Do you think Leica lenses outperform the top end lenses from Nikon/Canon?

[regit]

somebody was talking about the Ripro-Nikkor 85mm f1.0 somewhere on CS a few days back. I've not seen anything from Leica or that matter Zeiss that can compare to that lens. Regardless manual or AF, camera body mountable lens.

So it serves a case in point that Canon and Nikon are capable of building such lenses, but its just not a right mix with the company's economic wants and needs. As such, they have resorted to building 'sellable' lenses that appeal to the mass market at large.

I own a Repro-Nikkor 85/1 and it is a industrial lens made for ... you guess it, copying. It has a very short register and it is not comparable to the Noctilux in its application. Even when using it as a micro lens, the effective aperture becomes smaller than f1. There are a fair amount of lenses that actually breaks the f1 barrier (e.g. Zeiss' f0.75 or Heligon f0.5), but the question is, are they suitable for general photography?

Canon use to make a f1 50mm, but IMO, the wide-open performance is not on par with the Mandler design.

 

[hongsien]

M lenses appear to be remarkably distortion free, very even over the frame. I cannot say the same for all the WA L lenses that I own.

I assume you know why? They are completely different designs, Leica M cameras have no mirror so the wideangle lenses can be more of the Biogon types,which are famous for their low distortion. If you compare these lenses with SLR lenses then it is like comparing apples with broccoli.......

I don't even understand why people are comparing M lenses with SLR lenses in the first place, it is like asking the wrong question already

HS

 

[regit]

Ya i would love to own a leica someday ... but back to the topic if they outperform .... another question pop up instantly .

Are they Practical ? LOL

It is as practical as lugging a 400/2.8 for avian :bsmilie: Different occassion calls for different equipment; and if the occassion or style fits, I don't see it as an issue.

 

[regit]

Blasphemy!

For those of us who have used Leica or Zeiss glass, we know what we would rather want. Perceptions of value is the only thing that stops a lot of us from getting the better glass, and we all know which is the better glass. :bsmilie:

Get a $50 Summar for glow :bsmilie: The best I've seen is still the non-asph 35 Summilux; the old Nokton 50/1.5 (not the current design) also has a nice glow when used wide-opened.

 

[regit]

Guys,

Also, unlike film media which accepts non-linear light rays, digital sensors have a more limited "angle" of incidence... so that's why some film lenses look washed out on digital.

I agree with most point except for the above... at least I would like to believe that there is a way to overcome this on a camera with a short film/sensor-to-lens register... I'm still holding out for a FF m-mount :bsmilie:

 

[regit]

for practical purposes, does leica lens have any mounts that fits nikon bodies?

Unfortunately, no. M-mount Leica has a very short register and would not work on f-mount, sadly, neither would R-mount.

 

[Jagdeep]

Not anymore.
they are just basking in the name when they were really leaders.

Zeiss are better. and the likes of Nikin/Cannon/Sigma etc are up there as well.
The real technology now is in the sensor.
who can make a sensor with the lowest noise

I am waiting for a DSLR-like compact camera like the Sony R1, average Mpix count, Medium Zoom, and a DSLR size sensor;p

 

[Leong23]

Not anymore.
they are just basking in the name when they were really leaders.

Zeiss are better. and the likes of Nikin/Cannon/Sigma etc are up there as well.
The real technology now is in the sensor.
who can make a sensor with the lowest noise

I am waiting for a DSLR-like compact camera like the Sony R1, average Mpix count, Medium Zoom, and a DSLR size sensor;p

Good sensor with lousy lens, the result is worst. :bsmilie:

 

[alternatve]

Not anymore.
they are just basking in the name when they were really leaders.

Zeiss are better. and the likes of Nikin/Cannon/Sigma etc are up there as well.
The real technology now is in the sensor.
who can make a sensor with the lowest noise

I am waiting for a DSLR-like compact camera like the Sony R1, average Mpix count, Medium Zoom, and a DSLR size sensor;p

I disagree, I think Leica is at it's best now. In the 1930s-1950s, it lost out to Zeiss in optical coatings and lens design. Now, it's among the best. However, you do pay preminium price for preminium lenses.

I've used Zeiss, Leica, Canon and Nikon before, and state my opinions based on my experiences. I do prefer Zeiss as they deliver great lenses with reasonable pricings, but any of the manufacturers above make great lenses.

Samuel

 

[Ansel]

I assume you know why? They are completely different designs, Leica M cameras have no mirror so the wideangle lenses can be more of the Biogon types,which are famous for their low distortion. If you compare these lenses with SLR lenses then it is like comparing apples with broccoli.......

I don't even understand why people are comparing M lenses with SLR lenses in the first place, it is like asking the wrong question already

HS

Hongsien, I agree with you. It is important for people to understand some basics about lens design before they even start to say which brand is better. The talk about distortion performance between M and SLR wide angle lenses is like comparing how fast a man can swim verses how fast a shark can swim. It is an unfair comparison.

But it is OK if we compare telephoto lenses.

 

[lsisaxon]

Hongsien, I agree with you. It is important for people to understand some basics about lens design before they even start to say which brand is better. The talk about distortion performance between M and SLR wide angle lenses is like comparing how fast a man can swim verses how fast a shark can swim. It is an unfair comparison.

But it is OK if we compare telephoto lenses.

There will be problems with Biogon designs on digital sensors though.. ;p

 

[alternatve]

There will be problems with Biogon designs on digital sensors though.. ;p

Too bad, Biogon designs were among the best in the world for wide angle lens design for the better part of a century!

Yet more incentive to continue using film.

Samuel

 

[Ansel]

There will be problems with Biogon designs on digital sensors though.. ;p

They need to improve the sensor.

Or maybe do something like what Hassy did with the SWC. Design a special sensor that just works with the Biogon and then sell a fixed body+biogon set for the purists who can afford it. This will be PERFECT! HAHAHAHAHA.....:bsmilie:

;p

 

[lsisaxon]

They need to improve the sensor.

Or maybe do something like what Hassy did with the SWC. Design a special sensor that just works with the Biogon and then sell a fixed body+biogon set for the purists who can afford it. This will be PERFECT! HAHAHAHAHA.....:bsmilie:

;p

Hahaha.. it's just that the AA filter needs to be optimised for the oblique projection. So it has to be custom made for biogon designs.

 

[gooseberry]

There will be problems with Biogon designs on digital sensors though.. ;p

It's not the rear element to film/sensor distance that needs to be looked at, it's the exit pupil location. If you take a look at the Leica wide angles, the exit pupil is no closer than about 28mm from the film plane (even for the the 21mm). So it's not so bad and can be overcome to some extent as I mention below.

They need to improve the sensor.

They are trying... the M8 sensor uses offset microlenses (which coincidentally Fuji has a patent on) and the D3 sensor uses a two layer offset microlens structure.


With the advance in electronic viewfinder tech and sensor tech, people are talking about a new class of cameras that have been termed EVIL cameras (Electronic Viewfinder, Interchangeable Lens).

Basically a digital rangefinder without the rangefinder, so it has advantages of the rangefinder
- no mirror (quieter, no mirror slap)
- simpler symmetrical lens designs especially for wide-angles with better performance than slr lenses (no need for the complex larger retrofocus designs)
etc
but also without the rangefinder disadvantages
- no parallax error
- can use long lenses
etc

And you wouldn't need to get rid of your existing SLR lenses, just use an adapter to use them

 

[zoossh]

It's not the rear element to film/sensor distance that needs to be looked at, it's the exit pupil location. If you take a look at the Leica wide angles, the exit pupil is no closer than about 28mm from the film plane (even for the the 21mm). So it's not so bad and can be overcome to some extent as I mention below.



They are trying... the M8 sensor uses offset microlenses (which coincidentally Fuji has a patent on) and the D3 sensor uses a two layer offset microlens structure.


With the advance in electronic viewfinder tech and sensor tech, people are talking about a new class of cameras that have been termed EVIL cameras (Electronic Viewfinder, Interchangeable Lens).

Basically a digital rangefinder without the rangefinder, so it has advantages of the rangefinder
- no mirror (quieter, no mirror slap)
- simpler symmetrical lens designs especially for wide-angles with better performance than slr lenses (no need for the complex larger retrofocus designs)
etc
but also without the rangefinder disadvantages
- no parallax error
- can use long lenses
etc

And you wouldn't need to get rid of your existing SLR lenses, just use an adapter to use them

can i clarify that a digital RF also have an optical viewfinder, and i thought that optical viewfinder still has parallax error for near subjects?

 

[gooseberry]

can i clarify that a digital RF also have an optical viewfinder, and i thought that optical viewfinder still has parallax error for near subjects?

Nope, an EVIL camera won't have an optical viewfinder. That's why I said like a digital rangefinder without the rangefinder - so something like the epson rd1/s or leica m8 but remove the optical rangefinder - the "viewfinder" can either be the lcd on the back or in the place of the optical rangefinder can put in an electronic viewfinder - either way, the electronic viewfinder is looking through the lens ala current "live view" - but of course much better refresh rates etc.

 

[zoossh]

Nope, an EVIL camera won't have an optical viewfinder. That's why I said like a digital rangefinder without the rangefinder - so something like the epson rd1/s or leica m8 but remove the optical rangefinder - the "viewfinder" can either be the lcd on the back or in the place of the optical rangefinder can put in an electronic viewfinder - either way, the electronic viewfinder is looking through the lens ala current "live view" - but of course much better refresh rates etc.

hmmm... is it true that the electronic viewfinder is anywhere coming close to a good quality optical viewfinder in any near future?

 

[egnaro]

seriously as a newbie, I cant really tell the diff... for canon user they might think canon is the best, like I am a olympus user, I may wan to say Zuiko is the best however, I think all brand got it pros and cons, there no best.

 

[Tachi]

Some years back on a holiday, I took some shots of my wife, both in Contax 167T Zeiss 50mm f1.4 & my Leica Minilux.

The question that caught my attention and subsequently investment in Leica M6TTL : "how come this photo resolution cannot see my strands of hair whereas the one taken by your point & shoot camera can?"

I'm sure those whom knows the difference between Hasselblad lens & Rollei lens would also know the answer.....