M vs. Contax G: Significant Difference in Color Rendition

[maestro logos]

Last night I was looking at some Provia slides with a loupe. The slides came

from the same roll, half of which was shot with a Contax G and the other half

with an M6. (I took the roll out mid-roll from the Contax to put into the M etc.)

 

<p>

 

The pictures were shot outdoors in daylight. I was really surprised to notice

the apparent differences in color rendition. The Zeiss images appeared to be

notceably cooler, whereas the Leica pictures looked very much warmer. To my

eye, the Leica pictures seem to be closer to neutral. But I guess this is

subjective.

 

<p>

 

I also noticed uniform corner-to-corner sharpenss with the Leica images. On

the other hand the sharpness of Zeiss images deteriorated a bit towards the

corner.

 

<p>

 

The lenses used were 35/Summicron ASPH, 50/Summicron, and 45/2 Planar G.

 

<p>

 

For a long time I have been a Zeiss advocate. I shoot mostly on print film and

was always very pleased with images I got from my Zeiss lenses. When I

bought my Leica system half a year ago, I merely wanted an all manual camera

and wasn't really anticipating any image quality beyond the Zeiss. But now I

guess.......

[andrew_schank]

Different lenses do reproduce color differently--I have seen this on

many occasions. My M lenses have a very pleasing color rendition to

me, and I think my 90mm Elmarit may be my favorite. Color

reproduction is influenced by the coatings, and the type of glass

used, and possibly even the optical design. It can be a very

subjective evaluation to determine what lens reproduced

color "better", but I agree more neutral or slightly warmer are my

preferences.

[andrew_schank]

By the way, the sharpness issue you saw may be more of a function of

the AF on the Contax not acquiring a spot on focus, and not the

lens. I have taken some shots of a resolution chart by both AF and

manual focus with my Nikon, and the MF shots are usually sharper. AF

is faster, but often not quite as accurate if you have the time to

make a precise manual focus (especially with an accurate focusing

camera like a Leica M)

[jackflesher]

In addition to my Leica and Nikon gear, I also shoot with large

format equipment. With LF, you can mount any brand or lens on your

camera, and thus you immediately notice the differences in color

casts with lenses from different manufacturers. Often times the

difference is so significant that you have to filter for it to keep

the color cast of your transparencies consistent! In general, lenses

of German munufacture are "cooler" than those of Japanese

manufacture. Try a Tiffen 812 warming filter on your Contax lenses -

they are relativiely inexpensive, and should bring the color cast

pretty close to that of your M lenses.

[mike dixon]

What were the approximate times of day when you were shooting? I

wonder how much of the color difference was caused by differences in

the lenses and how much was caused by differences in the color

temperature of the light. There's a huge difference in the color of

light between midday and later afternoon.

[Spearhead]

I've always found the color differences between film to be far bigger

than that between (modern) lenses. Try shooting Provia and Astia

through the same lens and you will probably see much more difference

than you see between brands of lenses. Like black and white film and

developer, the combination is far more important than the individual

elements, and there is probably a way to get similar results from

both lenses by varying the film.

[cing_dao_kan1]

I have been using Leica M and Contax G systems side by side for some

time now. I also noticed that characteristics of M and G lenses are

different on slide films. To my eyes, Leica lenses render deep and

rich color with extraordinary sharpness and resolution, while Zeiss

lenses have a clear and crisp rendition with a beautiful blue tone.

IMHO, the real advantages of M over G are the availability of large

aperture lenses and the build quality. Other than that, I think the

Zeiss G lenses are every bit as good. Don't dismiss your G system

based on one roll of test.

[charles_curry_hyde]

In similar way I have noticed distinctly cooler and greener colour

rendtion from my 135 elmar (1960's) and my 50/2 (new), same subject,

light aperture etc.