• site home
  • blog home
  • galleries
  • contact
  • underwater
  • the bleeding edge

the last word

Photography meets digital computer technology. Photography wins -- most of the time.

You are here: Home / The Last Word / Leica 18 & 24 on a7R & M240

Leica 18 & 24 on a7R & M240

December 12, 2013 JimK Leave a Comment

I promised some corner smear tests for the 18mm f/3.8 Leica Super-Elmar ASPH, and the 24mm f/3.8 Leica Elmar ASPH. I’ll show you the results here, both with the Sony a7R and the Leica M240, both res’d up to 12000 pixel across using bicubic smoother. I used Preserve Details in the last post, and I think the crunchiness that it introduces makes it more difficult to judge.

The original scene, with the 18mm f/3.8 Leica Super-Elmar ASPH set to between f/5.6 and f/8 for max sharpness, the shutter at 1/1000, ISO 400 in both cases:

The Sony a7R:

_DSC1934

The Leica M240:

L1004454

The center with the Sony:

a7r 18 ctr

The center with the Leica:

m240 18 ctr

The Leica is sharper in the center, which is a surprise.

The upper right corner with the Sony:

a7r 18 UL

The upper right corner with the Leica:

m240 18 UL

I’d give the corner to the Sony.

And now, with the 24mm f/3.8 Leica Elmar ASPH set to between f/5.6 and f/8, the shutter at 1/1000, ISO 400 in both cases::

Sony:

_DSC1942

Leica:

L1004459

Center with the Sony:

24 a7r ctr

Center with the Leica:

m240 24 ctr

Again, the Leica is sharper.

Upper right with Sony:

a7r 24 UL

Upper right with Leica:

m240 24 UL

The Leica wins this one.

The results are a little hit-and-miss, but the upshot of this testing for me is that the a7R corners don’t show much smear. I’m more concerned with the center fuzziness which I’ve not seen with longer lenses. At 1/1000, I don’t think it can be vibration. I had the Leica in live view mode, and both cameras had to deal with the shutter closing, then opening when I pressed the shutter release. The cameras were on a tripod. Focal-plane tolerance build-up in the lens, the adapter, and the camera body? Could be; I didn’t use live-view to focus.

I just ran a check on the 24mm infinity focus using live view. I picked a tree on a hillside about 3 miles away, and focused carefully, using a loupe on the LCD screen for precision. The lens focuses at infinity when the markings indicate that it is just shy of that. So when I set the 24mm lens at the infinity stop, I was actually focusing it just beyond infinity. Boy, focus sure gets picky when you’ve got 36 million pixels!

I’m not anxious to go out an rerun the above tests right away — maybe in the fullness of time — but I’m pretty sure they’ll indicate that there’s even less corner smear than shown above.

The Last Word

← Sony a7R corner smear with Zeiss 35mm A break from the a7R →

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

May 2025
S M T W T F S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031
« Apr    

Articles

  • About
    • Patents and papers about color
    • Who am I?
  • How to…
    • Backing up photographic images
    • How to change email providers
    • How to shoot slanted edge images for me
  • Lens screening testing
    • Equipment and Software
    • Examples
      • Bad and OK 200-600 at 600
      • Excellent 180-400 zoom
      • Fair 14-30mm zoom
      • Good 100-200 mm MF zoom
      • Good 100-400 zoom
      • Good 100mm lens on P1 P45+
      • Good 120mm MF lens
      • Good 18mm FF lens
      • Good 24-105 mm FF lens
      • Good 24-70 FF zoom
      • Good 35 mm FF lens
      • Good 35-70 MF lens
      • Good 60 mm lens on IQ3-100
      • Good 63 mm MF lens
      • Good 65 mm FF lens
      • Good 85 mm FF lens
      • Good and bad 25mm FF lenses
      • Good zoom at 24 mm
      • Marginal 18mm lens
      • Marginal 35mm FF lens
      • Mildly problematic 55 mm FF lens
      • OK 16-35mm zoom
      • OK 60mm lens on P1 P45+
      • OK Sony 600mm f/4
      • Pretty good 16-35 FF zoom
      • Pretty good 90mm FF lens
      • Problematic 400 mm FF lens
      • Tilted 20 mm f/1.8 FF lens
      • Tilted 30 mm MF lens
      • Tilted 50 mm FF lens
      • Two 15mm FF lenses
    • Found a problem – now what?
    • Goals for this test
    • Minimum target distances
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Printable Siemens Star targets
    • Target size on sensor
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Test instructions — postproduction
    • Test instructions — reading the images
    • Test instructions – capture
    • Theory of the test
    • What’s wrong with conventional lens screening?
  • Previsualization heresy
  • Privacy Policy
  • Recommended photographic web sites
  • Using in-camera histograms for ETTR
    • Acknowledgments
    • Why ETTR?
    • Normal in-camera histograms
    • Image processing for in-camera histograms
    • Making the in-camera histogram closely represent the raw histogram
    • Shortcuts to UniWB
    • Preparing for monitor-based UniWB
    • A one-step UniWB procedure
    • The math behind the one-step method
    • Iteration using Newton’s Method

Category List

Recent Comments

  • JimK on Goldilocks and the three flashes
  • DC Wedding Photographer on Goldilocks and the three flashes
  • Wedding Photographer in DC on The 16-Bit Fallacy: Why More Isn’t Always Better in Medium Format Cameras
  • JimK on Fujifilm GFX 100S II precision
  • Renjie Zhu on Fujifilm GFX 100S II precision
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • Ivo de Man on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • Ivo de Man on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF

Archives

Copyright © 2025 · Daily Dish Pro On Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

Unless otherwise noted, all images copyright Jim Kasson.