeiss Planar ZM, 50mm/f 2.0 – with Leica M mount
Carl Zeiss Biogon ZM 25mm/f 2.8 – with Leica M mount

All the images were captured in RAW over 10+ years; edited using Lr and/or Ps, Adobe Flat Field correction for Biogon, and Nik plugin for B & W. FYI, no Leica cameras will be included.

Thank you for following the verb age so far, if you think these non-rigorous comparisons might amuse you please comment.
Gkl

PixelStan77 Loc: Vermont/Chicago

Images are where?

gkl Loc: Old Lyme, CT

will post when ready

gkl Loc: Old Lyme, CT

The last two were in camera HDR captures (-4, 0, +4) used in-part to minimize noise in shadow areas. The last was taken next to the Peace Columns across the Invalides towards the Eiffel Tower. There stands a number of plexiglass panels with the word “PEACE” etched in all the written languages. The macro lens is at minimum focus, 1:1 magnification, hand held. During the three exposures, the color lights were constantly changing. The iris is composed of 11 curved blades so that the aperture is nearly a smooth circle projecting smooth bokeh. Given the distances involved, the lights all should appear as individual overlapping circles across the entire frame. There is notable fall-off near the bottom and to the right edge of this frame. This is a high resolution but soft lens with a reasonable uniformity across the field, edge to edge.

Ricoh GXR with A12/M 12MP, 23.6x15.7 mm CMOS (1.5X), no AA filter, mirrorless, view finder extra Using Kern macro Switar + Kipon Alpa to M mount, usually f5.6-f3.5

gkl Loc: Old Lyme, CT

Ricoh GXR with A12/M
12MP, 23.6x15.7 mm CMOS (1.5X), no AA filter, mirrorless, view finder extra
Leitz Summicron Symmetric IV, 35mm/f 2.0 – classic M mounted for Leica RF

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

I can sympathize with your curiosity. I doubt whether you can come up with a simple answer unless you get your hands on a lot of lenses to test.

I use Leica, Zeiss and Voigtlander lenses with my Leica M6 and Sony A7 II (24 MP). My current lenses are Zeiss 28 and 35 f/2.8, Voigtlander 40 f/1.4 and 75 f/1.8 and Leica 50 f/2 Rigid, 90 f/2.8 and 135 f/4. All of the Leica lenses are vintage lenses from the 1960s. The Zeiss and Voigtlander are from 2013 or later.

I find it impossible to judge their relative merits with the best film so I have to do my comparisons using the A7 II.

The only direct comparison I ever made was between the Leica 50 f/2 and a Zeiss 50 f/2. The Leica had an almost imperceptible difference in corner to corner sharpness plus a measurable difference in transparency - about 1/6 stop brighter. I sold the Zeiss to KEH because I didn't need them both.

Since I shoot mostly in daylight at f/8 or f/11 I cannot see any problems with any of these lenses at 24 MP.

I do not plan to move to a higher resolution camera. When I want more resolution I just do a stitched panorama or use medium format film.

Based on the time of manufacture of the lenses I would say that the most striking difference is that the Leica lenses from 50-60 years ago are as good as the contemporary Zeiss and Voigtlander lenses for the M mount.

gkl Loc: Old Lyme, CT

Ricoh GXR with A12/M
12MP, 23.6x15.7 mm CMOS (1.5X), no AA filter, mirrorless, view finder extra
Carl Zeiss Biogon ZM 25mm/f 2.8 – with Leica M mount

The specular reflections in the B & W image are from a chandelier.

This completes the set captured using the Ricoh.

GoofyNewfie Loc: Kansas City

Should have just posted on this thread, not start another.
https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-642188-1.html

gkl Loc: Old Lyme, CT

Thanks for your reminder. However, too many images to fit. I think the maximum is 8?

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

The quality of a lens is not just about resolving power or contrast. It includes how it renders out of focus areas, any difference in contrast between in focus and out of focus areas, distortion, uniformity of performance across the image from corner to corner, flare, chromatic aberration, coma and other anomalies, flatness of field, etc.

Biogons in particular are very good at minimizing volume anamorphosis - a characteristic of very wide and ultra-wide lenses. Some Leitz lenses (I only have experience with screw mount), were uncanny in their ability to render a subject in focus with amazing contrast and clarity, and render the out of focus background with far less contrast and very smooth bokeh. I've seen many modern lenses accomplish decent to excellent bokeh, but have yet to see the contrast trick duplicated. I had several Leitz lenses that could do that, but it has been such a long time (mid 70s), that I couldn't tell you which ones.

I would definitely categorize the bokeh, contrast, and volume anamorphosis as "facts" that go beyond data, MTF tests and other very objective criteria. And yes, these "facts" can be added by a lens.

gkl Loc: Old Lyme, CT

Agreed that lens gathers the facts.

GoofyNewfie Loc: Kansas City

Should still post them here, not start another thread.
Makes it really confusing.
Maybe it will take more than one post to get them all but don’t start another thread.

Another newbie tip: using the “Quote Reply” as I did here helps us know which post you are addressing.
Cheers!

gkl Loc: Old Lyme, CT

Thanks will follow your suggestion.

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

When you do, click on “store original”.

Since it’s hard to see a difference at 24MP, a 12MP image probably won’t be very useful.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

A bunch of example images belong in the Photo Gallery.