We had sunlight today! I was able to take the loaned Leica 35-70mm lens out for a walk. I'll say one thing right off the bat: It's sharp and contrasty! Part one. High ISO at home.

Here we are looking at a few high ISO samples from the combination of the Leica SL camera (type 601 from 2015) and the Leica Vario-Elmar 35-70mm f4.0 zoom lens from 1997.  Several of these (4?) were done using ISO 12,500. I'm happy with the way that camera handles high sensitivity settings. It's not a Panasonic S5 or a Sony A7S3 but it's not at all bad for a sensor from one or two generations back... 

First off, I'm always interested to see how the Leica SL handles low light and 

high ISO settings. This shot is the top of a large bookcase in my bedroom.

It was shot handheld at 1/250th of a second with an aperture of f5.6 which

required an ISO of 12,500. If you click on the image to see it across your

desktop computer screen you'll see "grain." But I am impressed

at the lack of chroma noise. A nice test. 

the same parameters here. But this was also converted to black and white 

in Lightroom. Again, grainy but to my mind quite usable...

Note the detail on the right hand side of the blue and white shower curtain.

It's got tons and tons of detail. And I love the contrast right out of the camera.

this is my most used appliance. I make toast with it every day before 

swim practice. There is noise in this image which was made at 12,500 ISO but

it's not intrusive and the contrast and color never really break down.

Toasting Trader Joe's Organic Super Bread and slathering it with 

peanut butter is a joy. Add apricot preserves for a touch of heaven. 

Leica SL + 35-70mm f4.0

And finally, a semi-abstract view of my new refrigerator.

Again, shot at 12,500 and gently processed in Lightroom.

I think the Leica lens is a very good adjunct to the 

performance of the Leica SL camera. 

WALKING PHOTOS COMING IN THE FOLLOWING POST.

COMING UP RIGHT NOW.

One version of a "standard" zoom lens. Why do people like these?

 

This is the zoom lens I wrote about yesterday. It was made by Leica for their R system film cameras starting in 1997. Its specs are pretty meager by current standards. The zoom range is anything but wide-ranging, going from "only" 35 millimeters to 70 millimeters. The fastest aperture is f4.0. It can only be focused manually. When using an adapter to mount the lens on anything but an R series film camera you'll need to do your focusing in the stop down mode. I'd make a case that it's smaller and lighter than current lenses but it's really not. Not when you add the lens adapter to the mix. If none of that appeals to you and you shoot with any number of other cameras there are plenty of current, modern lenses that weigh less, cost less and give you a lot more features. An example would be the Sigma 28-70mm DG DN f2.8 lens. Wider range, all the features, and a full stop faster into the bargain. 

When this lens was introduced I think the prevailing sentiment was that you could replace three individual, single focal length lenses with only this one zoom. In fact, reviews and legend suggests that when comparing a Leica 35mm, 50mm and 80mm lens, used at the same aperture as this one's fully open aperture (f4.0), this lens was actually a better overall performer. If you like wider angles of view you would be out of luck. If you needed longer focal lengths....well.... you could crop the frame or you'd just have to choose a different lens. But for people who like to shoot in the neighborhood of 50mm "normal" lenses this was a sensible choice for those wanting only one lens to carry around. 

It's no secret that I like the 50mm focal length. Lately, I've gotten more and more comfortable with 35mm focal lengths as well, and I'd never say "no" to focal lengths a little longer than 50mm. I think of this lens as a standard 50mm with the option to add a bit more or get just little tighter. It's more of a "frame adjustable" lens that a real 21st century zoom...

The advantage that Leica fans will trot out is that the optical performance is quite good. And in its heyday I'm reasonably sure it was a top of the line solution in a short range zoom. Now? There are plenty of good zooms on the market that are cheaper, faster and easier to use. But those of us who seem to have drunk the Kool-Aid from Leica persist in thinking that these lenses maintain their value because they offer some secret sauce of imaging that makes photographs taken with them different and, subjectively, better. 

In the 1990s I used a Nikon N90s and a Nikon 35-70mm f2.8 lens to photograph many events. It felt like a good range to me then. The 35mm "short" end of the lens kept me from composing group shots in which the people on the edges of the frame seemed to gain 50 pounds and grow heads the size of melons. At the same time the longest focal length of 70mm pushed me to get in closer to people and actually have human contact instead of standing back and sniping. It was a good solution for my way of shooting. 

That lens got replaced by the Nikon 28-70mm f2.8 which seemed very large at the time. Now it's been eclipsed in size and weight by any number of new 24-70mm zooms. 

At the time of its introduction the biggest complaint about the lens was the "slow" maximum aperture. And with early digital cameras I can see this would have been less than optimal. The early sensors needed lots of light and everything got dicey when ISOs topped 200 or 400. Now though an aperture of f4.0 can be seen in a different light. Would you be willing, in a time of clean and fairly noise free ISO 6400 camera sensors, to trade off one stop of light gathering for better overall optical performance? Seems like a reasonable question, especially if you are a "street photographer" and normally work by zone focusing to a hyperfocal setting and using f8.0 or f11 to provide greater depth of field. Then the f4.0 versus f2.8 argument becomes largely irrelevant. 

My interest in this lens falls into the category of, "could this be a really nicely corrected 50mm that provides the option to go slightly wider or slightly tighter as a situation suggests?"

The 35-70mm would make a nice travel lens when paired with either a Leica SL2 or a Panasonic S5. In the case of the SL2 one could also use the APS-C crop mode to boost the longer end of the focal length range. One menu change and you'd switch from 35-70 to something like 52.5mm to 105mm. Alternatively you could use this lens on a Leica CL and also get that longer range. But you'd have to be comfortable either foregoing wider angles or acquiesce to carrying along an extra lens; something like a 24mm.

Around the same time Leica also made a much larger (2x) 35-70mm f2.8 ASPH lens which was said to be an outstanding optical performer. It quickly became quite rare as collectors snapped up nearly all of them. If you want that extra stop of aperture and would like to own this completely manual, short zoom lens you'll find prices for mint copies start around $12,000. That's beyond my ability to rationalize burning money. 

I've been told by people who have had the pleasure of photographing with both the 2.8 and the 4.0 versions that from f4.0 on down the lenses are similar. The f2.8 is better but not by a huge margin. Ostensibly, by f5.6 they both tend to deliver both high contrast and high resolution. So, if you can find very nice copies of the f4.0 for around $850-$1,000 is it really worth it to you to spend the extra eleven thousand dollars to gain one stop? While doubling the weight?  Or, as one friend speculated, one might be able to do just as well with the f4.0 lens if one was willing to nudge that sharpness slider over a bit further to the right in post.....

If I buy the lens it will definitely be for the smaller profile and lower weight when compared to the two different native L mount zooms I currently own. One is the Leica 24-90mm f2.8 to f4.0. I love that lens for work but it's large and it weighs a ton. Its optical performance is better by far than many expensive prime lenses I've used from other camera makers. I use it on nearly every commercial project. But on those projects I don't need to carry it around for hours and hours as I would if I were taking a lens on vacation. Or for travel projects. 

I'm also quite comfortable with manual focusing, manual operating lenses because that's what I grew up with and I've never veered too far from those practices, and the acquisition and use of older MF lenses. 

So far I'm pleased with the lens and have done some research. The lens achieves its highest performance at f5.6. At that setting and with all focal lengths it's said to have great micro-contrast and the appearance of snap and three dimensional representation. I won't mind shooting travel stuff at f5.6 all day long. In fact, after reading Erwin Puts's assessment of lenses in general having high performance and diffraction limiting at f5.6 seems potentially superb. I also note that 35mm is the sharpest setting. 50mm is just a little behind that but brings "no distortions" to the mix. The 70mm setting is just a hair behind the 50mm but is crisp by f5.6.

It's sunny and nice out today. I'm waiting for a tree service to drop by at noon to cut up and haul off all of the branches scattered across our property. If they are on time and fairly quick I'm going to head out and shoot photographs for the rest of the day to see if the lens is as super and comfortable as many think. 

One more note: Having a lens that was built to a very high level of mechanical and optical tolerances while not having the complications of auto focusing or in lens image stabilization, or plastic gears and other internals, should mean that the lens will have a much longer life, is adaptable across any number of mirrorless lens systems, and should be much more reliable. If you are using the lens predominantly for travel then these considerations should be given their due. 

Technical consideration:

Leica focused writer and researcher Erwin Puts wrote about getting the best out of a lens and camera system. He suggested that having a high enough shutter speed is critical for handheld photographs in systems that eschew mechanical image stabilization. And even in conjunction with them.  I like to think I can handhold a 50mm at around 1/125th of a second with minimal camera shake. He disagreed and felt that 1/250th should be considered an absolute minimum and that 1/1,000th+ was demonstrably better. 

That's prodded me to experiment a bit more. I'm setting my camera to Manual. I'm putting the 35-70mm lens to its optimum aperture of f5.6 and setting my minimum shutter speed to 1/500th of a second. I'll let Auto ISO take care of the exposure and we'll see if it makes an observable difference in the rendering of fine details. Always good to find different ways to achieve higher image quality. We'll see how it pans out in the real world. 

Comment on whatever you want but let's stay away from overall Leica bashing and the idea of Veblen products. I know this stuff costs money. I know other stuff is cheaper. I don't really care. None of this is even a tiny down payment on an Aston Martin. And far cheaper to maintain than a backyard pool...

New lens. Not yet mine. Still in the testing phase....

 

I was minding my own business, wondering when more tree branches were going to fall from the sky when I got a text from a photographer friend of many years. He was reaching out to see if I would like to go up the street from my house and grab a coffee with him at Trianon Coffee. Since this friend is an unapologetic gear hound with lots of fun information to share I didn't see how I could possibly turn down his invitation.

The coffee house was crowded. Especially for a mid-afternoon. I mentioned this and my friend reminded me that many of the folks present might be there instead of in their homes because at the moment over 100,000 people in Austin are without power. Camping out at the coffee shop means hot coffee, a warm environment and free wi-fi. Ah, that explains the amazing, topical burst of coffee's popularity. 

We grabbed our preferred beverages and found a table. From seemingly out of nowhere he produced a leather lens case and handed it to me. I opened it and found inside one of the "holy grail" Leica R lenses. It's Leica's R series 35-70mm f4.0 zoom lens. Not to be confused with two earlier, f3.5 zooms nor the two 28-70mm f3.5-4.5 zooms made for Leica by Sigma. 

I had always heard that this final iteration of their 35-70mm lenses was completely designed by Leica, unlike a series of re-badged Minolta and Sigma lenses. And while it was "completely" designed by Leica in Germany I'd also heard that it was produced by Kyocera in Japan. Indeed. Looking at the lens revealed an engraved line of type on the opposite side of the lens from aperture settings that read: "Designed by Leica Camera. Mfg. in Japan. At the time Kyocera was also the owner of Contax cameras and was making very nice lenses for the mark under license from Karl Zeiss. They still make really great lenses for Voigtlander. 

While all the previous 28-70 and 35-70mm Leica zoom lenses were "pretty good" The Leica 35-70mm f4.0 has always been considered head and shoulders above them for sheer optical quality. The late Erwin Puts was widely regarded as having a comprehensive knowledge of Leica optics, from theory and design through manufacturing. He exhaustively tested a number of their lenses over the years. His assessment of the 35-70mm f4.0 ROM was that it equaled or exceeded the performance of the 35mm Summicron R, the 50mm Summicron R and the 75mm Summilux M if all were used at f4.0 or higher. It was reported to be capable of resolving upwards of 125 lp/mm in the center of the frame at full aperture. 

It's a fairly small lens and it lacks AF and I.S. which only adds to its reliability and durability. 

My friend's copy is pristine and was recently serviced. He suggested that I take it and shoot it for a while to see if I might be interested in owning it. Otherwise, after I'm through playing with it (testing it?) if I decide it's not for me he'll put it on the market. 

After we finished our coffees and catch up I headed back around the corner to the office to put the lens on a Novoflex R to L mount adapter, put that assembly on an SL body and headed out onto one of my downtown routes to see how I liked using the whole package together. The fly in the ointment today was the heavy overcast for most of the afternoon which limited what was available as subject matter. 

The focusing ring is firm and smooth. The aperture ring clicks in half stops and feels just right. And, of course, it zooms with amazing grace. 

I need to shoot it in full sun. If it performs as well as its historic legacy indicates I probably will buy it from my friend and then sell my Panasonic 24-105mm zoom to offset some of the cost. The 35-70mm is a beautiful and convenient lens for walking around and for shooting in the streets. If you are into manual zone focusing it's got hard stops at minimum and infinity settings along with a very legible focusing scale. You could put the lens to f11, set the focusing distance to 10 feet and have a blast shooting without focusing.

It's early days with the lens. Tomorrow is supposed to be a sunny Texas day for a change. I'll have more to say about his lens soon. So far I like what I see. 

Iceland 2018. Small camera, big photos.

 

Neutral and non-judgemental photos from Reykjavik. 

Taken with a Lumix G9 camera and an Olympus 12-100mm lens.

I really have nothing more to say about the images.

Have a nice day.

Hmmmmm. blah, blah, blah.

 

Oh wait. I remember now. I shot these in color, in the raw format, when I was in Iceland in 2018. I came across them a few days ago and wondered to myself...."how would these look as black and white landscapes?"  

blah, blah, blah. 

There you go. Nicely gutted and made happily neutral.

Effort sometimes required to gain access to the grand view. Why photographers who shoot landscapes and street photos should make physical fitness part of the picture taking practice.

 

this is a stairway in Iceland. It leads up and up and up to a wonderful vantage point

from which a proficient landscape photographer could take a very interesting photograph. 

The general location is already at an altitude a good bit higher than sea level. And there is 

no lift, elevator, escalator, tram or private car access to the shooting platform at the top.

You have to hike up the stairs. And when you get to the top you'll need to have your 

pulse rate recover quickly to it's baseline in order to handhold your camera 

as effectively as you can. With minimal shake. Rather use a tripod? You'll have to carry that up

the stairs as well. 

How do you practice this at home? Walk a lot. Carry a backpack filled with weighty gear and go up and down hills to prepare yourself for journeys and adventures. Always take the stairs when it's an option.

The fewer pounds over your ideal body weight that you have to carry around makes the climb easier.

Whether your body is 40 pounds overweight or you've shoved 40 pounds of gear in a 

back path both scenarios make your climb that much harder. 

Here in the USA we make age an easy excuse for not being in shape.

"Oh....I'm 65 years old. Falling apart. If there's no bus to the top I can't

make it."  But our counterparts in other countries, from my observation, 

don't use the same tired excuses. They expect to move; and in doing 

so get more out of every trip. It's something to think about.

So much dissatisfaction with getting older could be short circuited by 

making moving and exercising as routine as eating, showering and 

sleeping. We'd collectively feel so much better.  But it's always a choice.

My biggest complaint about people over 50?

Most of them are too easy on themselves. Too pampered. A little daily 

discipline would make so many lives so much better....

Wow. The ice storm sucked. Put a hamper on my street photo practice and taught me that chopping trees with a hand saw might be inefficient but it's awfully good exercise!

 

Wet cold sucks. Black ice on asphault sucks. PTSD about loosing power in an arctic ice storm sucks (memories of Feb. 2021, remember?). Big trees dropping thousand pound branches on your roof while transformers blink like Las Vegas fireworks in the night is tough to sleep through. Getting "chilled" out of your pool for five days super sucks. And feeling like you should stick around the house to take care of emergencies that might crop up instead of getting out photographing is beyond frustrating. 

People died again here in Texas this year when the weather went to crap. Even though in central Texas it never got below maybe 25. And here in Austin I think we hovered at 29° for most of the week. But it was still tough since the rain was cold, the trees and power lines were cold and just about any moisture that fell immediately stuck to something it really shouldn't and just made a mess of stuff.  Most died in car wrecks.

When the freezing rain stopped and the black ice melted away this afternoon I walked around the neighborhood to take a look. On every block grand old tees were injured and lost plenty of branches. Ice was still falling off the leaf canopies as well as the power lines. But I think the rough weather is winding down.

I've pulled all the big and menacing looking fallen branches away from the house. The ones that are somewhat upright and ready to fall again but this time through a double glass french door ($$$) or one of the new windows ($$). Some of the biggest branches had to be chopped up in order for me to be able to move them. At 67 years wise I've decided not to try and lift stuff that's heavier than my body weight. So I've been chopping the big stuff down to size with a cross cut saw. No, not an electric one. Just a hand saw. It takes a while but at least I'm getting exercise. Someone suggested a chain saw but the last thing I want to do is operate a noisy chain saw and potentially slice through a thigh or lose a hand. And they're so noisy. Seemed more "environmentally" sound to go all manual. At least my neighbor who is an emergency room physician believes it a wise move. He's seen me try out power tools...

Why did I go to all the trouble to pile everything up in one place? Well, I've got a lone portrait assignment scheduled for tomorrow morning and I thought it was basic customer service not to have my client stepping through a tangle of fallen wood to get to my studio door. Call me old fashion. 

We're shooting with flash in the morning. Using a Panasonic S5 for a change. And a good, ol' Lumix 70-200mm lens. 

Oops. My CFO (B) just informed me that it would be nice if I spent a little time vacuuming the studio floor as well. And maybe giving the rest room a bit of a shine. Jeez. It just never slows down.

I went out to shop for some groceries today. What a mess! All three grocery stores surrounding me in my "food paradise" experienced long power outages in the last two+ days. All three had to dump every last product in their frozen foods display cases, and all of their refrigerated foods. Sure, I could buy dry goods, canned goods and fruits and vegetables but I was looking forward to celebrating our survival with something fun --- like some salmon or a steak. Maybe a nice brie cheese. Some organic kimchi. Maybe even a shared, small container of coffee ice cream. But no. I picked up some of my favorite bread, an interesting can of vegetarian chili, some more of my favorite crunchy peanut butter (which experts now say is really, really good for you!!!) and a nice bottle of red wine to serve tonight with pizza. Not a very satisfying shopping trip but at times like these I'm reminded by family and friends that I'm lucky and so privileged that I'm almost the definition of spoiled adult brat. A few days without delicacies or indulgences should be just fine. At least I'm told it's so. 

No new cameras or lenses to talk about. But I'd better get on the vacuuming. And toilet cleaning. I'd hate to fall short....

That branch is usually ten feet above my head. Put ice on it and it bends over precariously.

I hope it bends back up.

As long as it doesn't fall on top of my car I guess I'll be okay.

sunny tomorrow and I just got a note that the pool

will be returning to regular hours. Ahhhh.