Monthly Archives: March 2013

Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM A1 Nikon – update

March 6, 2013Nikon lensesThomas Pindelski

A qualified recommendation.

Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM A1 Nikon â€“ update

Background:

See my earlier Sigma 35/1.4 review comments based on the faulty first sample of the Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM A1 for Nikon bodies.

For the street snapper using an FF sensor body (me!), arguably no lens is more important than the 35mm. Trained in the classic Leica rangefinder tradition the 35mm was the lens I most often used in the days of film. When Leica’s bodies fell behind I moved on, first to a Canon 5D, then to a Nikon D700, and now a D3x. Thus it’s worth sweating the details in getting the best 35mm optic, especially if low light use is contemplated.

I would preface what follows with the fact that I am brand agnostic – camera and lens. Whatever works. Until now I have used only Nikkors on my bodies because I know little of aftermarket lenses and the price differentials are mostly immaterial for a long-term user.

After I complained to Sigma USA about the faulty loaner, they loaned me a brand new copy of Sigma’s 35/1.4 lens to try. They volunteered this. I did not ask. After some quick snaps at home of my long-suffering test target, Bert the Border Terrier, all seemed well, so I hit the streets. I did give him a cookie first, though.

The first lens I had borrowed from BorrowLenses.com had a random AF error, sometimes front- sometimes back-focusing. Heck, sometimes it was right, too! And when it was right it was beyond compare. So trying again with another sample was worth the effort.

I had explained to Sigma that I would be more than pleased to buy the loaned lens given its stellar performance, provided AF worked every time. f/1.4 is nice, but I already own the f/2 pre-Ai MF Nikkor, so spending all that money for one more stop and unreliable AF does not solve.

Results:

“What are you looking for?” At f/1.4.

Well, things worked out great and the second loaner was perfect in every regard. I ordinarily use point/lock focus/recompose with AF lenses, as it’s fast and consonant with my snapping theme which is mostly street work. Further I do not need focus tracking as my subjects are not moving fast and I certainly do not trust 51-point autofocus to decide where my key area of sharp focus resides. How on earth can it know? At very short subject-to-lens distances I will compose first, then change from the central focus point to one over the subject, thus obviating the change in subject distance occasioned by the ‘recompose’ step. However, I generally dislike using the adjusters on the Nikon’s back as they are slow and clunky. By the time I have dialed in the focus rectangle of choice the subject has moved on, as often as not.

Triple Rock bar, Berkeley. At f/2.

So good is the AF in this sample that my D3x body needed no AF fine tuning and that is just as well, for the APS-C sensor D2x in my other Nikon body provides no such capability and it’s nice to be able to use the Sigma on it with confidence. Sigma’s promised USB attachment which may make AF fine tuning possible in the lens might address issues for bodies without the fine tune capability, but that will have to wait determination until the device becomes available. One thing it will do is make it possible to do firmware upgrades as these come along, as possibly required by new bodies down the road.

Why buy it?

It bears repeating that there is very little point in buying this lens if most of your snaps are not taken at f/1.4, f/2 or f/2.8. There are any number of excellent Nikkors in both MF and AF guises which perform every bit as well from f/4 down and weigh a fraction of the Sigma. They are also far more compact. Indeed, so large is the lens hood Sigma provides with their optic that I do not use it as it simply sticks out too far, and I find I am constantly whacking it against something with the camera over my shoulder. I just opt for a protective (67mm) UV filter and have at it. The lens is very heavy and you are not going to enjoy carrying much more than one big body with this lens and maybe a medium telephoto like the 85/1.8. Much more than that and you will be hurting before long. Pain is not conducive to happy picture taking. Even on the heavy and large Nikon D2x and D3x bodies I use, the lens makes the combination top heavy and the kit will not stand upright on these cameras’ broad bases, preferring to tip forward. However the large size and excellent ergonomics more than counter this front heavy design.

Saloon. At f/8.

AF versus MF. No test charts, honest!

I tested the lens on a tripod at typical snapping distances of 5 and 10 feet at f/1.4, taking sets of three snaps:

Lens set at infinity, using AF
Lens set at the closest focus distance, using AF
Lens set on MF, using the focus confirmation light in the finder of the D3x

I did this both by daylight and by incandescent light at f/1.4.

The first two were always perfectly focused. The third was seldom correct, reflecting the too-broad range of the focus confirmation LED in the Nikon. AF beats MF every time at f/1.4. If your eyesight, like mine, is not the greatest, you propose to use f/1.4 and you find you opt for LED confirmation MF rather than screen MF, then this finding should give you pause in deciding whether an MF f/1.4 lens (Zeiss/Cosina, Nikon MF, Samyang) is for you. The AF choices – Nikon G or Sigma – appear the best option in this case. There are alternative focusing screens for certain Nikon bodies which might help, but I have no data. I got like AF results on both FF (D3x) and APS-C (D2x) sensor bodies.

For a whole bunch of AF examples at f/1.4, look here – I do not photograph test charts. These were taken under incandescent and fluorescent light. More wide aperture snaps accompany the article you are reading.

Buying the lens:

The owner and the loaner. Two 35mm f/1.4 Sigma lenses in Nikon mount.

I had made it clear to Sigma USA that I was a buyer, not a hack reviewer trolling for clicks and freebies, I told them I was pleased with the loaner and asked to buy it. But no. They wanted the loaner back. When I complained that made no sense they offered to sell me a new one from their stock, and I quote from their email:

The writer meant ‘courtesy’ but ‘curiosity’ seems equally appropriate.

Bottom line? The loaner I received was pre-screened. Rational extrapolation? I would guess that all review samples are cherry picked before being sent for review.

Well, this raises some questions as you only screen review samples if you are worried about your QC, but I reckoned I might as well make the process a ‘win-win’, so I replied thus:

The one I eventually bought was every bit as good as it should be. It, too, was cherry picked, as the above emails disclose. Here is the serial number of the one I bought:

The lens I purchased.

Off-center focusing:

The Nikon D3/D3x/D3s/D700/D800/D800e/D4 all share the same AF module, the Multi-CAM 3500FX. Many users of the D800/800e have reported focus problems when using other than the center focus rectangle for AF. I tested this at 5′ distance and f/1.4 with the Sigma on my D3x focusing by using the extreme left and then right AF sensors at f/1.4. Focus was perfect for each, so it may be a D800/800e build or Nikon QC issue which is involved here. Once again, this is based on a sample of one, so treat this information with a pinch of salt.

What I saw:

Based on the two samples from Sigma and the loaner from Borrowlenses.com, this is the highest resolution 35mm lens, at wide apertures, I have used. It is also the bulkiest and heaviest. The Sigma easily out-resolves the 35/1.4 Nikkor G which BorrowLenses.com loaned me when I returned the first faulty Sigma, and is equal to or better at f/2 than the 35mm f/2 Asph Summicron for the Leica M which I owned for many years before giving up on Leica’s dated bodies. It also renders out of focus areas better at f/2 than the Asph Summicron, which tends to harshness. There’s more to life than raw resolution and the Sigma does not disappoint when it comes to color rendering where it easily matches the best I have owned from Nikon and Leica.

Images downloaded into Lightroom pop on the display. Colors have a natural quality commonly seen when Leica or older MF single-coated Nikkors are used.

And while pixel peeping will show that f/2 is better than f/1.4, f/1.4 is fully usable at all times and I find that I never hesitate to go full bore, gaining shorter shutter speeds in the process. F/1.4 with a fast shutter speed and no blur beats the alternative. As f/1.4 means backgrounds will be blurred, it bears adding that the out-of-focus bits are pleasantly rendered by this optic. You do not need a single test chart to tell you all of this. Just use your eyes.

Ethnic pride in North Beach. At f/2.

Sample variations:

The first loaner from Borrowlenses.com had perfect focus collar resistance but the AF was faulty. When focused correctly resolution was the best I had ever seen at f/1.4 to f/4, equalled by some other makers’ lenses at smaller apertures. Serial number 50004444.
The second loaner, from Sigma USA, had a slightly too stiff focus collar, perfect AF and resolution to match the first loaner above. AF nailed focus every time. S/N 50004693.
The one I eventually purchased from Sigma USA had perfect focus collar resistance, perfect AF and resolution to match the above two. An occasional squeak can be heard from the AF mechanism, audible to the operator only. I expect it will go away with use. S/N 50022095.

So there are sample-to-sample variations but the one constant was the high resolution of all three samples. Let’s be fair. Even Leica, Nikon and Canon have sample-to-sample variations in their premium lenses. Just check Roger Cicala’s blog to confirm this.

Other considerations:

What else is there not to like? The lens is a tad sensitive to flare when the light source is really bright and close to the axis. I suppose using the hood might help here but that’s not something I am willing to do. So, maybe not a fair test, but one consonant with my working method.

Flare central – what happens with the sun in the frame or just outside it.

The focus collar turns the way most lenses do, other than Nikkors that is. (Only Zeiss seems to go to the trouble of conforming the rotation direction on its Nikon versions). However, as I use AF with the Sigma all the time – and the AF is faster than that in the competing 35/1.4 Nikkor-G – it makes no practical difference. The focus collar on my loaner from Sigma was stiffer than on the first, the one on the purchased copy is just right.

I also dislike not having a physical aperture ring on the lens but that is the way of the world. That’s a Nikon issue, not a Sigma issue. You have to use the control dial(s) on the body to change apertures and may have to touch the shutter release first if the LCD display has gone to sleep to check your setting, otherwise no amount of control dial twiddling will change aperture. But the stellar performance of this optic makes this a light cross to bear.

North Beach paint job. At f/2.

Best of all, paired with a high pixel count full frame sensor like those found in the D3x, D600 and D800 bodies from Nikon and in the Canon D1x, 1Ds/III, 5D/II and 5D/III, there is high excess detail in files which allows for selective cropping when you could not get as close as you would have liked to your subject. I have cropped to one quarter of the frame and made 24″ prints and the results are stunning. No other word for it. That makes for a very capable body-lens combination and increasingly finds me leaving the medium telephoto at home.

Warmth. At f/2.8. Cropped from one quarter of the D3x 24mp frame.
This prints beautifully at 18″ x 24″.

Qualified recommendation:

The circuitous purchase route I took and the fact that my lens was pre-screened by Sigma USA’s tech people makes it impossible to give a blanket recommendation for this lens. Yes, good ones are as good as it gets. Both the loaner, also pre-screened, and the one I finally purchased direct from Sigma are outstanding. But buy ‘off the shelf’ from B&H or Amazon or whoever, and you may still find you are in a lottery. This may mean returning one or two before lucking out, and a growing body of AF issues is now being reported on chat boards. These also seem to be a problem with Sigma’s 50/1.4 and 85/1.4 lenses with samples requiring substantial focus tuning adjustments. In fairness, chat boards tend to be like hospitals. Only the sick have an axe to grind there. Also, bear in mind that the issue with my first loaner was not one of micro-focus adjustment. The AF was faulty. Period.

All manufacturers will make occasional duds. It’s a toss-up whether Sigma’s QC beats that of the opposition. Only industry insiders know. At this time there is no statistical basis for concluding whether Sigma’s quality control is improved from the bad old days or not. Nor do we know how it compares to the QC at Leica/Zeiss/Canon/Nikon et al. What is troubling is that, as both the Sigma and the 80% costlier Nikon 35/1.4 lenses state ‘Made in Japan’, I struggle to understand how Sigma manages to sell its lens for so much less without some cost cutting along the line. The math does not solve. Would I pay $1,100, $1,200 or even more with assurance that my lens has been subject to rigorous QC or pre-screening? Yes. This optic is easily worth that amount, especially when compared to the competition from Nikon and Zeiss, the latter MF only.

One other unknown must be considered. Nikon lenses are famously long lived. Any number of 40+ year old pre-Ai MF Nikkors I own testify to that fact. Will AF lenses last as long, given the complexities of motors and gears and electronics? Has Sigma cut cost saving corners compared with Nikon in making this optic? I do not know. Only time will tell. Still, if one gets three years of hard use from the lens (which is the Sigma USA warranty period to the original purchaser from an authorized US dealer for its DG non-EX lenses, like this one) then it probably does not matter. Sell at the end of the warranty period and replace if it’s a concern.

Conclusion:

I recommend you buy this lens if it meets your low light needs. You may have to try more than one sample if your first is a bad one. While I was unlucky with my first sample, there is no statistical basis for making any conclusive statements about Sigma’s quality control. A sample of three is not meaningful. One day we will probably see statistically meaningful results from the likes of Roger Cicala at LensRentals.com. Roger tests dozens of samples of each lens and can meaningfully address sample variation. But Roger, please make these tests include finder controlled AF, not LiveView. That’s why you use f/1.4 – street snaps in poor light. LiveView is not a concept here nor are tripods involved.

Blinds. In the tradition of EugÃ¨ne Atget. At f/8.

USB dongle:

10 pins on the CPU.

Sigma has promised to sell a USB attachment which will allow firmware updates – and maybe other adjustments? – to the lens. As you can see, the lens has 10 contacts on the CPU compared to a maximum of 8 on Nikkors, suggesting the other two are needed for this device.

Sigma’s rumored USB dongle.

Serial number:

This is the s/n on the Sigma USA loaner I had to return.

The serial number on the Sigma is very hard to make out. It’s screen printed in faint type atop the lens, diagonally up and to the right of the (useless) distance indicator window. My previous loaner was 5000444 – that was the one with the faulty AF.

Both the above lens serial number images were made with the excellent Lumin app on the iPhone 5.

Comparison with the ancient Nikkor MF pre-Ai 35mm f/2 Nikkor-O:

The Nikkor is over 40 years old so this is a brutal comparison.

In each case I use the lens correction profile I have made using Adobe’s Lens Profile Creator application. It’s more necessary at large apertures in the case of the Sigma where significant vignetting (corner shading) at f/1.4 and f/2 is removed. You can expect Adobe to come out with their own version of this profile soon. I also apply Sharpening=66 for the Nikon D3x, which is what I find to be optimal to overcome the anti-aliasing filter located in front of the 24MP sensor in the camera.

Center performance of the Sigma is clearly better in 5 foot wide prints at all apertures down to f/4. The resolution of the Sigma is truly outstanding from f/2 down. Will the Nikkor yield good 5′ prints at f/2 in the center? Absolutely. Will the Sigma appear sharper? Yes. Enough that you will notice on critical inspection.

Boozers. At f/4.

Edge performance is a different story. The Sigma is greatly superior at all apertures, but especially in the range f/2 though f/8. There is no comparison. The Nikkor is a fine lens but it shows its age here. For the street snapper edges do not matter much. For the landscape artist there’s a big difference. The Sigma is in a different league.

The old Nikkor is marginally less prone to flare into a light source.

Color rendering for both lenses is outstanding. The Sigma is multi-coated, the Nikkor single-coated. Whatever.

Comparison with the current Nikkor 35mm f/1.4 AF-S G:

The Nikkor AF-S G is outperformed by the Sigma at center and edge through and including f/2.8. After that I cannot tell the difference. The Nikkor’s AF is slower but no big deal. The current Nikkor f/1.4 is equal to the old MF Nikkor f/2 in the center at all apertures but clearly superior at the edges at all apertures.

The current Nikkor is marginally less prone to flare into a light source and vignettes less, before correction, at f/1.4 and f/2.

The Nikkor is lighter – nice. The Nikkor costs 78% more than the Sigma in the US, ex-tax. Not nice. Used Nikkors are coming to market at $1250, probably as word gets out about the Sigma.

Lunch. At f/1.4.

Adobe’s lens correction profile:

The just announced Beta version of Lightroom 4.4 now includes an Adobe profile for the Sigma.

Lens correction profiles added in LR 4.4 Beta.

I have tested the Adobe profile against mine and there is no detectable difference at any aperture between the two. If you are using my profile there is no need to rush into the Beta 4.4 update of Lightroom. Let it mature and migrate when Adobe says it’s final. If you want to be sure Lightroom is using Adobe’s profile, do erase mine if you have it installed, as it otherwise takes precedence over Adobe’s.

Full disclosure: For reasons I do not understand, Sigma sold me the lens at a discounted price. I did not ask. They volunteered the discount out of the blue, even though I told them my income from photography is zero and that I am an amateur. While the discount I received was not monetarily significant to me, I reciprocated by sending them two nice 18″ x 24″ prints taken with the lens.

William Stout books

March 5, 2013Architecture, Book reviewsThomas Pindelski

Architecture.

William Stout books is located in the heart of San Francisco’s interior design area of Jackson Square and has been in its current location for 27 years. The focus here is on architecture, urbanism, landscape, design and art. There’s even a small pure photography section though obviously photography pervades much of their inventory.

Spread over two floors, this sort of place can do serious damage to the architecture aficionado’s wallet.

The upper level.

The lower level.

Curiously, signs on the lower level proclaim “Please do not Photograph Books” (eh?) but the atmosphere is friendly and browsers are encouraged to take a seat and enjoy what the store has to offer. There are so many books here that the best way to put the sheer range of choice in context is to point out that tomes on California garden design alone take up a large bookcase. You will not find Amazon style discounts, but then you will not find this sort of selection on Amazon either.

I snapped up a copy of History’s Anteroom which is a photo book showing the effects of the 1906 San Francisco earthquake and fire as well as the heroic subsequent reconstruction of the city. You can get this through Amazon but not discounted – the book is actually published by William Stout themselves, and is highly recommended, if not cheap at $40 + tax.

Click the picture for William Stout’s site.

The Leica M

March 4, 2013CamerasThomas Pindelski

Better. With snaps from those bad old film days.

Kensington Gardens. Leica M3, 50mm DR Summicron, TriX.

Long term users of Leica rangefinder bodies, meaning chaps like me who go back to when the M2 and M3 were the current models and have 30+ years of these under their belt, would make a strong case that the 1950s Leica M2 was the best ever from what was then the house of Ernst Leitz, Wetzlar. The reasons are many. A body screwed, not riveted, together. A rangefinder which did not flare out into the sun. A viewfinder which had but three frame lines and no clutter, all you needed for the ‘around the world’ kit of 35, 50 and 90mm lenses. And bulletproof reliability thanks to German craftsmen untouched by the production line and the need to make quarterly earnings estimates. A workforce which paid tribute to the power of apprenticeship and on-the-job training by some of the best craftsmen in the world. To get a sense of what it took to make that wonderful range-viewfinder, click here.

Leica M2 and a 35mm lens. The ultimate film-era street snapper.

The M4 retained the build quality, if you could cope with the plastic-tipped advance lever, frame selector and delayed action control, but compromised the finder with unnecessary frame clutter for the 135mm lens. This clutter would only grow in future versions. The M5 was a disaster with a cockamamie CdS TTL meter which popped out of the base of the innards and would be crushed if you forgot and retracted your 50mm Elmar into the body. But, worst of all, it didn’t look like an M. It appeared to come more from Tokyo than Wetzlar.

Plain dumb. The Leica M5.

After that things got progressively worse. The M6, which I owned for a few years, had a ghastly, compromised rangefinder, unusable into the sun. The finder was even more cluttered, squeezing in an additional frame for the 75mm lens. It substituted robust LEDs for the M5’s fragile match-needle meter and a silicon cell which had better color response, but the good bits ended there. You could only meter with the camera to the eye, which sort of destroyed the whole Leica stealth concept and the quality was rapidly going downhill with rivets where screws used to be and Portugese workers trying to make like Germans. Not possible. The shutter lost that magic sound and the whole thing was just …. ugh! I dumped mine and returned to my M2 and two M3s.

Victoria’s Secret. Leica M2, 21mm Elmarit, Kodak Gold 100.

The M7 finally added aperture priority automation but little else and quality did not improve while the price skyrocketed. Finder clutter was now maxed out, like in the 0.72x M6 variant, spanning the range from 28mm through 135mm in pairs. It’s successor, the MP, was an attempt to milk ‘retro’ with the original metal film advance lever from the M2/M3 and a unthinking return of the film rewind knob – one of the worst designs ever, small and painful – where every body since the M4 had a fold out crank which worked well. Indeed, I fitted aftermarket cranks to my M2 and two M3s to make the film rewinding process less reminiscent of Torquemada’s ministrations.The M7 and MP were grounds for despair that it was all over for the House of Leitz, and those extolling the virtues of the M7 have likely not used a well tuned M2 or M3. Then, just when everyone thought Leica would go under after several ownership changes, they discovered the digital sensor ten years after the rest of the world. So where do they go for the sensor? Why, Kodak of course. And which do they use? A crippled APS-C abomination which immediately throws out most of what is good and great about the Leica brand. The lens. The magenta distortion was thrown in free, ineffectually corrected by Leica doling out correction filters to those affected. At least they were free. Sort of like Porsche forgetting the steering wheel and offering one at no charge to all affected ….

Leica M8. A dud to match the M5.

Leica (Ernst Leitz had sold out years ago, so no more ‘Leitz’) tried to make amends with the full frame M9, after years of proclaiming it couldn’t be done in an M body, just in time to introduce a camera with an already obsolete sensor from a soon-to-be bankrupt Kodak. (DxO labs, who know about these things just concluded about the M9’s sensor in uncompromising terms: “In fact, with a DxOMark Overall Score of 68, or 69 for the Leica M9, M9-P and ME Type 220, these cameras offer the worst image quality DxOMark have tested on a full frame sensor, with the exception of the 10-year-old Canon EOS 1Ds. The full review is here). The system of marginal miniature correction lenses in front of the sensor is very smart, it has to be admitted, if designed by Rube Goldberg. These correctly direct oblique light rays so that they strike the sensor at a preferred angle. The new M body is now up to $7,000, meaning only three types of buyers can afford it:

Banksters and hedgies (these were doctors and lawyers in the ’50s)
The insecure with more money than sense (see above)
A few great photographers who can make an M sing

Main Street, South Uist, Outer Hebrides, Scotland. M3, 90mm Elmar, TriX.

It’s fair to say that since that M6 of the 1970s, Leica’s rangefinder bodies have sadly trailed their lenses by a considerable margin. And what lenses! You can read about the driving genius behind their optical mastery, Walter Mandler, here. While QC was not what it should be as the company’s meagre capital base dwindled in the 1980s, its latest recapitalization a few years back has seen the company spring back to life. Hedgies are now everywhere, which cannot hurt demand, and their lenses remain optically, if not technologically, the standard against which all others are measured. “As good as a Summicron” is a label every lens manufacturer in the world aspires to. I write ‘not technologically’ because Leica does not make one RF auto-focus optic in M mount (despite pioneering the first AF system, the Correfot, with Honeywell and producing many world class AF lenses for their medium format S2 SLR body) which rules them out for sports snappers. Arguably, no bad thing. How many more images does the world need of ‘athletes’ powered by Bayer, Hoechst and Pfizer, after all?

35mm Asph Summicron. As good as it gets.

So while AF will likely not darken the doors of the Leica M user any time soon, the new Leica M (that’s all, just M, not M10) really shows that they are progressing rapidly to a full EVF mirrorless full frame body. And you really want full frame because fast wides are what the Leica is all about and APS-C chucks out half the goodness and all of the width. Leica has two other Leica M-style bodies on the market. A ‘bargain’ ME which is nothing more than a rebranded M9 with that tired old Kodak sensor at $6,000. And the beyond foolish $8,000 Monochrom for people who like to pay more and not be able to make color pictures. Best of all, the M comes in a silver chrome option which is how Leicas should be. The amateur looks enhance the user’s stealth rating.

Paris Métro. The colors of France. As befits the most beautiful city in the world, the French
take particular care to see that their subway system is well maintained and clean.
Leica M3, 50mm DR Summicron, Kodachrome.

The Leica M adds one feature which has nothing to do with the rangefinder ethos. A movie mode. You are seriously going to make movies with this body when you can get a better, dedicated movie camera for less? I don’t think so. Live view and movies are not consonant with the Leica M ethos. Still, movie mode/live view add little bulk and you do not have to use either. Think of the M as a viewfinder camera also able to take long lenses with the clip on EVF at a pinch. If most of your work is at 90mm or shorter, then you are missing little.

Marion Campbell spinning Harris Tweed yarn, Harris, Scotland. Leica M3, 35mm Summicron, TriX.

And the ability to use the clip-on EVF made for the overpriced $2,000 Leica X2 point-and-shoot is the signal feature added. It’s named the ‘Visoflex EVF2’. The name derives from the mirror box attachments Leica sold back in the film days which made your M into an SLR. Sort of. You had great bulk and weight, poor responsiveness, awful ergonomics for hand-held use, a restricted lens range, no aperture automation and a myriad of adapters and coupling rings. Focussing on the plain groundglass screen which lacked a fresnel lens was iffy at best, with many opting for aftermarket screens you could actually see in less than noon California sun. It never worked anywhere near as well as an SLR, and I made sure I proved that by owning a Visoflex I, a Visoflex II and a Visoflex III. All just awful. There’s Leica fever for you.

St. James’s Park, London. Leica M3, 50mm Elmar, Kodachrome.

The new Visoflex attachment is notable not so much for what it does – lots of MFT bodies and even Leica’s APS-C X2 offer like gadgets – but for what it promises. And that promise is of an integrated, compact EVF built into the next M’s body. No more flaky optical finder frames, no more marginally accurate rangefinder patch (consistently nailing focus with a 50mm atf/1.4 or a 90mm at f/2 is at or beyond the technical limits of the antiquated prism-and-mirror based rangefinder, a trivial process for any modern DSLR), no more clip-on gadgets, but rather an EVF with focus peaking (the sharp bits go red) and center magnification to make MF simple and accurate. The old Visoflex (and it should fit the M!) is a comical comparison to the new Visoflex EVF-2 when you look at capability and bulk:

The new Visoflex, with a Leica R lens fitted.

Visoflex 2. Good luck seeing the image with the lens stopped down.

The Visoflex EVF-2 comes in black only, needlessly emblazoned ‘LEICA’ in huge white letters on the front, at $460. You can buy the Olympus VF-2 in black or chrome for $250, get the same 1.4MP definition and flip up capability for waist level use. Leica has confirmed it works. The LCDs in both are made by Epson. Alternatively, the even cheaper Olympus VF-3 at $180, reduced to 920,000 dots but seemingly well regarded, may work as well. I’m not sure. The big wheel is the diopter adjuster.

Olympus VF-3.

The new Visoflex, and the eventually integrated EVF in the next M which is surely coming, offers the ability to use not only every Leica M mount lens ever made with full focus range and accurate framing, but also just about every SLR lens ever made, whether Leica R (we are talking some awfully good lenses here, also damned by Leica’s inept SLRs – yup, I owned a bunch of those, too), Nikkor, Pentax, Canon, etc. as well as almost every screw mount Leica lens ever made. Nirvana for lens buffs! This new Visoflex should offer constant brightness regardless of how much the lens is stopped down (just like a Panasonic with adapted MF lenses), aperture priority exposure automation and, best of all, an optional 5x-10x selectively magnified center patch for critical focusing, a function activated by a discreet front panel switch with a horizontal control wheel on the back changing magnification. How fast the whole thing is has yet to be determined. Panasonic, which lead the way in EVF DSLRs has proved that an EVF can work superbly, as my G1 and G3 Panny bodies testify.

Plus the new M offers a 24mp sensor, CMOS for the first time, which early reviews suggest is a significant step up from the one in the M9, especially at higher ISO settings, the M9’s sensor being bottom decile in that regard. It’s not made by the spin-out Kodak business used for the M8, M9, MM and ME, but rather by a specialty Belgian manufacturer named CMOSIS. Let’s hope they stay in business.

London gent, Green Park. Leica M3, 35mm Summaron, TriX.

There’s a lot to like here, except for the $6,000 + lens price tag. The 35mm lens is the perfect match for the Leica street snapper. Small, fast, light, not too long and not too wide. The rational buyer’s M would likely sport a 35mm f/2 Zeiss optic because it’s rumored to be every bit as good as the $3,000 Summicron at one-third the price. Likewise, Cosina makes a range of M mount lenses which have a great reputation, their 35/2.5 Color Skopar selling for just $410 new. Cosina – the same Cosina which makes Zeiss branded lenses – will sell you a 35/1.4 Nokton for a bargain $630 with a choice of single or multi-coating, which compares nicely with the $5,000 Leica is demanding for its equally fast Summilux. 90% of the performance for 10% of the cost.

Zeiss Biogon. Yes, Leica quality at 70% off, and in silver at that.

The new M owner is also spoiled for used lens choices, with any number of 35mm Summicrons and Summarons available for a fraction of the cost of a new Asph Summicron in any condition desired. Having used early Summicrons and both f/3.5 and f/2.8 Summarons, I can vouch for these optics unreservedly.

Bottom line? Price of entry with an excellent 35mm lens totals under $7,000. Buy a new Summicron and you are close to $10,000, the cost of a good used car. A new Nikon D4 body runs $6,000 for comparison, though most would agree it’s a far tougher beast and hardly comparable in terms of versatility and speed, where it leaves the M in the dust. But’s that’s comparing chalk with cheese. A Leica is not an alternative to a modern DSLR, it’s an adjunct.

Pall Mall, London. Leica M6, 90mm Apo Summicron-M, Kodachrome.

You can download my free book of Leica pictures here, all snapped on my M3 mostly using a 35mm f/2.8 Summaron or, heavens forbid, buy it here for a pittance, which will make me exactly the same sum but will give you something permanent. It’s all black and white because that’s what almost everyone used in the 1970s and, furthermore, I couldn’t afford color in any case. This was in the days of TriX and D76 and Agfa Brovira and smelly chemicals but the results seemed to come out OK, especially once digitized with a Nikon scanner. I was lucky to be able to scan the original negatives some thirty years after they were taken.

No modern Leica can hold a candle to a cheap, modern DSLR at one third the price. A Nikon D600 or Canon 6D is a far more versatile instrument than the essentially single-purpose M. The M is for stealthy street snapping, something the DSLR can do pretty well if pushed. I do fine with a bulky Nikon D3x and despite all the codswallop about it being ‘threatening’ I have found it to be quite unobtrusive in practice. The DSLR can do lots of other things better and faster than any M body. However, until you have used Leica and its natural – if dated – optical viewfinder with a 28mm to 90mm lens and enjoyed its stealthy nature, you have no frame of reference from which to criticize. The price? Give up some other vice and it’s yours in a year. Whether you really want to carry $10,000 on your shoulder in the rougher parts of town is a trickier question.

Of course, should my ship come in, the first thing that happens to my M is that it’s off to the engraver’s to be corrected, and that gauche red dot removed:

Leica M10.

Note that the new M, which really should be named the M10, no longer has the middle window between the viewfinder and rangefinder. The purpose of that was to illuminate the frames in the finder. That is now done electronically and you can even switch the color from white to red – a solution looking for a problem.

Holocaust Museum, Paris. Leica M3, 35mm Summaron, TriX.

Though a self-admitted Leica fan who gets free testers from Leica, Jonathan Slack has a useful review of the new Leica M with comparison notes on the M9, especially informative when it comes to shutter release feel and shutter sound. You can read his piece here.

Alternatives for the stealthy street snapper:

The only other full frame compact snapper currently out there is the Sony RX1. It comes with a fixed 35mm f/2 Zess lens and the mind-numbing price of $3,000, capitalizing on the Leica’s premium pricing. It has yet to be seen if Sony’s AF is up to the task, and the camera would have to be fitted with a proper optical finder at modest additional cost to be useful on the street in fast paced situations. The inclusion of AF rather puts the Leica to shame by comparison.

Far more interesting is the newly announced Fuji X100S, though unfortunately it’s APS-C not FF. Once again the lens is a 35mm FFE (23mm) and f/2. Ideal. Early reviews suggest that Fuji has fixed the frustratingly long list of design bugs which made me pass on the X100. Most importantly there’s a claimed significant increase in AF speed and the innovative integrated hybrid optical/electronic finder is retained. The lens is not interchangeable but the price is very reasonable at $1,300 for a compact point-and-shoot with quality optics and (maybe) newly found responsiveness. If this body had a full frame sensor there would be very little point in spending many times the asking price on any Leica.

Wedding, Parc Monceau, Paris. Leica M3, 35mm Summaron, TriX.

If anyone can come up with a full frame camera with specs to match the X100S I would think it has to be Fuji. They are the most innovative camera maker in the market, they make Hasselblads so they know all about quality optics and large sensors, and they seem to be tapping a rich vein among gear aficionados. I would think that Leica is looking over its shoulder daily hoping that the M-killing Fuji is not about to hit dealers’ shelves. At $2,000 I would buy one sight unseen.

Those Canadians …. Leica M2, 90mm Apo Summicron-M, Kodak Gold 100.

Technical note: The film images illustrating this piece were variously scanned on Nikon Coolscan 2000 and 8000 and Canon Canoscan 4000US film scanners, then minimally processed in Lightroom 4.