Sunstar rendering, Flare and Vignetting compared to the Leica 50mm f/1.4 Summilux
It was mentioned in this thread that the Simera lens may provide a cinematographic look, which is often the case with lenses that are 'less-corrected' and have coatings that are not very resistant to veiling flare. However, based on my tests so far, I see the Simera as a lens with great flare resistance, especially considering it's a fast lens and compared to its main competitor, the Leica 50mm f/1.4 Lux.
I've grown accustomed to seeing veiling flare in many of my images taken with the Leica. While this can create a great look, it really depends on your taste and application.
I've compared the Simera to the Leica in terms of sunstar rendering, vignetting, and flare resistance, and here are my findings based on the images I've presented below:
The Simera has higher vignetting compared to the Leica. It's not significantly higher but noticeable when comparing images without any in-camera or post correction. The Leica is less resistant to both veiling and ghosting flares. This can give the Leica a more cinematographic look depending on the lighting conditions. I much prefer the sunstar rendering from the Simera. It produces very pleasant 14-point sunstars starting at f/4, while the Leica's sunstars are a bit messy. The Leica yields 18-point sunstars that lack definition and have too much flare bleeding through them. This is not ideal for those who prefer definition and symmetry in sunstars.
Here is a comparison showing the Simera vs. Leica in terms of sunstars, flare resistance, and vignetting at f/1.4, f/2.8, f/5.6, and f/8:
Both lenses were tested with the same exact Lightroom settings. No profiles were used in-camera. Images were taken seconds apart from each other.
f/1.4 (Simera)
f/1.4 (Leica)
f/2.8 (Simera)
f/2.8 (Leica)
f/5.6 (Simera)
f/5.6 (Leica)
f/8 (Simera) - Optimal
f/8 (Leica) - Optimal (f/11 and f/16 have less definition and too much flare on the Leica)
Fred Miranda wrote:
<div id="sun" name=sun"></div>
<a href=https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1878983/0#ql>Back to Quick Links</a>
Sunstar rendering, Flare and Vignetting compared to the Leica 50mm f/1.4 Summilux
It was mentioned in this thread that the Simera lens may provide a cinematographic look, which is often the case with lenses that are 'less-corrected' and have coatings that are not very resistant to veiling flare. However, based on my tests so far, I see the Simera as a lens with great flare resistance, especially considering it's a fast lens and compared to its main competitor, the Leica 50mm f/1.4 Lux.
I've grown accustomed to seeing veiling flare in many of my images taken with the Leica. While this can create a great look, it really depends on your taste and application.
I've compared the Simera to the Leica in terms of sunstar rendering, vignetting, and flare resistance, and here are my findings based on the images I've presented below:
The Simera has higher vignetting compared to the Leica. It's not significantly higher but noticeable when comparing images without any in-camera or post correction. The Leica is less resistant to both veiling and ghosting flares. This can give the Leica a more cinematographic look depending on the lighting conditions. I much prefer the sunstar rendering from the Simera. It produces very pleasant 14-point sunstars starting at f/4, while the Leica's sunstars are a bit messy. The Leica yields 18-point sunstars that lack definition and have too much flare bleeding through them. This is not ideal for those who prefer definition and symmetry in sunstars.
Here is a comparison showing the Simera vs. Leica in terms of sunstars, flare resistance, and vignetting at f/1.4, f/2.8, f/5.6, and f/8:
Both lenses were tested with the same exact Lightroom settings. No profiles were used in-camera. Images were taken seconds apart from each other....Show more →
Fred,
Have you compared compared the Simera to the Lux using the Lux correction profile in LightRoom as you would get if the Simera was 6 Bit Coded to the Lux? Maybe this will clean up the vignetting.
Have you compared compared the Simera to the Lux using the Lux correction profile in LightRoom as you would get if the Simera was 6 Bit Coded to the Lux? Maybe this will clean up the vignetting.
In Lightroom, the Leica 50mm f/1.4 Lux profile only corrects distortion, with vignetting correction disabled. This is likely because vignetting is already handled by the in-camera Leica profile. While vignetting can be reduced using the 6-bit code or in post-processing, my main point is that, without any correction (either in-camera or post), the Simera shows more vignetting than the Leica.
Vignetting correction is disabled in LR for the 50mm f/1.4 lux (for demontration, not used on the test)
That's a sweet crop, at maybe 60 metres or so, and leaning out well into the mid-frame on the right. A neat performance, front to back. Surprisingly how well it held up at infinity in the previous tests also, it was not expected.
The Simera's flare resistance is impressive given how poorly most of the recent lenses out of China have fared in comparison. And impressive against the Lux, though we all (should) know that flare resistance is not one of its strengths (surprisingly also true for many other Leica M lenses).
Any thoughts about how the Simera handles flare compared to the VM 50/2 APO?
So far this Simera is sounding a lot like a Goldilocks fast M system 50... apparently all of the good from the Lux without the mid zone compromise and so-so flare resistance. Still curious about LoCA...
Aside from the slightly longer focal length (shorter angle of view), the Simera has nearly identical rendering to the Lux. While their optical designs are not the same, the overall drawing characteristics are almost indistinguishable. I will post rendering comparisons very soon.
rscheffler wrote:
The Simera's flare resistance is impressive given how poorly most of the recent lenses out of China have fared in comparison. And impressive against the Lux, though we all (should) know that flare resistance is not one of its strengths (surprisingly also true for many other Leica M lenses).
Sadly, my opinion here is that it's more so that Leica's flare resistance continues to be so poor. The Summilux 50 is one of their better lenses believe it or not. However, veiling flare can hit a Leica lens when you don't expect it based on conditions. I sometimes have wondered if these lighter shadows and more shadow detail Leica lenses are known for isn't just due to poor flare control. I will now put on my flame suit after sharing what I have to assume is going to be a unpopular opinion.
spendychucky wrote:
One thing I noticed is that even at MFD, the simera50 still moves the focus patch on the m11p.
I don’t recall other close focusing lenses doing the same?
at 0.45m?
Starting with the M10 series, lenses can focus as close as 0.62m without disengaging, but with a Leica M film camera, the closest focus distance is around 0.7m.
Yes it moves the focus patch all the way down to MFD, but the coupling is off and produces blurry images.
In my memory other lenses will move the patch down to about 0.6m like you said and the patch would stop moving, letting me know that the rf is no longer coupled.
Good thing this lens has the soft detent, otherwise it would be extremely easy to miss focus <0.7m since the rf patch still moves, but completely off. Fred Miranda wrote:
at 0.45m?
Starting with the M10 series, lenses can focus as close as 0.62m without disengaging, but with a Leica M film camera, the closest focus distance is around 0.7m.
My theory is that the rf patch is moving as if it was going toward 0.6m but the lens is actually focusing at 0.45m, maybe something to do with the FLE design.
Another thing i noticed is that at 0.7m, my copy appears to be front focusing slightly, while keeping the point of focus still at the edge of depth of field. Not sure if anyone else has observed this.
spendychucky wrote:
Haha I thought I was going crazy, too.
I think this is the first lens where I experienced this. Can’t rely on the old “focus until the patch stops” technique anymore with this.
I just tested this, and although the RF patch is engaged, it doesn’t actually focus the lens properly. The images come out of focus when moving past the indentation. I need to test it further, but it seems to focus correctly only a bit closer than 0.7m, similar to the Leica Lux.
rscheffler wrote:
The Simera's flare resistance is impressive given how poorly most of the recent lenses out of China have fared in comparison. And impressive against the Lux, though we all (should) know that flare resistance is not one of its strengths (surprisingly also true for many other Leica M lenses).
cbass wrote:
Sadly, my opinion here is that it's more so that Leica's flare resistance continues to be so poor. The Summilux 50 is one of their better lenses believe it or not. However, veiling flare can hit a Leica lens when you don't expect it based on conditions. I sometimes have wondered if these lighter shadows and more shadow detail Leica lenses are known for isn't just due to poor flare control. I will now put on my flame suit after sharing what I have to assume is going to be a unpopular opinion.
No flames from me! The consummate Leicaphile will argue this is a feature and not a flaw.
Maybe it is a form of contrast control; no need for a mist filter, etc.
IMO the longer the Leica (M) lens, the worse the veiling flare control is. I have not used all M lenses across all eras but those I have, and have owned for many years, all seem to abide by this rule of thumb (21 Lux, SEM, 28 Lux, 50 Lux ASPH, 50 Cron Rigid, 90AA, 90 Macro).
Fred Miranda wrote: Samples 1
All wide open: 0.9m and 1.2m
Straight out of the camera with added sharpening and Adobe Standard profile. No corrections.
Oh oh, I see traces of LoCA/color fringing in the mailbox...
I guess it won't entirely dethrone the Lux after all.
spendychucky wrote:
My theory is that the rf patch is moving as if it was going toward 0.6m but the lens is actually focusing at 0.45m, maybe something to do with the FLE design.
Another thing i noticed is that at 0.7m, my copy appears to be front focusing slightly, while keeping the point of focus still at the edge of depth of field. Not sure if anyone else has observed this.
I tested the Simera more carefully with a tripod, checking both the rangefinder and live view for accuracy. My copy is perfectly aligned with the RF from 0.7m to infinity. However, once I passed the hard MTF indentation, the lens no longer focuses accurately. The "hard stop" at 0.7m represents the maximum rangefinder minimum focus distance. Even slightly beyond this point, the lens loses its ability to focus accurately.
At first, I thought it was promising that the RF remained engaged from 0.7m down to nearly 0.45m, but in reality, 0.7m is the actual MFD for RF focusing. This is a bit disappointing, as other lenses can focus as close as 0.62m.
rscheffler wrote:
No flames from me! The consummate Leicaphile will argue this is a feature and not a flaw.
Maybe it is a form of contrast control; no need for a mist filter, etc.
IMO the longer the Leica (M) lens, the worse the veiling flare control is. I have not used all M lenses across all eras but those I have, and have owned for many years, all seem to abide by this rule of thumb (21 Lux, SEM, 28 Lux, 50 Lux ASPH, 50 Cron Rigid, 90AA, 90 Macro).
Oh oh, I see traces of LoCA/color fringing in the mailbox...
I guess it won't entirely dethrone the Lux after all. ...Show more →
So far, I’ve found that both lenses have similar LoCA correction, which is an important point since the Leica 50mm f/1.4 Lux serves as the base for the Leica 75mm f/2 APO lens.
This will be part of the rendering test series:
Can anyone identify which image is from the Leica and which is from the Simera, based on the pictures A and B below?
Fred Miranda wrote:
So far, I’ve found that both lenses have similar LoCA correction, which is an important point since the Leica 50mm f/1.4 Lux serves as the base for the Leica 75mm f/2 APO lens.
This will be part of the rendering test series: Can anyone identify which image is from the Leica and which is from the Simera, based on the pictures below? Please don’t focus too much on resolution, as this is just a screenshot.
(Extend browser window to view full image)
The second shot has a bit more structure in the bokeh.
I’m curious about the bokeh rendering of that lens, that would be the main attraction for me.
