There is no doubt that the Leica R is extremely sharp, especially considering its age. And even though it has a fairly warm color cast, it still renders pleasant skin tones. However, the image shift, focus breathing, hexagonal bokeh, and the horrendous ghosting/inner reflections are all ultimately deal breakers for my taste on ANY project. Interested in what gear i use? Check out my updated gear list: www.kit.co/jponfilm
@@Julianorzel I've had both the Summilux M & R and Noctilux M on different cameras, cine and photo. For me, the Summicron offers the best overall value.
You’re right about focus breathing and shift with the R lenses, but let’s not forget that these are photo lenses and generally exhibit less breathing than most anamorphic lenses. I’m not sure how much long static focus pulling you do, but all lenses will involve some compromise. If you’re working on high-end projects, you might need clean glass without character. On the more affordable side, consider the Sony CineAlta lenses. I think they are APO with some ASPH elements and offer great value for the money, though they can be heavy and large.
In terms of image-quality I would always prefer the Leica-R lenses. They have better micro-contrast, because they have less elements in their old lensdesign. Most of the modern lenses have too much elements to get the sharpest and cleanest look. The result is boring flat images with a digital look. A Lens without flares is boring. Cinema-Lenses have their strength in handling the lenses in terms of focusing, focusbreathing, etc. You can rehouse the Leica R-Lenses into a cinema-lens.
the xenon use asphericals, horrible onion skin in bokeh, also quite some purple color firnging, and i can name a few other things, if you would rehouse leica r, it will do fine, the intter reflections (ghosting), can be gone with recoating the lens cell with fanta black. I would say a rehoused leica r is way better than the xenons
The xenon 35mm is the worst offender in a set plagued by ca issues. There are better chinese lenses on the market currently. Also the 35mm v2 (not in this test) has far less ghosting even if it flares a lot and is the one lens I will never sell. I do think Leicas are overrated and would never get them at the current price point though.
I’m honestly hoping someone can talk me into selling my Leica R set. But these modern primes are usually not it when you take them outside. Maybe it’s a coating thing, but I miss the vintage render immediately
I’m just saying Vista primes… they are the best vintage looking modern cinema lens on the market at their price point (especially if you can find them used) IMO
@@Ansonandco bruh c,mon man. those vista primes are $6,000 a piece. no way anyone should be spending that kind of bread for TH-cam talking head shots. Kevin Reyes is one of my favorite DP's and he shoots on leicas quite a bit for his professional work. There are certainly more budget friendly cine lenses that a struggling DP should look into.
@@bmefilms6879 it’s all about average set cost. I got my copies used for around 6k - 7k for my two lens set. and the set I chose was the 16-28 t3 and the 50 t1.5. If you get the 19, 24, 35 and 50 with the Leicas you are spending well above 6k for that set. Now admittedly I do not have a solution for 35mm, I shoot 28mm in place of 35. But if you go 35 f2 and 19mm (on the cheap end) your spending 9k before modding gear. But I am getting the same coverage on modern cine lenses that create a beautiful, vintage like, aesthetic for 6k to7k. I could probably still get the 35mm t1.5 for less than what most people spend on their set if they get that damn 19mm. So again, per lens i agree they are really expensive, but If you’re strategic about it you can get the coverage you need for less than the Leicas, depending on the Leicas you try to pick up. I love Kevin, but he definitely spent almost 10k on his set. Love the work he does but I would venture to say that a complete Leica set is just as impractical as the vistas, for struggling DPs. And if you use a clamp on mattebox without support, you are DESTROYING those lenses, whereas I can clamp on a matte box no problems. Not to mention, my set is PL mount. Good luck getting non rehoused Leicas to have a PL mount. 🙂
@@Ansonandco The Vistas just have this nasty green flare. Everything else is great. But that’s mainly why I wouldn’t use them. I have zero complaints with the Leica image quality, but the mattbox situation is a bitch. Also just knowing if you get the faintest scratch you’re fucked. Honestly if any other vintage brand was consistently sharp wide open I’d use them instead but it’s just not the case. Eventually, somebody will make a modern cine lens under 10k that I like personally but it’s definitely not out there right now.
@@HiddenOaksMedia the vistas do flare, I LOVE the flaring, but if you’re not a fan it can be a deal breaker. Have you looked at the sigma cines? You would using Top Gun lenses 😉
Those Xenon lenses suffer from heavy Chromatic Aberrations, the focus chart is almost purple.. Leica-R renders with more 3D dimensions, it pop's more then the flatter image of the Xenon. In my opinion I would pick the leica-r over the Xenon, dont mind to go with a swing-away mattebox to overcome the extending lens barrel.
agreed. For me, it's the 3D pop effect and warmth that the Leica's have that makes them stand out against Xenon or even the Xeen Cine Primes from Samyang. I'd take that over some more breathing any day! But of course, in general it always depends on the project and look you're going for. Perhaps Justin should stick to renting lenses (which is what I do too!) instead of buying new ones for the hype every now and then.
@@heroaomedia so I agree that if you were to rehouse the Leicas that would solve a lot of the problems I have with them. But what made me switch to actual cine lenses was the fact that a good rehousing would have ran around 4k a pop. It was actually more cost effective for me to buy a Tokina cine zoom and a prime for less than what it would have cost to get my set converted. And if you find the right cine lens, you can find a unique image in it’s own right
I had the 75mm Xenon, but the chromatic aberration and purple fringing made the lens unusable with backlight or on sunny days. While I loved the size and housing, the optics didn't convince me. The skin tones were nice, but I can't take so much risk working with this lens when dealing with clients. I choose my old set of Leica R lenses any day for use with my RED, Leica and Sigma fp. The E55 filters keep the setup light, inexpensive and compact, especially with the 35, 50, 60, 90mm lenses, while the lenses deliver a lovely rendering and color. I'm a 50mm guy, and I prefer the Leica R Summicron over the M f/1 Noctilux lens in terms of balance, operation, and minimum focus distance. Controlled tests and comparisons don't reveal all the qualities of a lens in daily use. Additionally, I went through a few versions of the same lens to find a keeper. I've owned and collected too many lenses, including Kern Switar, Zeiss, Angenieux, Cooke, Som Berthiot, and M lenses, but the Leica R lenses remain my go to day to day set that doesn't break the bank. If you can't create an interesting image with them, consider pursuing something else. Old glass from the 1930s to the '60s, especially uncoated lenses with fewer elements, can add a lot of character and personality to the image. These vintage lenses often have unique imperfections and optical characteristics that give the footage a distinctive look, adding a nostalgic or artistic flair. If you're looking for a very clean lens with no chromatic aberration, full illumination, and minimal vignetting at a low price, and one suitable for working with a focus puller, clients, try the Sony CineAlta lenses. They offer excellent value for a set of cine lenses.
Leica R - Walter Mandler is one of the most experienced and influential lens designers in the history of optics, photography and cinematography. Go around the block for over 30 years, and then we’ll talk about lenses.
@@JustinPhillip There are too many lens options today. If you want to keep your investment without losing money, buying Leica R lenses might not be a bad idea. For more than 30 years, I have been buying and selling equipment to upgrade, so at my age, I am no longer interested in constantly losing money. It’s not just about the equipment; it’s about the story. I just opened this new channel and posted a video shot in MP4 with a Leica SL2-S. just a quick, cheap image 8 bit no cc because I wanted to test the camera. This is the opposite of what I usually do in my day-to-day work. Good luck!
People, don't mind me, but I think that the real visual rendition differences between the 2 lenses are quite pointless when you consider the tons of advantages bring by the modern cinema lenses vs the vintage photo ones. First of all, the reliability and ease of use on the set; if you're working and not playing with your glass, any seconds saved in some situations can be very important. Even more than a (maybe) different nuance that can be noticed by 1 people over 1000 of the final audience...
Loved that outro Justin! Do you have any videos on how to control reflections, especially when shooting into light? This is always tricky for me. Thanks!
The flare characteristics are not a Leica R issue they are a Leica issue period. Leica when compared to other brands has never done well with flare, ghosting, veiling flare, etc. Don't get me wrong they have a few lenses that are truly excellent when it comes to flare but those tend to be the exception. Even today some SL lenses suffer from some embarrassing veiling flare especially by modern standards.
I just picked up a Meike set of Cine Lenses and are literally BLOWN away by them! Used some vintage contacts & canon cinema lenses, and definitely prefer these and they are way cheaper!
if you shot film and printed in the darkroom you could tell if its a nikkor, canon, minolta or some other non-leica lens you shot with, or if u used a leica-r lens instead. i know i do and i can tell immediately from looking at the negative. talking about 50mm summicron-r V2 here, dont have experience using any other leica glass but that lens is something else compared to any canon fd/fdn, minolta, nikkor or m42 mount lenses i have tried. so to me it is not hype because i see it with my own eyes.
There is no doubt that the Leica R is extremely sharp, especially considering its age. And even though it has a fairly warm color cast, it still renders pleasant skin tones. However, the image shift, focus breathing, hexagonal bokeh, and the horrendous ghosting/inner reflections are all ultimately deal breakers for my taste on ANY project. Interested in what gear i use? Check out my updated gear list: www.kit.co/jponfilm
Thats cause the summilux are what have the real character
@@Julianorzel I've had both the Summilux M & R and Noctilux M on different cameras, cine and photo. For me, the Summicron offers the best overall value.
You’re right about focus breathing and shift with the R lenses, but let’s not forget that these are photo lenses and generally exhibit less breathing than most anamorphic lenses. I’m not sure how much long static focus pulling you do, but all lenses will involve some compromise. If you’re working on high-end projects, you might need clean glass without character. On the more affordable side, consider the Sony CineAlta lenses. I think they are APO with some ASPH elements and offer great value for the money, though they can be heavy and large.
In terms of image-quality I would always prefer the Leica-R lenses. They have better micro-contrast, because they have less elements in their old lensdesign. Most of the modern lenses have too much elements to get the sharpest and cleanest look. The result is boring flat images with a digital look. A Lens without flares is boring. Cinema-Lenses have their strength in handling the lenses in terms of focusing, focusbreathing, etc. You can rehouse the Leica R-Lenses into a cinema-lens.
the xenon use asphericals, horrible onion skin in bokeh, also quite some purple color firnging, and i can name a few other things, if you would rehouse leica r, it will do fine, the intter reflections (ghosting), can be gone with recoating the lens cell with fanta black. I would say a rehoused leica r is way better than the xenons
The xenon 35mm is the worst offender in a set plagued by ca issues. There are better chinese lenses on the market currently. Also the 35mm v2 (not in this test) has far less ghosting even if it flares a lot and is the one lens I will never sell. I do think Leicas are overrated and would never get them at the current price point though.
Nope, they're not overrated...IMHO, Walter Mandler designed some of the finest lenses ever made (for photography) ✌
I’m honestly hoping someone can talk me into selling my Leica R set. But these modern primes are usually not it when you take them outside. Maybe it’s a coating thing, but I miss the vintage render immediately
I’m just saying Vista primes… they are the best vintage looking modern cinema lens on the market at their price point (especially if you can find them used) IMO
@@Ansonandco bruh c,mon man. those vista primes are $6,000 a piece. no way anyone should be spending that kind of bread for TH-cam talking head shots. Kevin Reyes is one of my favorite DP's and he shoots on leicas quite a bit for his professional work. There are certainly more budget friendly cine lenses that a struggling DP should look into.
@@bmefilms6879 it’s all about average set cost. I got my copies used for around 6k - 7k for my two lens set. and the set I chose was the 16-28 t3 and the 50 t1.5. If you get the 19, 24, 35 and 50 with the Leicas you are spending well above 6k for that set. Now admittedly I do not have a solution for 35mm, I shoot 28mm in place of 35. But if you go 35 f2 and 19mm (on the cheap end) your spending 9k before modding gear. But I am getting the same coverage on modern cine lenses that create a beautiful, vintage like, aesthetic for 6k to7k. I could probably still get the 35mm t1.5 for less than what most people spend on their set if they get that damn 19mm.
So again, per lens i agree they are really expensive, but If you’re strategic about it you can get the coverage you need for less than the Leicas, depending on the Leicas you try to pick up.
I love Kevin, but he definitely spent almost 10k on his set. Love the work he does but I would venture to say that a complete Leica set is just as impractical as the vistas, for struggling DPs. And if you use a clamp on mattebox without support, you are DESTROYING those lenses, whereas I can clamp on a matte box no problems.
Not to mention, my set is PL mount. Good luck getting non rehoused Leicas to have a PL mount. 🙂
@@Ansonandco The Vistas just have this nasty green flare. Everything else is great. But that’s mainly why I wouldn’t use them.
I have zero complaints with the Leica image quality, but the mattbox situation is a bitch. Also just knowing if you get the faintest scratch you’re fucked. Honestly if any other vintage brand was consistently sharp wide open I’d use them instead but it’s just not the case.
Eventually, somebody will make a modern cine lens under 10k that I like personally but it’s definitely not out there right now.
@@HiddenOaksMedia the vistas do flare, I LOVE the flaring, but if you’re not a fan it can be a deal breaker.
Have you looked at the sigma cines?
You would using Top Gun lenses 😉
You compare 600$ lens VS 3000$, this video doesn't made any sens
Those Xenon lenses suffer from heavy Chromatic Aberrations, the focus chart is almost purple..
Leica-R renders with more 3D dimensions, it pop's more then the flatter image of the Xenon.
In my opinion I would pick the leica-r over the Xenon, dont mind to go with a swing-away mattebox to overcome the extending lens barrel.
A rehoused Leica R set vs the Xenon would be a no-brainer. The only downsides I'm seeing are the bokeh and the build.
Why not just keep both of them? Vintage prime + modern cine zoom😎
just give him a few months, he'll be on to something else!
agreed. For me, it's the 3D pop effect and warmth that the Leica's have that makes them stand out against Xenon or even the Xeen Cine Primes from Samyang. I'd take that over some more breathing any day! But of course, in general it always depends on the project and look you're going for. Perhaps Justin should stick to renting lenses (which is what I do too!) instead of buying new ones for the hype every now and then.
@@heroaomedia so I agree that if you were to rehouse the Leicas that would solve a lot of the problems I have with them. But what made me switch to actual cine lenses was the fact that a good rehousing would have ran around 4k a pop. It was actually more cost effective for me to buy a Tokina cine zoom and a prime for less than what it would have cost to get my set converted. And if you find the right cine lens, you can find a unique image in it’s own right
Sorry, but this is not THE Leica-R 35mm f/2 Summicron, it’s version 1 of 2. They are actually very different :)
It’s down to personal taste as the older ones have pros and cons compared to the newer ones.
I had the 75mm Xenon, but the chromatic aberration and purple fringing made the lens unusable with backlight or on sunny days. While I loved the size and housing, the optics didn't convince me. The skin tones were nice, but I can't take so much risk working with this lens when dealing with clients. I choose my old set of Leica R lenses any day for use with my RED, Leica and Sigma fp. The E55 filters keep the setup light, inexpensive and compact, especially with the 35, 50, 60, 90mm lenses, while the lenses deliver a lovely rendering and color. I'm a 50mm guy, and I prefer the Leica R Summicron over the M f/1 Noctilux lens in terms of balance, operation, and minimum focus distance.
Controlled tests and comparisons don't reveal all the qualities of a lens in daily use. Additionally, I went through a few versions of the same lens to find a keeper.
I've owned and collected too many lenses, including Kern Switar, Zeiss, Angenieux, Cooke, Som Berthiot, and M lenses, but the Leica R lenses remain my go to day to day set that doesn't break the bank. If you can't create an interesting image with them, consider pursuing something else.
Old glass from the 1930s to the '60s, especially uncoated lenses with fewer elements, can add a lot of character and personality to the image. These vintage lenses often have unique imperfections and optical characteristics that give the footage a distinctive look, adding a nostalgic or artistic flair.
If you're looking for a very clean lens with no chromatic aberration, full illumination, and minimal vignetting at a low price, and one suitable for working with a focus puller, clients, try the Sony CineAlta lenses. They offer excellent value for a set of cine lenses.
Funny enough i now also only own the Leica Rs. However i own the Version ii’s nowadays. Have heard that before about the CineAlta’s tho.
Leica R - Walter Mandler is one of the most experienced and influential lens designers in the history of optics, photography and cinematography. Go around the block for over 30 years, and then we’ll talk about lenses.
😆 fair enough
@@JustinPhillip There are too many lens options today. If you want to keep your investment without losing money, buying Leica R lenses might not be a bad idea. For more than 30 years, I have been buying and selling equipment to upgrade, so at my age, I am no longer interested in constantly losing money. It’s not just about the equipment; it’s about the story. I just opened this new channel and posted a video shot in MP4 with a Leica SL2-S. just a quick, cheap image 8 bit no cc because I wanted to test the camera. This is the opposite of what I usually do in my day-to-day work. Good luck!
People, don't mind me, but I think that the real visual rendition differences between the 2 lenses are quite pointless when you consider the tons of advantages bring by the modern cinema lenses vs the vintage photo ones. First of all, the reliability and ease of use on the set; if you're working and not playing with your glass, any seconds saved in some situations can be very important. Even more than a (maybe) different nuance that can be noticed by 1 people over 1000 of the final audience...
Preach!
Taxi driver was shot with a Zeiss lens with a triangular bokeh... Just sayin'
Leicas has the smoother highlight roll off. Look at the candle.
Loved that outro Justin! Do you have any videos on how to control reflections, especially when shooting into light? This is always tricky for me. Thanks!
The flare characteristics are not a Leica R issue they are a Leica issue period. Leica when compared to other brands has never done well with flare, ghosting, veiling flare, etc. Don't get me wrong they have a few lenses that are truly excellent when it comes to flare but those tend to be the exception. Even today some SL lenses suffer from some embarrassing veiling flare especially by modern standards.
Please… do not use clamp on matte boxes on any vintage lens, especially Leica r’s
ok
Schneider is Xenon
@@JustinPhillip my friend, i never see this lenses on Schneider website there are isco but never xenon.. at least in USA Schneider website
Thats the version one summicromn that most people don't use.
Yupp
I just picked up a Meike set of Cine Lenses and are literally BLOWN away by them! Used some vintage contacts & canon cinema lenses, and definitely prefer these and they are way cheaper!
Yep, the Leica is definitely over-hyped. Just paying for the name really.
what do you shoot with?
if you shot film and printed in the darkroom you could tell if its a nikkor, canon, minolta or some other non-leica lens you shot with, or if u used a leica-r lens instead. i know i do and i can tell immediately from looking at the negative. talking about 50mm summicron-r V2 here, dont have experience using any other leica glass but that lens is something else compared to any canon fd/fdn, minolta, nikkor or m42 mount lenses i have tried. so to me it is not hype because i see it with my own eyes.