Leica lenses vs others

[kelly_flanigan1]

<p>Ray; what vintage of Rigid Summicron; I suppose it is the one from decades ago; and not the 1990's LTM new Summicron? </p>

[Gus Lazzari]

<p>No doubt that the more modern coatings and designs produce higher contrast.</p>

<p>But you know, with Ray's comparison, <strong>I really like</strong> the look & color rendition of the tiny collapsable 50mm Elmar! </p>

<p>Good job Ray, & thanks again for the kind mention.</p>

[seth_lord]

<p>Ray<br>

I found this very useful, even given the limitations mentioned by other members. Thank you.<br>

The performance of the Jupiter amazed me. Like you I am new to Leica (with an M4).<br>

I accept that I am in no position to pass definitive comment on any of this. I realise that we are only looking at scans on computer screens, but the reality is that this is the platform most photographers use these days to display their images. So, if it looks as good as a Summicron ... and if its bokeh looks equally as pleasing and maybe better than some of the Leica glass ...<br>

... then I would like to know where I can get some of the Jupiter lenses. Can anyone recommend a vendor?</p>

[oleg_novikov]

<p>Hi Ray,</p>

<p>Thanks very much for the kind words. I had the Leica lens on loan from a friend and it was already converted when he gave it to me. I have no idea how it was done but can confirm that it was done in a neat way and you can focus to infinity without problems.</p>

<p>I have never been to Yuyao but visited Ningbo a few times. If you have time, you might want to visit Mount Putuo, which is not far from where you will be and a great photographic destination.</p>

[OPK]

<p>nice comparision! there's no need to peep at 100% crops in real life (you'll never be watching pictures closer than 50cm). what really count is overall look and your test gave us an idea. good work:)</p>

<p>and to all sharpness/pixel peepers - don't you feel sorry wasting your time instead of shooting pictures;)</p>

[ray_cutting]

<p>Andrew, according to Wikipedia, the Jupiter lens was made by KMZ, the factory that later made Zorki cameras, they also made some Fed cameras for Fed, to help with their production requirements.<br /><br />Kelly, the Summicron rigid is a 1957 ver. and is one of the heaviest feeling lens i have, i love how solid it feels.<br /><br />Dan, welcome to the Leica family, you will never regret the thousands you are about to spend, LOL. The only place to buy a Jupiter is online, like ebay, thats where i found mine. According to the web, some lens are good and some are not so good. If i were you i would buy one and factor in a CLA cost to have it cleaned and adjusted like i did. Gus Lazzari did a fantastic job on mine, he made it look and feel like new, and now it take great pictures.</p>

[allancobb]

<p>Speaking of comparisons of Leica to other lenses, I seem to recall a Popular Photography column in 2001 (May issue?) by the late great Herb Keppler comparing the 50mm f/2 Summicron (I think) on an M6 to the Pentax Super Takumar 50mm f/1.4 lens on a 1964-era Spotmatic. Identical scenes were taken with both lenses at the same aperture and identical 8x12 enlargements were printed... the analysis showed no discernible difference could be made. Caused quite a stir if I remember correctly!</p>

[paul_neuthaler]

<p>Ray, I hope you enjoyed the activity</p>

[ray_cutting]

<p>Paul<br>

I had alot of fun doing my little comparison, when ever i get to spend quality time with my toys, im in heaven!<br>

I have some other lenses i woud like to test sometime, a jupiter 35,50,85 and 135.<br>

It's all for fun.</p>

[carbon_dragon]

<p>The jupiter seems to do a pretty good job. It's so hard to compare because focusing with a rangefinder can be difficult to execute repeatedly. Also people tend to think certain kinds of pictures "look" sharper, often related to color contrast and general contrast of the shot, as well as lack of flare. Jupiters and other lenses from the Soviet age can be great or not so great depending on construction, age, and how well they were put together that day (as well as who has maintained them since). With a Leica lens (or indeed Nikon, Canon, etc.) you can rely on good quality control where with a Soviet lens, it's more of a gamble. Thanks for posting.</p>

[Gus Lazzari]

<p>I think that David G. sums it up beautifully !</p>

[frank_horn]

<p>Ray--<br>

All the effort at testing these lenses is appreciated. <br>

Oleg-- Ditto.<br>

The latest Summicron gets my vote as the most pleasing insofar as sharpness, contrast and neutral color rendition.<br>

What I'd like to view is the latest Summicron against the 50mm Elmar-M. There is a difference, but I can't really say what it is! They're both tack sharp. The Rollei 35S f2.8 Sonnar did excellent work for me, as well.</p>

[nee_sung]

<p>About 2 years ago another person did a similar test but with far more lenses, all of them 50mm! Can't remember the details now.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>the uncoated elmar which is quite dull in comparison (but closer to reality)</p>

</blockquote>

<p>That is why I have one, I like the closeness to reality.</p>

 

[ray_cutting]

<p>Yes, i also like my Elmar, i am really impressed at the sharpness of this lens.<br>

It's incredible for a 1939 lens!<br>

I wouldn't hesitate only taking this lens and a Leica IIIf on a trip, because when collapsed you could put it in your pocket and have it available all day long.</p>

 

[seth_lord]

<p>I think it may have been Raid (see above) who did that exhaustive test on the 50mm lenses. Search on him.<br>

Dan</p>