Whats closest to that Leica glow?

[jermaine_scott]

I have been reading these forums for some time. I don't own a Leica. It's just out of my price range at the moment. I

do however own some classic rangefinders from the 70's (ie Yashica GTN, Canon Canonet QL17 GIII and Olympus

35 SP) and a Contax G1 with 28mm, 45mm and 90mm lenses. Of these, is there anyone that you would say

comes close to the that Leica glow that I read about from time to time?

[jermaine_scott]

Of these lenses I should say.

[SCL]

Impossible to emulate the "Leica glow". Just kidding. More than anything else you need to rely on lighting and proper exposure. If you have a lens with slight softness around the periphery and an increase in sharpness centrally, and good "bokeh" at wide open apertures, you're on the road to success.

[ericd]

If I only knew what is that glow... Onlyypus µju II has often impressive sharpness but you have no manual

control. I like the Canonet but it is not that sharp at full aperture and none of the I own has a very accurate

meter be prepared to open the camera to hack the potentiometers.... The 800 ISO limit is also a problem no neopan

1600 or Tri-X in Diafine.... But well if you open the camera to adjust the exposure you can tune it to one stop

overexposure thus 800 ISO setting will be perfect for 1600 ISO...

[ericd]

A Zorki-1 with Industar-22 very close to the classic Elmar but it is a poor shooter in low light...

[ronald_moravec1]

Leica "glow" is just a little flare in the highlights. The internally clean lenses show much less than those that have become fogged inside which is the way you will find most all used older Leica lenses.

 

Examine the inside with a small penlight or keychain light from the opposite end before you buy one. They need to look like a crystal goblet to work properly. Even if perfect, they will flare more than newer lenses.

 

Later models of lenses do not flare under most photoconditions.

[ericd]

My Nikkor 50/2 in LTM has this kind of glow... For me that's a problem not a a quality...

[larry h-l]

I'd vote for your Yashica GSN, a nice blend of sharpness and smoothness. Try it with side lighting and a darker background.

 

The Leica glow means a lot of different things to different people. For me, the non-asph 35mm f1.4 Summilux comes closest to what I

would call Leica glow, given its tendency to create a halo around backlit objects.

 

Then there is the Leica haze/flare found in older lenses. See the image below in the lower left corner by the Audi's headlight, probably

from haze in my 50mm 'cron. (And note the fashion shoot going on in the 2nd floor window).

 

 

<center><img src="http://oak.cats.ohiou.edu/~hamel-la/photo/Paris_window2.jpg"></center>

[aplumpton]

Some possibilities for "Glow":

 

 

Mythical older Leica lenses, creating abherations, at the expense of contrast, sharpness and reduced flare

 

HIE IR film from Kodak (no longer sold)

 

Some other IR films (Maco might)

 

Take a clear filter and put some liquids or emulsions on its surface, and experiment

 

Don't use a lens shade

 

Shoot late in day or early morning, both with sunlit highlights

 

Play with the light of the image during enlarging.

 

 

There may also be some other ways to have "Glow"

[frank uhlig]

Look for any hype lens and you got it - - - if, if, if you believe it and can convince others that the emperor- eh, the glow lens has clothes on ....

 

Otherwise, as they say, just any old lens without coating, pre 1950 will do the pointed into the source of light.

[derek_stanton2]

No two people can even agree on what the "Leica Glow" is.

Find some pictures by a photographer you like. Find out what lenses, films/developers he used. Buy the same things. If you get

glow, you can attribute it to the gear. If you don't, you can attribute glow to a circumstance or an accident. I don't think you can

take someone's word for it, without seeing an actual example of the 'phenomenon.'

[ronald_moravec1]

You can`t buy the same things today. Tri x is several generation updated. Agfa is gone. Printing papers are totally different.

[steve_bellayr]

Of the three fixed lens reangefinders I'd say the Yashica GSN is closest...IMHO.

[leicaglow]

I know Leica Glow when I see it, but it is difficult to define. I own a Leica because of the look the lenses give me on film. I'd suggest that the Contax with Zeiss lenses would be the closest, and while I like Zeiss lenses, I think they're just too critically sharp sometimes.

[frederick_muller]

"Leica "glow" is just a little flare in the highlights."

 

Ronald's definition of glow is pretty much my own. When I want results like that, I use something like the Canon 35mm f1.8. This lens can throw off a soft, pleasing flare in the highlights.

[davebell]

A Jupiter 8 on my Leica III produces amazing glow... although my guess is that this is due to some sort of lens defect or compatability issue more than anything else.

[ericd]

This Leica glow is hype IMO.

A lot of old lenses have flare in the highlights my Nikkor 50/2.0 has Nikkor glow, my pre-WWII Ikonta has Zeiss Tessar glow, my Industar-22 has some soviet glow.... And now we have Yashica glow ;-)

[ericd]

I suspect this glow is related to coating... Uncoated, single-coated lenses or not as good as today

multicoating... And tiny scratches (cleaning marks) on the front element.My Nikkor have a lot of these. Sonnar or

Sonnar copies (Nikkors in LTM, Jupiter-8 and Jupiter-3....) seems to have a very soft front element...

[zml]

<i>Whats closest to that Leica glow</i><br><br>

 

Pretty much anything: in double-blind testing your chances of correctly identifying the camera and/or lens

responsible for this-or-that picture in a statistically significant number of attempts are not too good, I'd say rather

poor, like zero, "glow" or no "glow."

[don_e]

I agree with Steve and Larry on the GSN (I have a G and the Canonet GIII).

 

I define "glow", ie "halation", whether Leica or not, as the translucent gradient-like diffusion from the center

of the highlight. To see glow all you need to do is look at a Vermeer painting. He would place a drop of lead

white into a pool of resin and let it spread out.

[robert lee]

Here's a classic Mike Johnston article addressing about getting the "Leica Glow": http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/sm-02-04-28.shtml. It works.

 

An important component is the not well corrected aberrations introduced by some older optics. I have a Takumar 50mm f1.4 in M42 (and adapter to Canon EOS.) At wide apertures, the look is different from certainly more modern EOS optics.

[starvy]

my 1937 elmar 9cm produces the glow but i don't always like it.

[plasma181]

Funny you should mention that. I've been playing around a little, trying to get a Leica-like effect. I wasn't expecting anything too great, but it's fun to experiment.

 

http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?topic_id=1481&msg_id=00QWnI&photo_id=7683840&photo_sel_index=0

[mohir_ali]

Nikkor 50/1.4 SC LTM

[jermaine_scott]

Thanks everyone. I now have a better understanding of the Leica glow. I guess I need a Leica to round out my cameras. Matter of fact. I'm sure of it.