In the last report, I used the Carl Zeiss Hologon 16/8 which was altered to be mounted on Leica M cameras. Of course, next you want to see how the MM works with older lenses. First, the conclusion. I'm still trying to get good results with old lenses because at this time I'm having some difficulties. I guess maybe darker lenses such as the red Elmar, Summaron 3.5cm/3.5, or Summaron 2.8cm would work well. If you happen to agree with me on this, probably you are suffering from a severe lens-bulimia and you can achieve remission only after you buy and test them. Anyway, I think the lenses that can draw powerfully with sharp outlines would work well with the MM, so I need to test this hypothesis in the future. This time, I used the reasonable rigid Summicron 5cm. This legendary lens is known to be sharp in the center and get darker toward the corners.

( Photo & Text : K )

"Outstanding resolution in the center"... that's an old story now. How can we expect the optimal performance to a lens that has been used by many people for decades? Only once in a while I happen to get a lens that is so good, but that's so rare and basically a life with old lenses is just like getting stuck in the mud. Anyway, this lens I have is a nicer one, and I liked to use with the EPSON R-D1, the Leica M8, and the M9. However, with the MM, it's a little undependable. It's never bad, but a bit loose. It's still SUMMICRON-ish, but the contrast is low and the resolution difference between the center and the corners is salient. So, I'm puzzled.

At an Oden eaterie Takocho, located in Kyoto. It's a comfortable place even for first-time customers and you are served with the best seasonal dishes. I heard that Ken Domon used to come while he was shooting in Kyoto. I'm sorry Master, but I framed you intentionally in the side. The background bokeh is just like usual: like the viscous oil on the iron plate. Also, it shows the difference between the center and the corners. The M9 is also a lowpass-less camera that allows no ambiguity, but the MM captures even more minutely. Therefore, the gap between the center and the corners is clearly shown. Yes, that's lens. But, the problem is, I'm preoccupied with the excellent results from the modern lenses when they are paired with the MM, so I am not completely satisfied with the performance of this old lens on the MM. I know I shouldn't complain. If I only had old lenses, I would just be amazed by the unique tonality.

Apart from preconception, I can see this lens resolves the coarse finish of the poles when I look at the full size. The SUMMICRON's is famous for its sharp center and this one performed just as expected. The lenses at that time aren't as contrasty as the modern ones, but they have a rich tonality and give some room for shooting under.

Compared with the MM, perhaps, I think the digital M-Mount cameras including the R-D1 were somewhat lenient to old lenses. The MM has one-to-one correspondence between the sensor pixels and the output pixels, so it directly reflects the resolving power and some faults of the lens. For example, when I was taking night shots with the SUMMILUX 35mm (pre-ASPH), I used to stop down as much as I could while maintaining the minimum shutter speed for handheld shooting. I had to do it because the lens had a spherical aberration wide open and I worried about the coma. I think the MM requires such old manner when old lenses are mounted. Of course, it's OK to shoot only wide open with a holy spirit, wouldn't it be also fun to go back to some good old manners?

Once you stop down, the sharpness increases and it produces outstanding pictures. I focused to the man who was sketching, and at full size, it is surprisingly sharp when I took the lens age into account.

I first shot wide open, but I stopped down two f-stops because the advertising board wasn't sharp enough.

It was dark and could start raining anytime. This lens takes wet pictures, so I utilized the characteristic and shot wide open to realize this wet weather. If this were shot with a camera with a lowpass filter, the picture would become more flat for various reasons.

The serial is at 150s, so this was made in the very first period. This lens doesn't take good pictures just by point-and-shooting. Is it bothersome? Or is it fun? I haven't encountered any old lens that surpasses the modern lenses on the MM, so I will keep mounting different lenses in the future. See you then!