View Full Version : Such a beautiful Lens..
The venerable Summarit 50/1.5 LTM, wide open on the M8...
http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e32/jaapv/summ.jpg
Hopefully Santa's elves are making you an IR filter that will fit, because I'm not optimistic that the elves in Solms will :(
Vrolijk Kerstfeest en een Gelukkig Nieuwjaar.
Sailor Ted
12-25-2006, 11:45
Hopefully Santa's elves are making you an IR filter that will fit, because I'm not optimistic that the elves in Solms will :(
Vrolijk Kerstfeest en een Gelukkig Nieuwjaar.
Yea beacuse it's such an awsome color lens to begin with.
Merry Christmas Jaapv and a very nice holliday shot.
Aurelius
12-25-2006, 12:26
[QUOTE=jaapv]The venerable Summarit 50/1.5 LTM, wide open on the M8...
ISO?
erikhaugsby
12-25-2006, 12:47
and isn't the Summarit supposed to be a dog, especially at 1.5?
It's a nice shot, Jaap
[quote=jaapv]The venerable Summarit 50/1.5 LTM, wide open on the M8...
ISO?
ISO 1250. The little bit of noise cleaned up really nicely in Neat Image.
Rex
I don't clean it up - for me ISO 1250 is the nicest setting for the M8 in B&W.
And yes- the filter is available on special order.
Gabriel M.A.
12-25-2006, 14:23
I notice that the M8 threads bring out the PNuts in everybody.
I'm looking forward to the same, jaapv.
And, btw, you and I know that the IR filters are an absolute necessity for the Point-and-Shooters. :angel:
Yea beacuse it's such an awsome color lens to begin with.
Of course you must know that the IR problem affects b&w too. Blacks not only turn magenta they go lighter on the grayscale. Ditto for the greens that go yellow. It's true the average viewer won't be jolted as badly as when he sees a shot of a room full of men in purple tuxes but it does still mess with the grayscale gradient and one would expect the photographer to notice and be bothered.
Jaap, glad a filter will be available for it--is is from Leica or B+W? I hope they have one in 43mm, even if the glass has to be transplanted into a Leitz mount, for the pre-ASPH 50 Lux. If I ever get an M8 I'd definitely want to use that lens!
Sailor Ted
12-25-2006, 15:03
Of course you must know that the IR problem affects b&w too. Blacks not only turn magenta they go lighter on the grayscale. Ditto for the greens that go yellow. It's true the average viewer won't be jolted as badly as when he sees a shot of a room full of men in purple tuxes but it does still mess with the grayscale gradient and one would expect the photographer to notice and be bothered.
Jaap, glad a filter will be available for it--is is from Leica or B+W? I hope they have one in 43mm, even if the glass has to be transplanted into a Leitz mount, for the pre-ASPH 50 Lux. If I ever get an M8 I'd definitely want to use that lens!
Wait until you get your R-D1. IR contamination is off the chart and far worse then what is commonly recognized. It's funny but when I post examples of IR contamination as well as other serious imaging issues the R-D1 has in s_pades they go largely unacknowledged. What is it with the R-D1 loving / M8 hating peanut gallery hurling their peanuts at the M8? I own an R-D1, like it, but I do not need to fool myself into thinking it's perfect, or as good as an M8 (because it is not), or that the M8's superior performance is somehow not worth the extra dosh- (it is). No Leica gear has always been about sending a great deal extra for that something extra and it's no different today. I guess I just don't feel threatened by the other DRF on the market :D
You'll see for yourself soon enough, or not, and if not then the M8's issues would likewise go unnoticed along with its superior performance. It's amazing. If the M8 had the same significant imaging shortcomings of the R-D1 the uproar would be far louder then is currently the case. Perhaps due to the lower cost of admission R-D1 owners are just not as demanding or do not expect as much from their kit as they do from the M8.
Merry Christmas.
Wait until you get your R-D1. IR contamination is far worse then what is commonly admitted to. It's funny but when I post a prime example of IR contamination as well as the other issues the R-D1 has in s_pades they typically go unacknowledged. What is it with the R-D1 loving / M8 hating peanut gallery hurling their peanuts at the M8? I own an R-D1, like it, but do not need to fool myself into thinking it's perfect or as good as an M8 or that the M8's superior performance is not worth the extra expense- Leica has always been about sending a great deal extra for that something extra. I guess I just don't feel threatened by the other DRF on the market :D
You'll see for yourself soon enough, or not, and if not then the M8's issues would likewise go unnoticed along with its superior performance. It's amazing. If the M8 had the imaging shortcomings of the R-D1 the uproar would be far louder then it is now.
Merry Christmas.
For someone not threatened by the other DRF on the market you sure make a song and dance about it:rolleyes:
Sailor Ted
12-25-2006, 15:32
For someone not threatened by the other DRF on the market you sure make a song and dance about it:rolleyes:
Really? I own both you old goat. :D Plus that's rich I don’t TROLL R-D1 rooms throwing up in their faces about how their cameras are inferior or have issues. Really this type of behavior is unprecedented. Can you imagine what the response would be if people were to join a Canon forum only to continually rag on Canon owners for their cameras "plastic image quality" and equally plastic aesthetic? To me the 5D camera looks like a first generation Xbox controller but if I pursued a similar line of communication to that of the M8 haters here on our forum in a Canon room I would be drummed out.
Logical questions and discussion regarding the M8 are one thing but this circular crap and harassing should stop. Now.
Really? I own both you old goat : )
Good for you. Enjoy.
Back on topic. Nice shot jaapv. I do like this lens, but the focusing on my copy is a bit stiff, so it doesn't get out as much as it should do. I feel a CLA coming on.
Of course you must know that the IR problem affects b&w too. Blacks not only turn magenta they go lighter on the grayscale. Ditto for the greens that go yellow. It's true the average viewer won't be jolted as badly as when he sees a shot of a room full of men in purple tuxes but it does still mess with the grayscale gradient and one would expect the photographer to notice and be bothered.
Jaap, glad a filter will be available for it--is is from Leica or B+W? I hope they have one in 43mm, even if the glass has to be transplanted into a Leitz mount, for the pre-ASPH 50 Lux. If I ever get an M8 I'd definitely want to use that lens!
I can create an infinite number of greyscales using levels sliders in colour channels, not to mention the twenty-odd B&W profiles I have installed in C1. Using the green-filter #4 profile on a true Ir photo with 092 filter turns it into a normal B&W shot- so IR contamination in digital B&W is really irrelevant - luckily. And yes,Ben it is one of the all-time greats, that lens :)
I don't clean it up - for me ISO 1250 is the nicest setting for the M8 in B&W.
And yes- the filter is available on special order.
jaapv
I thought you might say that. However, the little bit of noise under the beady looking ornament didn't look like film grain to me. It looked like a digital artifact.
What I found out in screing around with noise removal in Neat Image is it made the whole picture more "summarit" like.
Anyway, I really like the look of that lens, noise or no noise. Using older "dogs" is one of the joys of M mount cameras, film or digital. Their qualities really come thru
Rex
I see what you mean. It does not appear in the full-size shot on my screen, so I guess it is resizing that did it. As for 1250ISO grain in the M8 - I think it adds to the result in print in general. I don't want it to look too Canon-like ;)
dreamsandart
12-25-2006, 17:52
Using older glass for something different is one of the joys of 'leica-rangefinder' photography. Just goes to show that there are no 'bad' lenses if you use them for what they are and the photographer is still the main element in a good photograph.
Merry Christmas
Jaapv,
I just got a 1953 iiif with its' original Summarit for christmas. The camera and lens are virtually perfect except for a slight haze in the lens.
I shot a roll with it today and just love how it handles bokeh and is actually pleasantly sharper than I expected. It does have a lower contrast level than my current lenses but that is easily adjust in post.
Mine flared some, and I don't know how much of this is normal and how much is because it needs a CLA.
Could you post some more samples of what is characteristic for this lens and possibly describe how it renders.
Your thoughts would be appreciated.
Best,
Ray
Wait until you get your R-D1. IR contamination is off the chart and far worse then what is commonly recognized.
I'm sure I'll see for myself soon enough. Right now all I have to go on is Sean Reid's word that it's far less than the M8.
What is it with the R-D1 loving / M8 hating peanut gallery hurling their peanuts at the M8?
Surely I'm not one of those. I never even considered getting an RD-1, having expected the M8 to improve upon it in every way, not just in some ways while "compromising" :D in others. I still would never have dropped three grand on an RD-1, if not for the refurbs and the 10% discount I'd never have hit the "buy" button.
Perhaps due to the lower cost of admission R-D1 owners are just not as demanding or do not expect as much from their kit as they do from the M8.
Bingo. And it's not something we RD-1 owners invented for the occasion of the M8's birth. It's a concept billions of people apply to purchases every day. For $2200-3000 the RD-1 is, IMO, a worse value than the M8, filters and all. At $1395 including shipping, it's a bargain: an M-mount digital rangefinder for the price of a prosumer DSLR. If the IR contamination is as bad as you say, I'm sure I'll sell it for what I paid.
And finally, the RD-1's IR contamination issue does not in any way mitigate that of the M8. Leica had 2 years and the help of Kodak, Jenoptik and PhaseOne--all heavy-hitters in high-end digital, unlike Cosina and Epson--to solve it. Or at least to be up-front about it before they sold them.
I can create an infinite number of greyscales using levels sliders in colour channels, not to mention the twenty-odd B&W profiles I have installed in C1.
IR contamination is selective, so only some blacks will turn light gray. To get the grayscale to replicate what the eye saw, you would still need to either shoot with an IR filter, or select each affected subject and correct individually. Otherwise just as with color, any "filter" will affect other grays as well.
IR contamination is selective, so only some blacks will turn light gray. To get the grayscale to replicate what the eye saw, you would still need to either shoot with an IR filter, or select each affected subject and correct individually. Otherwise just as with color, any "filter" will affect other grays as well.
Yes- but the B&W grayscale is just an abstraction anyway, not a realistic rendering of nature. If the result looks good, the photograph is good, no matter what frequency of light is was painted with.
Sailor Ted
12-26-2006, 09:57
Yes- but the B&W grayscale is just an abstraction anyway, not a realistic rendering of nature. If the result looks good, the photograph is good, no matter what frequency of light is was painted with.
Thats my take as well.
Really? I own both you old goat. :D Plus that's rich I don’t TROLL R-D1 rooms throwing up in their faces about how their cameras are inferior or have issues. Really this type of behavior is unprecedented. Can you imagine what the response would be if people were to join a Canon forum only to continually rag on Canon owners for their cameras "plastic image quality" and equally plastic aesthetic? To me the 5D camera looks like a first generation Xbox controller but if I pursued a similar line of communication to that of the M8 haters here on our forum in a Canon room I would be drummed out.
Logical questions and discussion regarding the M8 are one thing but this circular crap and harassing should stop. Now.
I see you edited this some time after my response to you:)
I am not a troll. Never have been and never will be and I take exception to your assertion. If you'd care to research any other comments I've made with regard to the M8 you would find that I am consistent and not in the least the M8 basher that you seem to think I am. This wasn't an M8 thread. It was you who started spouting on about how poor the R-D1 is in relation to the M8, which has nothing to do with the summarit. It seems to me, reading your posts of the past week that all you want to do is tell everyone how wonderful the M8 is compared to the R-D1 and how crappy the R-D1 is - that is much more troll like in my opinion. I should know better than to feed a troll, but sometimes one's patience wears thin.
Sailor Ted
12-26-2006, 12:28
Gid come on- I'm not saying your the troll, Ben Z popped in as is his usual fashion, dropped a steaming pile and then left. Take a look near the front of this thread and you'll see what I mean. And just because I make reference to me not being a Troll or point out how certain types of posts would not be accepted in a Canon forum does not mean I'm implying you are (a Troll).
Hey it's a New Year so lets start spreading a little cheer?
Peace,
Ted
PS. OK I just finished reading the rest of your post and fair enough I have been drawing a lot of comparisons between the M8 and the R-D1s (a camera I dearly love by the way). The reasons for these comparisons are a response to what I see as a white washing of the R-D1's faults (especially in terms of IQ). These comparisons are important because much of the criticism aimed at the M8 and the design decisions/ compromises Leica had to make would have created a camera little better then the R-D1 had Leica made similar decisions to that of Epson/ Cosina. That I bring these issues to light, including photographic evidence is because they are not widely understood by the broader DRF community. So under these circumstances and given the harsh treatment Leica is receiving it seemed a valid set of comparisons for me to make and share.
Ben Z popped in as is his usual fashion, dropped a steaming pile and then left.
That kind of comment is why photo.net lost all of its knowledgable and/or civilized contributors. I hope Jorge won't let it happen here.
Sailor Ted
12-26-2006, 12:46
Hopefully Santa's elves are making you an IR filter that will fit, because I'm not optimistic that the elves in Solms will :(
Vrolijk Kerstfeest en een Gelukkig Nieuwjaar.
If not a steaming pile then what? and why this kind of response to Jaapv's post? In fact why always this kind of negative finger wagging at the M8 and it's users?
If not a steaming pile then what? and why this kind of response to Jaapv's post?
Leica's not offering a coded rear flange for even the very popular E43-version of the 50 Summilux which has the same optics as the E46 version, hence justifiable pessimism that they would offer an IR filter in the special E41 mount that was used TTBOMK on only the Summarit. I wished Jaap a Merry Christmas and Happy New Year in his native language, which I was taught is a sign of respect.
I don't believe anyone can find an example of where I have been rude or vulgar to anyone on this forum, and I repeat my hope that Jorge won't allow that kind of nonsense here.
Sailor Ted
12-26-2006, 14:26
Well Ben I just clicked on your post history and you are correct taken out of context I could not find any evidence of you being rude. I did however follow your posts back four pages deep and in every post until you posted regarding your employment history (aprox 70 posts) you were critical of the M8 usually for it requiring the use of filters. Fine you don't like filters and in your mind they exempt the M8 from serious consideration as a camera to own.
Taken in context however some of your comments (not least of which would be your opening response to this thread) could be interpreted many different ways. For the record I’m tired of this back and forth with you as I'm sure are many others and I'm sorry for having engaged in it for as long as I have and for those who must read through our tit for tat. So I'm finished with it. Soon I'll have an M8 and if you are correct my images and posts regarding its performance will support your analysis- we'll just have to wait and see.
Well Ben I just clicked on your post history and you are correct taken out of context I could not find any evidence of you being "rude". .......
Sailor
Calm down. Ben is not a troll. He has been highly critical of Leica because of the filter issue but so am I. I, however, have made my peace with the enivitabilty of filters, at least this go around. That doesn't mean I like the idea. I even think (or hope) that by the time the M9 rolls along, filters will be a thing of the past. But the technical problems preclude this happening anytime soon. So if you want a dRF you got two choices. And you know what? Many of us will have both!
Ben's complaints are real and rational. He is not bitter about the problems, just disappointed. He dosn't claim conspiracy theorys to explain engineering problems.
He doesn't insist that anyone that buys an M8 is brain dead and a fool and puppet of the Leica establishment.
It's natural for most people to want a product to perform a little more up to its capabilities than the M8 has out of the box. I think that early adopters can be divided into two camps. Those that have extremely high hopes for a new product, and those that have a little "beta" tester in their blood. Or both.
I, personally, don't mind a little struggle to wring out the best in a new product. Now if I was making a living off the thing, I may have a different attitude. But I really don't think its that so much as people just have different reactions to things. It's the whole "glass half empty or glass half full" thing. There is room for both in any discussion. Tolls need not apply
Rex
,,arf
Don't worry Ted, when Ben and I are in opposition it is more like sparring than a clash :). In this case he's obviously not aware that both Heliopan and B+W offer 41 mm filters. No problem - I've got mine ordered and will post filtered shots in due course. :) And, Ben, a happy new year to you too. Where did you learn Dutch?
back alley
12-26-2006, 18:12
if you guys can't get along then i'll be taking your cameras and sending you both to your rooms!!
maybe stop comparing and start enjoying your gear.
no matter what the price tag for our toys, unless you make money with them, they are toys and are there to have some fun and enjoyment with.
if you want to get serious start thinking about creating something to brag about, ya know...like art.
merry ho ho!
joe
Jaap,
Back to the subject... This is a nice image, and I like the b&w rendering. I'm rather new to the rangefinder world, and until I bought my RD1s I had never used a rangefinder at all. Therefore my knowledge of leica lenses is very limited. What is the vintage of this Summarit 50/1.5. Do the various names of the lenses have a specific meaning (beyond marketing)?
Take care,
Michael
Yeah, somewhere in the middle of all these M8 threads there is a trip wire, and KABOOM.
So officially, let's make this a Summarit thread and have some peace.
Michael, this particular lens dates back to 1954 and has Leica Thread Mount and an adapter for the M mount. As for the meaning of the names, I doubt that Jorge would like me to use so much bandwidth.:D There are plent of threads and sites on the subject though.The Summarit is a clone of the Zeiss Xenon with some (primitive and largely ineffective) coating added. It was Leica's first fast 50 mm and is the direct precursor of the original Summilux. It is known for its harmonious bokeh wide open, sharp rendering at smaller apertures, relatively low contrast, rich colour rendering and propensity to flare. In short, a fairly ideal portrait and atmosphere lens.
Thanks Jaap. What I find most wonderful about these cameras, your M8 and my RD1, is that we have the pleasant option of using a lens from the 1930's, '40's, or '50's on cameras that are Twenty-first Century creations.
Take care,
Michael
Jaapv, have you tried using a deep red filter such as a 25A for taking B&W shots with the summitar on the M8? I've noticed with my older rf lenses shooting film that using one makes landscape shots look sharper. I know that you can apply the filter after the fact in PS but I don't think that's the same thing. I'd be interested in seeing the results but I don't have an 8 to try it on.
I must confess I own no such filter..sorry.:(
Ronald M
12-27-2006, 07:58
I would recommend the lens be cleaned internally, not the first original, but the one who purchased one with haze. I find the Leica experience is not there with even slight haze. Tonal representation suffers first, then contrast, lastly sharpness. They just don`t look like leica pics with haze inside the lens.
One I've just taken with the Summarit wide open on the R-D1. Please note that this is a lens example and not an R-D1 versus M8 post. The B&W is via channel mixer in CS3 (beta) - 30% red, 40% green, 30% blue.
I'm liking these Summarit photos. Time to send mine off for a CLA.
Thanks,
Guys
vBulletin® v3.6.8, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.