Zeiss AND Voigtländer lenses the better option in comparison to the original Leica ?

Quite interisting what form of different phrases a forreign fellow is able to learn from you native
speakers here at Photrio..!

with regards

PS : In most cases are these phrases from bad shape! ..= not socially aceptable!

Once the monks of the eastern and western Zen halls in Nansen’s temple were
quarrelling about a cat. As he saw this, Nansen held up the cat and said,
“You monks! If one of you can say a word, I will not slay the cat.”
No one could answer. Nansen cut the cat in two. Nansen told Joshu what had
happened, and asked him for his view. Joshu thereupon took his sandals, put
them upon his head and went away. Nansen said,
“If you had been there, I could have spared the cat.”

chris77 said:

Once the monks of the eastern and western Zen halls in Nansen’s temple were
quarrelling about a cat. As he saw this, Nansen held up the cat and said,
“You monks! If one of you can say a word, I will not slay the cat.”
No one could answer. Nansen cut the cat in two. Nansen told Joshu what had
happened, and asked him for his view. Joshu thereupon took his sandals, put
them upon his head and went away. Nansen said,
“If you had been there, I could have spared the cat.”

Click to expand...

You are a real poet - have you also further skills chriss77?

with regards

PS : Not my problem if you can't afford a Porsche.... www.cars.com/car-affordability-calculator

PPS : It's indeed a funny game with you here but sorry I've no time for such NONSENCE

Summary Part 2 :

So what about the alternate manufacturers to Leica M-mount lens sytems ?
There is of course Voigtländer - this company is long time not existing any longer!
The company "Cosina" in Japan have the rights on the name VOIGTLÄNDER today!
Aha that's all? ....not at least :
www.closeuphotography.com/blog/cosina-voigtlander-factory-tour

That manufacturing is a real hight class manufacturing from strongest quality control
it is "high tech manufacturing" - the quality is extreme good and extreme reliable!

Well Leica is doing the same and it is better - that is correct!

The begining with M-mount was with Voigtländer system - but short after this Zeiss decided
to manufacture also there = Zeiss made from Cosina!!!
That should us tell enough about quality ! For Zeiss it is good enough - YES!

IS THERE A DIFFERENCE IN QUALITY BETWEEN VOIGTLÄNDER MADE BY COSINA
AND ZEISS MADE BY COSINA .......NO !!!
So you can buy lenses from Voigtländer brand with same characteristics (quite same quality level)
of that Zeiss lenses? YES ! !

hmm .....does this sound interisting ??

Where is then the difference between Zeiss and Voigtländer M-mount lenses?

The difference is from pricing : Zeiss is real cheap in regard of Leica ~ the half around but it depends a bit while VOIGTLÄNDER is much more cheap priced in comparison of Zeiss!

And that here mentioned isn't possible (not at the same quality level)!!!!! !! you are thinking now - correct?

PEOPLE IT IS FACT!

Notice : a high tech manufacturing is not possible and able in regards of : "Let us the cheap lenses made from worste quality!

So the " general quality characteristics of both brands in regard of raw materials design and mechanical precision is absolute the same!

Trendlands typical Fairytale Time...? Folks if you just bought a Leica M lens at about
5700,- USD last week you are of course not able to follow here - because your mind will not
allow you today!

So were is the difference beside the name onto a Zeiss and a Voigtländer lens?
The cheaper Voigtländer lenses have a more easy design! They are generally from less speed!
So you will not find lenses of same parameters from Zeiss and Voigtländer!
Cosina does intend this - to avoid a canibalism between this two brands!
So the typical 2.0 35mm is from Zeiss :


while the classic Voigtländer Ultron has 1,7 / 35mm !



If you don't like to see pictures of a original Leica M camera with a cheaper Voigtländer lens
pls. shut your eyes here at once!

Damned this is a bad example (the Ultron has more speed in comparision of the Zeiss)

But each rule has its exeption (I do not intend to refer aboud the whole Voigtländer lens portfolio in comparison to the Zeiss M-mount lens series) but in many cases the Zeiss version of the simular
Voigtländer lens have had more speed! The latest evolution let have Voigtländer lenses more special from design (regarding all Nocton lenses) and Voigtländer also have more expensive lenses within its portfolio meanwhile = more and more exeptions!

Here we regard a Zeiss Biogon (what is a very good lens design to many years) and it has that
T in addition wich indicates a special correction and better glass sort special Zeiss coating a.s.o.!
(I guess therefore Zeiss/Cosina decided to max speed 2.0 to make it not too complicate from design)

Because it is extreme hard to design a lens with absolute best characteristics with more speed and more speed and more speed (btw 2.0 can also be enough speed)!

But OK the Zeiss here is much better (and more expensive) beside less speed in comparison to the
Ultron here!

Is a lens with less speed the worse lens? Not to me - if you regard its sweetspot that difference is often minized so in general a lens from less speed can have a simular characteristic at
5,6 in comparison to the competing lens at 2.8/4.0!

But lenses with max. speed are real expensive because the lens ability to show good parameters
is going low from becomming more speed! Therefore the corection of such more and more failures
is most complicate to lenses of more and more speed! Beside general issues concerning APO
design and others!
with regards

I,m keeping very quiet about the two lenses I use on my Leica M8, a 7 Artisans 50 f1.1 bought mint for £275 and another 7 Artisans lens, a 35 f2 new for £199. Truly a shameful outfit but it works. Against all odds I have managed a couple of tolerable snaps. Us bottom-feeders sometimes use screw lenses, old Leica, voigtlander , soviets, with cheap Kipon screw to m mount adaptors which carry 6 bit coding on them. And they say Leicas are for toffs. All the best, Charles.

Charles Escott-New said:

Us bottom-feeders sometimes use screw lenses, old Leica, voigtlander , soviets, with cheap Kipon screw to m mount adaptors which carry 6 bit coding on them. And they say Leicas are for toffs. All the best, Charles.

Click to expand...

I recently would not trust to state it such drastic (for toffs)....!

But from my personal preference I would like to buy indeed one fine day a used Leica M-lens ! I am also able to try M39 because I own the adapter!

with regards

Why do people spend 1000s of pounds/dollars/euros etc on camera bodies to then go and put a 200 pound/dollar/euro lens on it ?

I use a 35mm lens, but personally found I liked the Zeiss 35mm f1.4 over the 35mm summicron 2.0 rigid (both were about the same cost as each other at KEH). I felt the Zeiss was the better made lens personally. The 1/3 stops is actually quite annoying. I rather dislike that, but can't do much about it. Having just starting shooting Leica, the lack of a focus tab doesn't bother me since I have no experience with it.

Ste_S said:

Why do people spend 1000s of pounds/dollars/euros etc on camera bodies to then go and put a 200 pound/dollar/euro lens on it ?

Click to expand...

Because it is fun, Charles.

Ste_S said:

Why do people spend 1000s of pounds/dollars/euros etc on camera bodies to then go and put a 200 pound/dollar/euro lens on it ?

Click to expand...

The Leica body ? There are of course a lot of collectors of Leica cameras!



others buy a M7 (comparable price) :


A digital Leica makes no sence :


But (if you want to know) my point against a Leica M (not against the M-lenses) is this here :


......that is nothing for me.....!

with regards

Charles Escott-New said:

Because it is fun, Charles.

Click to expand...

Charles I just noticed - the M8 is digital? Guess you spend not that high sum - you bought yours
in used condition?

For me digital shooting has no need to by a digital camera (if I have to shot digital I use one
of the Canon from our company!) - don't like it so much!

with regards

trendland said:

Charles I just noticed - the M8 is digital? Guess you spend not that high sum - you bought yours
in used condition?

For me digital shooting has no need to by a digital camera (if I have to shot digital I use one
of the Canon from our company!) - don't like it so much!

with regards

Click to expand...

Take your point, yes the M8 is digital and is worth about £800 on the market. Being the first in it's line it was put together by film people at Leica and at Kodak, who made the CCD sensor which I think gives a filmic quality. I also enjoy my M2 especially with the 50 Summicron. However I am not sure whether it is possible to see much difference between the output of various makers' lenses, sometimes all the talk of the Leica look and the Zeiss pop makes me smile. Someone as average as me could be given a top of the range Leica camera and lens with very little chance of shooting one image that comes close to the output of Cartier-Bresson, but I would be very happy to try. Regards to you, Charles.

Charles Escott-New said:

Take your point, yes the M8 is digital and is worth about £800 on the market. Being the first in it's line it was put together by film people at Leica and at Kodak, who made the CCD sensor which I think gives a filmic quality. I also enjoy my M2 especially with the 50 Summicron. However I am not sure whether it is possible to see much difference between the output of various makers' lenses, sometimes all the talk of the Leica look and the Zeiss pop makes me smile. Someone as average as me could be given a top of the range Leica camera and lens with very little chance of shooting one image that comes close to the output of Cartier-Bresson, but I would be very happy to try. Regards to you, Charles.

Click to expand...

Understand - yes (so far forgotten) a rangefinder for shooting street photography! Yes I remember years ago I indeed shot on street with my rangefinder - there are more possibilitys than with normal camera (people who been shot don't recognizing of being photographed)!

with regards

Ste_S said:

Why do people spend 1000s of pounds/dollars/euros etc on camera bodies to then go and put a 200 pound/dollar/euro lens on it ?

Click to expand...

For some it's because they spent most of their money on the body they wanted and that didn't leave them with a lot left over for the lens. For others, they don't consider a lens to be worth as much as the camera they bought. And yet others just like the less expensive lens more.

trendland said:

...
But (if you want to know) my point against a Leica M (not against the M-lenses) is this here :
View attachment 221122
...

Click to expand...

That's a Barnack (screw mount) Leica. It's much easier to load M-series Leicas:

https://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/Leica/Leica-M3/htmls/Leica_M3.htm

Even so, I can load my my Barnack Leicas (III, IIIf) in 20 seconds. It's not difficult: just ensure the sprocket hole in the film engages a tooth on the sprocket shaft.

Theo Sulphate said:

That's a Barnack (screw mount) Leica. It's much easier to load M-series Leicas:

https://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/Leica/Leica-M3/htmls/Leica_M3.htm

Even so, I can load my my Barnack Leicas (III, IIIf) in 20 seconds. It's not difficult: just ensure the sprocket hole in the film engages a tooth on the sprocket shaft.

Click to expand...

Yes I can't find the right advertising poster from the 50s! Perhaps you remember:
A sophisticated lady is loading a Leica M with her leather gloves!
Leica wanted to demonstrate : it is possible and easy! (The Leica II and III is no problem but the period was the 30s - that is allmost relative!) I never find sympathy for the reason Leica did not change construction of Leica M???? Not in the 50s...not in the 60th....not in the 70s...a.s.o.
with regards

PS : To load a Leica M is of course no problem also if one is sophiscated enough like that 50s lether glove girl !
PPS : I need a system what is easy enough to operate in the underslept state!

trendland said:

... I never find sympathy for the reason Leica did not change construction of Leica M???? Not in the 50s...not in the 60th....not in the 70s...

Click to expand...

The original reason for Leica's bottom-loading may have been to ensure the rigidity of the camera body. In later years, I think it has just become tradition. Similarly, there was a reason Porsche placed the ignition switch on the left, but now it is just tradition.

The ignore button is amazing.

I'm thinking the mr. trendland just got a new dingy and an electric trolling motor and he's getting lots of bites.

Theo Sulphate said:

The original reason for Leica's bottom-loading may have been to ensure the rigidity of the camera body. In later years, I think it has just become tradition. Similarly, there was a reason Porsche placed the ignition switch on the left, but now it is just tradition.

View attachment 221614

Click to expand...

Same thoughts form my side Theo! The original designed body wasn't changed from reasons of tradition! Leica had problems from that behavior during the 80s/90s!
Concerning messurement , electronic shutter, zoom lenses, concerning autofocus, later concerning digital sensors!
From my point the approach of Leica in concern of simple messurement, mechanical shutter , (Yes I know later versions got electronic),anty zoom decisions, No autofocus a..s.o. I feel fine with!
But a smal improvement in regard of normal 35mm loading would have had NO big thing for Leica in concern of tradition!
The body design of M Leicas with loading film via simple camera back could have been made
without dramatical change of overall visual impression of traditional Leica M Design!
The later R8 was a dramatical overdriven change from Leica R design!
Today Leica is omnipresent with all kind of digital affaires : Digital M Leica, Samsung, Huawei Smartphones,a.s.o.?
So from a todays perspective it is like a joke that Leica wasn't willing to change to botton loading
design - I feel sure most Leica M user have no problem to load film in that uncommon way but also : many don't like it much!!

with regards