Leica's strategic mistakes: the 75 Noctilux and the 90 Summilux

In late 2017, Leica announced the 75mm Noctilux. And just recently they announced the 90mm Summilux. There is nothing wrong with those lenses. In fact, there is much that is right about them. But launching these two lenses was a strategic mistake, because they should have launched a 35mm Noctilux first.

 

Perhaps there is a very strong case for the 75/1.25. A lot of photographers want something more like the old 75 Summilux but with better performance wide-open.

 

But the case for the 90/1.5 isn't as strong. The lens is no doubt terrific. But the very narrow DOF on the 90/2 APO is already very effective for those who like that kind of look. The Summilux could have waited.

 

Leica's priority should have always been a 35/1, or maybe a 35/0.95. I thought this in 2017 and I think it today. The reasons are obvious. Firstly, other manufacturers already have portrait lenses with very wide apertures. They're not small, but they do exist. Secondly, no other manufacturer offers a pro-class 35mm f/1, AFAIK.

 

And I'm not surprised. Have you seen how bulky some of these lenses are? Look at Nikon's 35/1.4: slightly wider than Leica's 50mm f/1 and also slightly heavier. Sony's FE 35/1.4 ZA is significantly bigger than any of the 50 Noctiluxes, while being about the same weight as a 50/1. Given those facts, can you imagine any manufacturer making an AF 35mm f/1?

 

Now let's do a more direct comparison: the Leica 50/1 M with the Canon EF 50/1. The Canon, being an SLR lens, weighs 1kg and takes 72mm filters. The Leica, being a RF lens and having no AF, weighs 630g and takes 60mm filters. No wonder Canon stopped making their lens, while Leica kept making theirs. Put that Canon lens on any decent SLR body and you have an unnecessarily huge kit that no sensible photographer would want to carry.

 

I'll be frank: I don't see much point in these crazy wide apertures, personally. I'd be very happy with a 35 Summicron, or a 90 Elmarit. But many people do see a point to these kinds of lenses, and in fact some photographers put these fast lenses to very good use.

 

Leica could be in a unique position to offer a lens that almost nobody makes. Zenit's M camera does come with a 35/1 but I don't know anything about it. If it's good, problem solved, I guess? But if Leica prioritized a 35/1 back in 2017, they would have a much more solid line of wide aperture lenses IMHO.

For those of us who shoot with and do not collect Leica M cameras, we need the following:

 

- 50MP

- Hybrid EVF/optical

 

Everything else is perfect!

 

I go crazy when I see 10 limited edition cameras being produced instead of decent innovation keeping up with Sony, Fuji, Canon or Nikon.

I want them to introduce the M11, so M10 prices will drop further and at that point, I'll get an M10, which seems like a pretty darn perfect camera other than less good battery life than the M262 I'm currently using. 24MP is a lot of resolution. The three 30x45 inch metal prints I've had made from M262 files shot in the Canadian Rockies with the 35mm f2 Summicron ASPH had way more than enough resolution.

Actually the battery life on the M10 is very good if you don't use the LCD screen a lot. I spent a month in India and basically used one battery most days and when going over barely used the extra one.

How should Leica keep a 35mm Noctilux out of the viewfinder?

I honestly don't care what they are catering to deeper pockets than mine.

A 35mm F1 lens for a digital sensor will have to be a strong retrofocus formula- meaning it will be big and heavy.

How should Leica keep a 35mm Noctilux out of the viewfinder?

I honestly don't care what they are catering to deeper pockets than mine.

It's not for me, either, price aside.

 

But, let's do a quick calculation. The 50 f/0.95 Noctilux has an aperture diameter of <53mm and a filter thread of 60mm. A 35 f/1 Noctilux will have an aperture diameter of 35mm. The filter thread could be as narrow as 42mm, but I'm not knowledgable enough to say for sure. Would this interfere with the 35mm frame lines? I don't know. The Zenit 35/1 has a filter thread of 72mm.

 

A 35mm F1 lens for a digital sensor will have to be a strong retrofocus formula- meaning it will be big and heavy.

I don't know. What makes you say that?

The sensors used in Digital cameras have a large fall-off in efficiency for collecting light coming in at shallow grazing angles. Film does not have this problem. A large aperture lens with a short focal length that is not a retrofocus design will lose a lot of efficiency at the edges.

A large aperture lens with a short focal length that is not a retrofocus design will lose a lot of efficiency at the edges.

I don't know. Maybe!

The sensors used in Digital cameras have a large fall-off in efficiency for collecting light coming in at shallow grazing angles.

Most manufacturers, including Leica, have a micro-prism array in front of the sensor, to normalize light entering the sensor at high angles of incidence. Anomalies in light distribution related to incident angle are moderate for a non-inverted-telephoto lens such as a Noctilux 50/.95. It is determined by the distance of the rear node to the image plane. Aperture is determined by the apparent diameter of the front pupil, looking toward the camera. The Noctilux 50 has other issues not so easily solved, such as abysmal corner resolution.

 

Pride of ownership aside, f/0.95 might have been appropriate when Tri-X was considered a fast film at ISO 400 (200 in practice), but good results at ISO 25600 give an f/2 or f/2.8 an additional 6 stops of light gathering ability. With such a shallow DOF, about 1 in 3 focusing attempts with a rangefinder camera would be acceptably in focus. The blurry edges constitute the major "bokeh" effect of this lens.

 

Better to put this $7K lens on a glass shelf than to actually use it.

Most manufacturers, including Leica, have a micro-prism array in front of the sensor, to normalize light entering the sensor at high angles of incidence. Anomalies in light distribution related to incident angle are moderate for a non-inverted-telephoto lens such as a Noctilux 50/.95. It is determined by the distance of the rear node to the image plane. Aperture is determined by the apparent diameter of the front pupil, looking toward the camera. The Noctilux 50 has other issues not so easily solved, such as abysmal corner resolution.

 

Pride of ownership aside, f/0.95 might have been appropriate when Tri-X was considered a fast film at ISO 400 (200 in practice), but good results at ISO 25600 give an f/2 or f/2.8 an additional 6 stops of light gathering ability. With such a shallow DOF, about 1 in 3 focusing attempts with a rangefinder camera would be acceptably in focus. The blurry edges constitute the major "bokeh" effect of this lens.

 

Better to put this $7K lens on a glass shelf than to actually use it.

 

 

Nahhh better to use it I reckon -:)

 

 

This one was made using a Nocti 0.95 on an SL - no problems focusing it using magnification provided by mirrorless cameras - like the SL/SL2 etc...one of the reasons why a Nocti is an interesting lens is the out of focus throw you can get front and back - like in this image I couldn't avoid the person in front so I blobbed them out

I want them to introduce the M11, so M10 prices will drop further and at that point, I'll get an M10, which seems like a pretty darn perfect camera other than less good battery life than the M262 I'm currently using. 24MP is a lot of resolution. The three 30x45 inch metal prints I've had made from M262 files shot in the Canadian Rockies with the 35mm f2 Summicron ASPH had way more than enough resolution.

 

The M10 is amongst the best Leicas that I have used including my MP (film) and M6 TTL. I can print 30x40 photos with no grain and larger with limited grain. It's near perfect!

This one was made using a Nocti 0.95 on an SL - no problems focusing it using magnification provided by mirrorless cameras

Mirrorless cameras with 100% live view and focus magnification are a game changer for fast, manual lenses. I bought a 1.4x magnifier for my Leica M9P, and even so focusing a 90/2, wide open, was hit-and-miss, compounded by lack of image stabilization. The performance of Summicron 90 on my Sony A7xxx, with IBIS, is stunning, if inconvenient to use.

 

Nice shot, by the way. Pulls your eye into the image.

Most manufacturers, including Leica, have a micro-prism array in front of the sensor, to normalize light entering the sensor at high angles of incidence. Anomalies in light distribution related to incident angle are moderate for a non-inverted-telephoto lens such as a Noctilux 50/.95. It is determined by the distance of the rear node to the image plane. Aperture is determined by the apparent diameter of the front pupil, looking toward the camera. The Noctilux 50 has other issues not so easily solved, such as abysmal corner resolution.

 

 

 

Better to put this $7K lens on a glass shelf than to actually use it.

 

Kodak started using microlens arrays over 20 years ago, the sensors used for the Leica are "Offset". However- if you look at the collection efficiency in published data sheets- there is still a large fall-off in efficiency for collecting light coming in at shallow grazing angles. Most cameras compensate for this digitally, applying a non-uniformity correction to the raw digital image. Basically, multiplying by a correction factor to compensate.

 

https://www.onsemi.com/pub/Collateral/KAF-16200-D.PDF

 

Look at Figure 11.

Figure 11. Typical Vertical Angular Dependance of Quantum Efficiency for Color Devices

Edited December 31, 2019 by Brian

Leica M9 with 7Artisans 75/1.25, wide-open, 1/60th, ISO2500.

 

7Artisans 75/1.25, Wide-Open by fiftyonepointsix, on Flickr

 

I use a 1.25x Magnifier.

 

https://cameraderie.org/threads/7artisans-75mm-f1-25.49525/page-2

Semi-symmetrical lenses, focal length 50 mm or more, have few issues regarding angle of incidence at the sensor. Older lenses, like a Leica Summaron 35/2.8 or Summicron 35/2 produce unacceptable loss of sharpness at the edges, similar to curvature of field. Vignetting is easily corrected, but nothing can be done about this distortion.

 

Wide angle lenses for high performance digital use inverted-telephoto design, in order to minimize the angle of incidence at the film plane. This increases the size and weight. My 25 mm Zeiss Loxia (Distagon) is 1/2" longer and 50% heavier than my Loxia 50 (Planar). It is also sharper throughout.

That's good, indeed, magically excellent. Tell me more about it. Regards, Arthur

Nahhh better to use it I reckon -:)

 

 

This one was made using a Nocti 0.95 on an SL - no problems focusing it using magnification provided by mirrorless cameras - like the SL/SL2 etc...one of the reasons why a Nocti is an interesting lens is the out of focus throw you can get front and back - like in this image I couldn't avoid the person in front so I blobbed them out

Now, that could be better than good, indeed, excellent. But what's that blob in the bottom right hand corner?. A very good shot, no doubt dictated by circumstances. Regards, Arthur

That's good, indeed, magically excellent. Tell me more about it. Regards, Arthur

 

Hello arthur - the first was just a matter of waiting for a big enough wave to break against the wall and after a couple of smaller and less dramatic splashes this one emerged....elevated from the mundane lucky snap - by ridding the photo of colour ( mostly a distraction when it comes to story telling) and applying some post shot vignetting to suggest some drama.

 

 

The second photo was just another happy snap - as always use what you've got in hand so Noctiliux wide open and in post crunch the shadows unmercifully and flatten the remaining colours to dress another ordinary image in the suggestion of a story... sometimes colour in limited palette form works as well as B&W.

 

 

all the best in 2020

Pete

The M10 is amongst the best Leicas that I have used including my MP (film) and M6 TTL. I can print 30x40 photos with no grain and larger with limited grain. It's near perfect!

I had the same experience with the M-P 240. Based on my experience so far, the M10-P is only marginally better in this respect. I was disappointed to discover that I can't shoot uncompressed RAW; although Leica says there is ultimately no difference between compressed and uncompressed, my processed TIF files are slightly smaller compared to those produced by the M-P 240 (uncompressed).

 

On a site note, I will say that I do like the higher greater dynamic range provided by the M10-P - and I love that whispery quiet shutter. Overall, it's a keeper!

 

I was disappointed to discover that I can't shoot uncompressed RAW; although Leica says there is ultimately no difference between compressed and uncompressed, my processed TIF files are slightly smaller compared to those produced by the M-P 240 (uncompressed).

Did you compare tif file sizes with those from M-P 240 (compressed)? I'm guessing that there's some other explanation for the size difference than compression - it's supposed to be lossless (like a zip file) in both cameras, so there's no reason not to use it. I think the earlier sensor has marginally more pixels (about 0.2%), so file sizes won't be identical even if all else is equal.

The Canon 50 f1 is no longer made, but they make/made an EF f1.2 and have a new RF 50 1.2. I don't think size seems to worry them. Also it is common to have an 85 f1.4 in full frame land (Canon RF 85/1.2 coming, Sony have 85/1.4) plus all of those available for DSLRs. They are popular so I can completely see why Leica might want an equivalent. 90mm is the Leica equivalent of 85mm. It seems clear to me that a very fast 35mm f1.2 or greater will badly obstruct the viewfinder of the M, which is an impediment in a wider angle lens where the edges are particularly important to see clearly when framing. Particularly for the "sacred" 35mm focal length: a mainstay of Leica M photography. For portrait teles it's an issue, but not such an issue. M customers like to use the optical viewfinder which means there are limits to what Leica will produce if they are incompatible with the traditional use of the camera system.

Further thought: the 28 Summilux has a filter thread of 49mm. It probably interferes with the 28mm frame lines a little bit, but perhaps barely touches the 35mm frame lines. Here's where it gets interesting: the 75 Summicron also has a filter thread of 49mm, and its aperture diameter is slightly wider than a hypothetical 35 Noctilux. Perhaps this is a useful proxy. So if you have a 75/2, you can see how much it interferes with the 35mm frame lines.

The Voigtlander 35/1.2 Nokton with fitted hood cuts well into the 35mm framelines, and reaches about 2/3 of the way to the 135mm framelines. As stated before, a fast wide-angle lens is going to be a strong retro-focus design because of design limitations imposed by digital sensors. Of course- if you use "Liveview", then you don't need to worry about the lens cutting into the viewfinder.

 

The M10 uses lossless compression. Makes things a little more complicated if you write your own software to process the DNG files. Reading and processing the uncompressed files from the M9 and M Monochrom is easy on a PC, they use little-endian format.