"Leica Glow" Myth or reality?

I am pretty damn certain it exists, as some kind of holy grail of lens

making. I have seen it, many times. Nevertheless, I would really like

to hear from anyone who feels one way or the other that it exists, or

does not exist. I am going to go out on a limb here, and name two

people who also claim that Leica lenses have an edge:

 

Doug Herr sold all of his Nikon lenses after seeing the results of

photos shot with Leitz lenses.

 

Talking with Sherry Krauter, she said that leica lenses give the

subject a "3D" look. I have noticed this interesting effect as well. I

have read, I think, that it is caused by Leica lenses ability to

render greater tonality.

 

So my question is, are Leica lens formulations like the recipe for

Coca Cola, some kind of closely guarded secret that makes them king of

the ant heap?

 

Or is it simply that Leitz designs better lenses than anyone else, and

for all their efforts the Japanese cannot pull of the same trick?

 

Or, if it is no real mystery, then why has no Japanese maker ever made

lenses in the same league? I have shot with Canon, Nikon, etc, and

while they are excellent lenses, I have never seen one that produced

the same "look."

Myth:

 

I doubt that anyone could pick out the Leica from a group of shots by a Hexar

AF, Contax G2, Voigtlander. The "Pepsi" challenge, if you will.

Must be time for Frank to do one of his "Cat Taking a Huge Dump" poses again...

<br>my Holga images 'glow'.<br><br>

the optical aberrations' only cost me $19, so perhaps I found a real bargain?

Is Sushi Makoshi related to the Emperor? Are we talking about THE Sushi Makoshi? Sushi was not killed in Baghdad, he met his demise while crossing the Roppongi Kosaten after a night of heavy drinking. He was run over by a Semi carrying M7s, and M6s along with many 75mm summicrons. I know, I was there. I grabbed up as many of the cameras as I could (they were scattered all over the kosaten). I have been selling them on Ebay ever since. How else do suppose I could fund my life of Riley in Tokyo!?

Leica lens quality and the famed Leica "glow" are two different things. For glow, seek older, lower contrast, single coated but still quite high resolution Leica lenses and add a bit of flare. There was a posting in the last year of some recent shots with a 50/2 Rigid, IIRC, that showed the famed "glow" amply.

 

As for current/recent lens quality, there are alot of issues. Surely some (many?) Japanese lenses easily rival Leica lenses in quality. Whether the famed Nikkor 105/2.5, more recent Nikon 28/1.4, Canon 85/1.2, various M mount Hexanons and so on.

 

Of course, Leica (and most other LTM or M mount lens makers) manages to pack most their wonderful optics into relatively small barrels, an added design constraint.

 

But there are tradeoffs. I think many Japanese manufacturers balance the eonomics of manufacture and end user pricing against their designs (and build specifications). It's not so much an issue of "can't" as it is an issue of "won't."

 

AFAIK, most lens design efforts at the larger Japanese companies are geared toward improving the much more popular popular zoom lenses. So I imagine Leica's recent prime lens designs moving forward will go "unchallenged" as it were by new designs from most other companies. I'm sure there will be occasional exceptions.

 

In the end, I love my Leica 28/2, my Nikkor 28/2.8 AIS, and my Nikon AFS 12-24 zoom for different reasons. All nice and functional lenses in their own way.

 

Although that Leica 28/2 certainly is special! :-)

 

 

 

Scott<div></div>

It probably has more to do with the transition from in focus to out of focus, along with what we now refer to as "boke" or "bokeh". The newer Leica lens designs don't seem to have the same feel as the older ones. My old LTM 85/2 Nikkor doesn't have the glow of my 90/2.8 Elmarit (old long style) but I prefer it for portraits to any other lens I've tried out over the years. I also miss my old 19/3.5 Canon that was stolen a few years ago. The 21/3.4 Super Angulon seems to have less "glow", but while marked Leitz it is a Schneider design.

My Rolleiflex glows....<div></div>

And so does my Nikkor LTM...<div></div>

Don't know about "glow," but I've had at least two separate pro labs ask me if I shot Leica

after looking at my negs. I told them yes, then asked them if it was obvious when

someone was shooting Leica glass. Both said yes, they jump out. That's good enough for

me.

The "glow" is real enough but the notion that it belongs exclusively or even primarily to Leitz/Leica lenses is myth. I think Al has it right: a smooth transition from out-of-focus to in-focus, along with a bit of veiling flare, yields the glow. My old Pentax 50mm f/1.4 Super Tak does it really well. So does an early 50mm Summilux. So does the 75mm Zeiss Tessar on my Rolleiflex T. So does any other lens with similar characteristics.

 

The 3D effect is something different. I've seen this with certain lenses under certain conditions. Again it's not exclusive to Leitz/Leica glass. The Leitz 400mm f/6.8 Doug Herr is fond of can certainly do it. What a great lens...and only two elements! My Zeiss 85mm f/2 (Contax RF mount or LTM) can do it too. And here's a ringer: the Yashica 28-85mm in Contax SLR mount. Set it to 85mm, wide open (f/4.5) with focus distance at or less than 2 meters. IMO it produces richer, snappier results than the Zeiss 28-85mm.

 

-Dave-

Leica used to use something to coat the glass which was radioactive. I can't recall what that substance was but you can easily find via google. Oh, and my cat just had a d*mp, if that's what you wanted to know, ~Jon~.

There is no such thing as radioactive coating. Leitz once used a Lantanum glass that contained a small amount of radioactive thorium, for a short period of time. The low level radioactivity was observed in some batches of the early 50/2 Summicron collapsible lens. Get your facts straight Frank.

As usual Eliot, your input is so helpful and good natured. It sure is nice

having you around here to add to the discussion.

Sony glow...<BR><P>

<center>

<img src= "http://pages.sbcglobal.net/b-evans/Images10/Glow.jpg">

</center>

Yes, they all glow. It's all marketing hype. And all food tastes like chicken; the duck a la orange is a myth.

pick your glow ...<div></div>

or glow this<div></div>

or even ...<div></div>

Film or digital glow?<br><br>

<center><img src=" http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/3350789-md.jpg"></center><br><br>

Yep, very nice shot Eric...

<center><img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/1769732-lg.jpg"></img><br>Pentax Glow</center>

.<BR>.<div></div>

or...(at the risk of tiring it; too lazy to upload more)<BR><BR><CENTER>

<img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/3373981-lg.jpg"><BR>

<i>Leica Summarit glow</i><BR></CENTER>

Don't know about the glow from newer lenses, but love the 'look' of pictures shot with the old 50/1.5 Summarit. Used to have one, then stupidly sold it, then shot all Canon and newer Hexar/Leica glass for a while and stumbled on photos shot with the Summarit stashed away at the bottom of the heap......fell in love with it, so bought a Summarit again.....never to sell it again ! Flares like hell, but with careful shooting, love it !