Leica My Leica Kit - Joining The "Cult"

For the last few days, I've been mucking around with the film modes. The smooth color film reminds me of a let intense Kodachrome 25. Not bad, but not something I think I would use a lot.
The vivid color film is nicely saturated, but it does seem to skew toward the highly contrasty and the JPG seems to be almost 1 full stop under exposed compared to the DNG file. A little boosting and it seems OK.

Still leaning toward just shooting RAW and post processing. I will say that the JPG were pretty good overall and I can see some potential in them in the future as I continue to get used to them.

Some samples from the vivid film mode from today. I do like the "grain" structure that it employs at base ISO.

One last note - I was messing with the lens profiles and set the M 240 to manual and had it setup for the Zeiss 50mm f/2. Totally forgot to switch it to a 35mm f/2.8 equivalent - so the EXIF data is incorrect - so the images below are all from the Zeiss Biogon-C 35mm f/2.8 ZM.

1
03-27-2023_lithopolis_M240_L1001466.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


2
03-27-2023_lithopolis_M240_L1001477.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


3
03-27-2023_lithopolis_M240_L1001481.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


4
03-27-2023_lithopolis_M240_L1001484.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


5
03-27-2023_lithopolis_M240_L1001495.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


6
03-27-2023_lithopolis_M240_L1001500.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


7
03-27-2023_lithopolis_M240_L1001502.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


8
03-27-2023_lithopolis_M240_L1001507.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 
The TTArtisan 28mm was a bust...the wrong lens was delivered and they have no option to get me the right one....so that is off the table right now.

The Laowa is interesting...I was not aware that they had that in FF. I used to have the Laowa 7.5mm for m43 and really liked it. The 9mm would be fine as I can frame via the rear LCD as needed. Assuming it is rectilinear, I can definitely give it a look.

I read some things about the 21/4 Voigt and how it may not be a great option for digital and that the f/3.5 version is better.

Then it comes to availability, and the Voigtlander 15mm and 21mm seem to be available more often than the 12mm. I've only heard praises for the 15mm with very little downsides, then the 21mm gets the second nod.
Plenty of time and much research on my part.

You've all not steered me wrong yet! :)
If you were wanting a silver one, B&H has a used one right now.
 
A strange lens, but also well worth it (for me) is the Lomography Atoll 17mm f/2.8; it's kind of huge (for a rangefinder lens), but optically holds its own; it also comes with a (cheap! plastic!) dedicated viewfinder.
I wondered if you'd bring this lens up, Matt. I'd imagine the viewfinder is kind of an annoyance, and there really aren't any other options out there for a 17mm, but I thought the optical performance I've seen, though limited, was rather good.
 
I wondered if you'd bring this lens up, Matt. I'd imagine the viewfinder is kind of an annoyance, and there really aren't any other options out there for a 17mm, but I thought the optical performance I've seen, though limited, was rather good.
It's huge for an EDC lens (on an M body), so it'll have to wait for another week or so, but I can provide a few images soon.

I own two (sets of) Lomography lenses, and the Atoll is the clear winner - great build, good optics, alomst boringly so (not really - but if you expect "Lomo" character, you'll certainly be disappointed). The Neptune lens set for F mount is quirky, but fun, and while optically not quite as convincing, carrying it is kind of rewarding. But changing lens heads is pretty fiddly - what you save in size, you add in complications.

On topic: The viewfinder is plasticky, but it works surprisingly well: It's bright and accurate enough. It was part of the backer's package - today, you pay $100 extra for the whole accessory bundle, including a mount adapter of your choice; the not-so-funny part: I as a backer got a speciality "limited" close-up adapter instead that doesn't allow for infinity focus - so, more of an extension ring; what were they thinking?! I prefer using the lens on the Z 6, though, mainly because of its size and front width (the built-in hood is massive for its type) that make it obscure much of the camera's viewfinder, and in theory, you need that for focusing. But if you're not close and the lens is stopped down just a tad, framing is more important than exact focus - DoF is huge anyway, even wide open. Hyperfocal settings are marked. Results are distinctive and nice; with LiveView (or on a mirrorless body), you can get close, too - though not extremely so (0.25m- 0.75ft. - only marked in meters). The aperture ring is smooth - if that bothers you, it's not the lens for you. For me personally, there's another quirk though: I dislike shooting my M bodies (the M10 and the M 262) without a ThumbsUp - and using the viewfinder blocks the hotshoe. Not too bad, just not as comfortable as I prefer.

Here's how it looks on the M10:
DSC_3517.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

(Sorry for the somewhat wonky colours - mixed lighting.)

Anyhow, I'd say the Atoll is a lens to take your time with (at least on an M body); that's why I mentioned the Laowa as well. That's a quick lens to use, all things work as expected, and apart from close focusing (0.12m - 0.4ft.!), you can just snap-guess away (there's no viewfinder this wide anyway). It's sharp, and whatever you end up with, you can use (crop and adjust for framing if necessary). The lens has a little click for you when you leave rangefinder coupling; this also coincides with hyperfocal at f/8 (one stop in). It's also more compact that the Atoll, in spite of its huge FoV. But of course, it's only f/5.6.

Assuming it is rectilinear, I can definitely give it a look.
It is.

All that said ... The lens that is more intriguing to shoot with is definitely the Atoll. And sometimes, f/2.8 is great to have.

M.
 
Last edited:
Played around with the Black and White mode today. Tried it out with the green contrast filter, which was my favorite way to work the Olympus PEN-F MONO mode.

Definitely a big difference in the way that Leica renders than the Oly! The oly was way more contrasty by default. The Leica tends to not crush the shadows as much. Out of camera, not my favorite, but makes the JPG a good starting point to tweak a little. I think my next test will be doing my own film mode or trying a different filter, perhaps orange or red. Just wish that Leica would allow processing of the DNG in camera (maybe it does and I have just not gotten that far yet).

Some samples after I processed them. Leica 90mm f/4 Wetzler-Elmar.

1
03-28-2023_reyn_M240_L1001513.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


2
03-28-2023_reyn_M240_L1001515.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


3
03-28-2023_reyn_M240_L1001518.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


4
03-28-2023_reyn_M240_L1001520.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


5

03-28-2023_reyn_M240_L1001522.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


6
03-28-2023_reyn_M240_L1001524.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


7
03-28-2023_reyn_M240_L1001525.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


8
03-28-2023_reyn_M240_L1001526.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 
I prefer the yellow filter in the B&W film mode for jpgs because the others are "too much". I have been doing much more DNG into ART 1.18 of late instead of just doing OOC jpg though. I find I use a lot of HaldCLUT film simulations in ART to get the look I like (XP2, Fuji 400H & Kodak Ektar 100) rather than the couple in camera.

I also have been needing a full stop of exposure compensation for the snow all winter but that's a different issue with the metering ;)
 
I prefer the yellow filter in the B&W film mode for jpgs because the others are "too much". I have been doing much more DNG into ART 1.18 of late instead of just doing OOC jpg though. I find I use a lot of HaldCLUT film simulations in ART to get the look I like (XP2, Fuji 400H & Kodak Ektar 100) rather than the couple in camera.

I also have been needing a full stop of exposure compensation for the snow all winter but that's a different issue with the metering ;)

I like using DxO Filmpack and usually do that versus shooting in camera JPG...but sometimes it is nice to just have the JPG ready to go and not faff about with the RAW and other stuff.
 
Played around with the Black and White mode today. Tried it out with the green contrast filter, which was my favorite way to work the Olympus PEN-F MONO mode.

Definitely a big difference in the way that Leica renders than the Oly! The oly was way more contrasty by default. The Leica tends to not crush the shadows as much. Out of camera, not my favorite, but makes the JPG a good starting point to tweak a little. I think my next test will be doing my own film mode or trying a different filter, perhaps orange or red. Just wish that Leica would allow processing of the DNG in camera (maybe it does and I have just not gotten that far yet).

Some samples after I processed them. Leica 90mm f/4 Wetzler-Elmar.

1
View attachment 375681

2
View attachment 375682

3
View attachment 375683

4
View attachment 375684

5

View attachment 375685

6
View attachment 375686

7
View attachment 375687

8
View attachment 375688
Just a little note: The Elmar-C has middling contrast anyway; it's less visible in colour because those are pretty bold (though a touch magenta, but that's hard to see with auto white balance), but I think it'll definitely be noticeable in b&w ...

M.
 
Just a little note: The Elmar-C has middling contrast anyway; it's less visible in colour because those are pretty bold (though a touch magenta, but that's hard to see with auto white balance), but I think it'll definitely be noticeable in b&w ...

M.

Coming from the Zeiss lenses, everything seems underwhelming in the color and contrast department! lol
Also, was looking at some reviews/image samples of the Atoll 17mm lens...I really like what I'm seeing from it and can see that being on a short list of wides for m mount I would consider.
 
Great...as if there are not already a lot of great options out there - Mitakon just announced this!


M mount 28mm f/5.6 for $299 USD new.
 
"And now for something completely Different"

These are with a 135/4.5 Hektor-M. The original "I don't get no respect lens". Often well below $100.
I picked one of for $60. All wide-open.
L1017892.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


L1017893.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


L1017894.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


L1017895.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


L1017896.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


L1017901.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 
Great...as if there are not already a lot of great options out there - Mitakon just announced this!


M mount 28mm f/5.6 for $299 USD new.
Nice to have choices but it is going to be hard to beat the Voigtlander 28mm f2 Ultra for size/speed/value and of course, image quality. For small, the older Canon 28 LTM lenses are very good and small and then there is the modern TTArtisan 28/5.6 which I really like for a daylight small carry. Yep, no shortage of affordable choices.
 
Nice to have choices but it is going to be hard to beat the Voigtlander 28mm f2 Ultra for size/speed/value and of course, image quality. For small, the older Canon 28 LTM lenses are very good and small and then there is the modern TTArtisan 28/5.6 which I really like for a daylight small carry. Yep, no shortage of affordable choices.
When I saw the images, I reacted the same way I had when the 7Artisans 28mm f/5.6 come out: No advantage over the Voigtländer in terms of size (at least not a crucial one), so, no real reason not to go for the most desirable option. Voigtländer has knocked it out of the park with the Ultron 28mm f/2 II. The TTArtisan is tiny - a little expensive for what it is on the whole, but it's well made, looks the part and takes nice images (not perfect, just nice).

What doesn't get mentioned a lot: The old Voigtländer Ultron 28mm f/2 for M mount is a really good lens, too. Not as small and optically fantastic as its successor, but still enjoyable, with very nice rendering, good colour and sharpness. If you can put up with a slightly bigger lens, it's a good choice. Mine practically lives on my M8 - it's a "match made in heaven" ...

@Brian Great stuff! Unbeatable for the price, too. I'll say here that the Elmar-M 135mm f/4 is another affordable gem. I've never seen the Hector "in the flesh" - how does it compare in terms of size and weight?

M.
 
Another try at monochrome. This time with the planar 50mm and I manually tweaked the B&W mode settings.

Definitely better, meaning more to my liking.

SOOC JPGs
03-29-2023_streetart_M240_L1001557_Original.jpeg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


03-29-2023_streetart_M240_L1001556_Original.jpeg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


03-29-2023_streetart_M240_L1001548_Original.jpeg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


03-29-2023_streetart_M240_L1001543_Original.jpeg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


03-29-2023_streetart_M240_L1001544_Original.jpeg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 
Last edited:
OK, so I had a play around with the GW-4 for the Ricoh GRIII. Very nice indeed. However, it seems rather "normal". Because of this, I think that I'll look more toward the Voigtlander 12mm or 15mm for something way more wide and "fun".

I'll still use the 21mm on the Ricoh, but it seems very well behaved and clinical.

Might see if I can make a stop at the local camera store today and see what they might have in the way of Leica glass.

Also - I forgot to mention about the shots yesterday....I was able to really test the infinity focus way more in those monochrome city shots and I have to say that it is bang on. I just turned the Planar 50mm to infinity and snapped off a few of the art deco looking building (The Leveque Tower in Columbus, Ohio). Perfectly in focus even at f/2.8.
 
Another question...and I think I might know the answer, just want to confirm my theory.

I've noticed that the EXIF data seems weird for the aperture on some of the images.

I have been explicity using full aperture stops. I noticed that the EXIF is reporting f/4.8 (f/4) or f/3.4 (f/2.8) when I know I've been using and not accidentally moving the aperture.
I think it might be for 1 of 2 reasons. A - since they are non-Leica lenses and I was shooting with lens info set to automatic and these lenses are not coded...the camera doesn't really know for sure and is approximating the aperture based on exposure. Or B - I am using exposure compensation and this is how it is registering the exposure shift. (Seems less likely since I am shooting in aperture priority and one would think that the shutter speed would be the variable that changes and not the locked ISO or aperture).

It's not an issue for me, as the exposures are coming out as expected....just more of a pure curiosity on my part.
 
Another question...and I think I might know the answer, just want to confirm my theory.

I've noticed that the EXIF data seems weird for the aperture on some of the images.

I have been explicity using full aperture stops. I noticed that the EXIF is reporting f/4.8 (f/4) or f/3.4 (f/2.8) when I know I've been using and not accidentally moving the aperture.
I think it might be for 1 of 2 reasons. A - since they are non-Leica lenses and I was shooting with lens info set to automatic and these lenses are not coded...the camera doesn't really know for sure and is approximating the aperture based on exposure. Or B - I am using exposure compensation and this is how it is registering the exposure shift. (Seems less likely since I am shooting in aperture priority and one would think that the shutter speed would be the variable that changes and not the locked ISO or aperture).

It's not an issue for me, as the exposures are coming out as expected....just more of a pure curiosity on my part.
That’s normal, the RF guesses the aperture. Imagine owning and shooting say a Noctilux wide open and the exif data displays as F4.8 well yes, than can and does happen on occasion.
 
That’s normal, the RF guesses the aperture. Imagine owning and shooting say a Noctilux wide open and the exif data displays as F4.8 well yes, than can and does happen on occasion.

Cool! I'm glad that my guess was confirmed. I mean, it is close, and exact EXIF / exposure settings are something that I tend to not care much about anymore...just happened to notice it.
 
Back
Top