A few days ago I published
an article by Rachel Stinson titled “6 reasons why Leica is better than Nikon
and Canon.” I explained that this were
the opinions of the author and thus quite subjective. I also mentioned that it would be very
helpful if Leica were to publish some tangible figures of what they do to set
themselves apart from their competitors.
I received a fair amount
on criticism for publishing that article.
It was called stupid, superficial and a whole lot of other things. Allow me to be quite factual in this article
with facts and figures that I have collected
Obviously Nikon and Canon
are very capable companies, as are many others.
It is certainly not the case that Leica somehow has some knowledge that
their competitors do not have. Nobody is
able to perform any miracles either.
Yet especially Leica
lenses are generally considered to be the best on the market. So what is it that allows Leica to set themselves
apart? The simple answer is ‘tolerances’. That is especially the case with lenses.
Unfortunately it is
impossible to make a perfect lens, one without any flaws. To minimize these shortcomings a manufacturer
has to try to come as close to the ideal as possible. That can only be done by using tolerances a
tight as possible.
Any lens consists of a
variety of individual lens elements to control aberrations. The tighter the tolerances are controlled during
the manufacture, the better the resulting lens will be. This starts with the design of the lens and
the selection of optical glasses needed for the manufacture.
Any lens is made up of
lens elements made from glasses of various refracting indices and various levels
of dispersions. Leica has very high
demands in this respect. Leica applies a
standard of ±0.0002% for the accuracy of the refractive index. This compares to the international standard
of ±0.001% as applied by most other companies.
The accuracy of the Abbe number, the measure for dispersion is ±0.2% for
Leica compared to ±0.8% internationally.
Then, during the
manufacture of the individual lens elements, Leica allows production tolerance
of no more than ¼ lambda or ¼ of the average wavelength of light which
corresponds to approximately 500 nanometers or 0.0005mm for the accuracy of the
lens surface. In comparison, the
tolerances applied by other lens manufacturers are ½ lambda or 0.001mm. For the production of aspherical lens
elements Leica applies even tighter tolerances which cannot exceed 0.03
micrometer or 0.00003mm.
Each manufacturing and assembly step is immediately followed by a check
Virtually all
manufacturers do mass produce their cameras and lenses with the exception of
Leica. The extremely tight tolerances
demanded by Leica simply cannot be achieved with mass production. While computer controlled manufacturing
processes have greatly improved accuracy, it requires a large amount of hand assembly
with constant checks and rechecks to achieve the tolerance levels as applied by
Leica.
However, these tight
optical tolerances are meaningless if not accompanied by equally tight
mechanical tolerance. The industry average standard is 1/1000 of an
inch, with a few manufacturers like Canon and Nikon going to 1/1250 or even 1/1500
of an inch. Leica cameras on the other
hand continue to be made to tolerances of 1/2500 of an inch or more precisely
1/100 of a millimeter. These mechanical
tolerances are applied throughout their lenses as well as with their
cameras. For instance, each lens mount has
to stay within these tolerances in its distance to the sensor. Anything less will adversely affect the performance
of their lenses.
Measuring for accurate thickness of a lens element
It was recognized that the
resolution of a lens is limited in part due to a lack of correction of
secondary colors. Based on the light
refracting properties of available optical glasses, most lenses can only bring
two wavelengths to a common focus. The
optical designer must choose these wavelengths to best suit the intended use of
the lens. All other wavelengths are then
focused in planes predetermined by the properties of the glasses over which the
designer has no control. Such lenses are
generally referred to as achromats and are corrected for wavelengths from 400
to no more than 600 nanometers. Anything
shorter is not taken into consideration.
Leica makes a large amount
of apochromatically corrected lenses, a lot of which are corrected from 400 to
about 900 nanometers. The first example
of such a lens was the 180mm f/3.4 Apo Telyt R which initially was made for the
US Navy and which was a classified piece of equipment for several years. Many of these lenses permit photography in
black and white, color and infrared with the same focal setting.
180mm f/3.4 Apo Telyt R
The advantage of such
lenses lies in the fact that they have an extremely small focus shift between
the blue and red colors of the spectrum.
In simple terms, it makes them a lot sharper, meaning a noticeably higher
resolution. The Apo Telyt has maximum
focal plane shift of 0.08mm or ±0.04mm which is less than 1/2000 of an
inch. This is one of the very reasons why
the tight mechanical tolerances, as applied by Leica, are necessary. If not, the camera would be unable to take advantage
of the optical capabilities of the lens. For comparison, with a conventional lens, the
maximum focal plane shift is 0.2mm as compared to 0.08mm for the 180mm f/3.4
lens. This amounts to a factor of 2.5
over the 180mm f/3.4 lens.
Unfortunately, such
accuracy does not come cheap and it is one of the major reasons for the
relatively high cost of Leica cameras and lenses. Another factor is the cost of some of the
materials. For instance, the Leica
900403 glass consists of no fewer than a dozen different ingredients, including
the rare earth element lanthanum. One
kilogram of this glass costs almost 60 times as much as a common optical glass
such as BK7. Please keep in mind that
this APO glass is twice as heavy as BK7.
Subsequently the volume of glass in a kilogram that can be turned into
lens elements is only half as great, making the actual price ratio between
these two optical glasses approximately 120-to-1
Various lens grinding machines, designed to grind a single lens element at a time
As of late many manufacturers
are offering lenses with aspherical surfaces which can greatly improve lens
performance by virtually eliminating spherical aberration. However, there are two distinctively
different approaches in the manufacture of these elements. An inexpensive method is to produce a
“conventional” spherical element and sandwich it with a thin aspherical surface
element. These are made of precision
molded acrylic. However, this method, originally
developed by Zeiss, was ultimately discarded by them because it could not
approach their quality standards. The
main cause was the fact that even the clearest plastics, like acrylics, consist
of very large molecules. Light, when
transmitting, literally will scatter off these molecules, causing the light to
be slightly diffused, which ultimately has adverse effects on lens
performance. Other companies use
precision molding equipment where a glass blank is reheated until it becomes
pliable and then is precision molded into the final shape of the lens
element. Some exotic types of glasses
cannot be used with this method because the reheating and molding will cause
the glass to deteriorate and thus make it useless. Subsequently, this precision
molding process forces the lens designer to compromise to a certain degree
because better suited glasses cannot be utilized. The same applies to lens elements of larger
diameters. Leica uses an entirely
different approach. They use computer
controlled automatic grinding and polishing of the glass elements which require
the adherence to extremely tight tolerances.
Unfortunately such production methods can only be achieved at
considerable expense.
As already mentioned for
the production of aspherical lens elements Leica applies tolerances which
cannot exceed 0.03 micrometer or 0.00003mm.
To achieve such precision Leica employs special grinding machines where
the lens element is rotating against the grinding head, which is in form of a
narrow rod. This will grind only a small
section of the entire surface of the lens element at a time. A special grinding substance is also used
which is partially magnetized. This is
done to allow for a more precise adherence of the grinding substance to the
lens and grinding rod surface. With all
lens elements the grinding substance becomes ever finer from one step to the
next until it is mostly water with a small amount of a very fine polishing
compound.
Some of he grinding ans polishing compounds must be continuously agitated to avoid deterioration
Unlike with other
manufacturers, at Leica all individual lens elements, spherical and aspherical,
do not approach their final surface configuration and thickness until the lens
coating is applied. Lens coating at
Leica is not applied in the same manner for all elements. Instead selective coating layers of different
substances is applied in a manner that eliminates surface reflection as much as
possible.
Grinding aspherical
surfaces via the method used at Leica is extremely time consuming. As with all manufacturing steps at Leica,
each individual step is immediately followed by a check. If these checks show that deviations from the
norm still exist, the step is either followed by additional work, or the lens
element is discarded. This often leads
to no more than five aspherical lens elements being produced in a single day.
To increase lens
production, Leica tried to outsource the manufacture of some aspherical lens
elements to other companies. The
companies that were approached by Leica either were not able to work within the
specified tolerances or they simply were not able to supply a sufficient number
of elements to make such cooperation feasible.
There are no assembly lines at Leica. All tasks are dine at individual work stations
Before lenses are
assembled, each lens element is coated at the sides with black paint to avoid
reflections. This used to be done with a
brush, but now a specially designed foam applicator is used instead. The question is often asked why this isn't
done by machine. The simple answer is
higher accuracy. The general black
coating is easily applied with just one step.
However the often sharp edge between the polished lens surface and the
edge often requires as many of five additional applications to be perfect. This can only be done by hand.
All of this makes Leica by
far the foremost and most advanced manufacturer of aspherical lens elements in
the world.
There are a couple of
additional steps in the manufacture of Leica lenses which are virtually ignored
by other manufacturers. It is a known
fact that regardless of how precise one tries to make each individual lens,
there will always be slight fluctuations in performance from one lens to
another. To minimize these fluctuations,
Leica tests each individual lens element after the completion of all
manufacturing steps to determine its actual focal length and along with it the
fluctuations from the ideal. If these do
not fall within the rather stringent parameters set by Leica, these elements
are usually discarded. The other ones
are described with plus or minus figures to indicate the deviations. Then, during assembly of the optical
components, these figures are used to even out the differences with the result
that there are considerably less fluctuation in performance from one lens to
another.
Finally, there are some
additional steps when it comes to the Leica rangefinder lenses. In order to work with utmost focusing
accuracy in conjunction with the mechanical Leica rangefinder, the actual focal
length of each lens is measured very accurately. Older Leica lenses were even engraved with
these figures. For instance, my 90mm
f/2.8 Elmarit has the figure 05 engraved to the right of the infinity mark on
the focusing scale while my 135mm f/2.8 Elmarit reads 55. If my memory serves me correctly, this means
that the 90mm is actually a 89.5mm lens while the 135mm in reality is a 135.5mm
lens. The focusing cam of all Leica
rangefinder lenses is then ground by hand to reflect the actual focal length of
the lens to make rangefinder focusing as accurate as possible. Unfortunately all
of this is also quite expensive. But it
proves once again, you get what you pay for.
For other articles on this blog scroll down in the column to the right to BLOG ARCHIVE
To comment or to read comments please scroll past the ads below.
All ads present items of interest to Leica owners.
___________________________________________________________________________
To comment or to read comments please scroll past the ads below.
All ads present items of interest to Leica owners.
___________________________________________________________________________
Buy vintage Leica cameras from
America's premier Leica specialist
http://www.tamarkinauctions.com/ http://www.tamarkin.com/leicagallery/upcoming-show
PLEASE NOTE: THE NEXT TAMARKIN RARE CAMERA AUCTION IS ON NOVEMBER 11, 2017
Buy vintage Leica cameras from
America's premier Leica specialist
http://www.tamarkinauctions.com/ http://www.tamarkin.com/leicagallery/upcoming-show
PLEASE NOTE: THE NEXT TAMARKIN RARE CAMERA AUCTION IS ON NOVEMBER 11, 2017
Click on image to enlarge
Order: info@gmpphoto.com
Please make payment via PayPal to GMP Photography
Click on image to enlarge
Order: info@gmpphoto.com
Please make payment via PayPal to GMP Photography
Click on image to enlarge
Order: info@gmpphoto.com
Please make payment via PayPal to GMP Photography
Click on image to enlarge
Order: info@gmpphoto.com
Please make payment via PayPal to GMP Photography
Click on image to enlarge
Order: info@gmpphoto.com
Please make payment via PayPal to GMP Photography
Click on image to enlarge
Order: info@gmpphoto.com
Please make payment via PayPal to GMP Photography
Heinz, there are six reasons, there is only one reason. Leica is Leica!
ReplyDeleteWithout a doubt.
DeleteAre you seriously suggesting that Nikon and Canon are incapable to make lenses like Leica?
ReplyDeleteNot at all, of course they could. But with the production methods (mass production) they have chosen for themselves, it is impossible to do so.
DeleteWouldn't Leica be better off to select a lower cost labor market to manufacture their goods? Wouldn't that make them more competitive?
ReplyDeleteNo. Even now Leica is being severely criticized for having a manufacturing plant in Portugal. Especially non-Leica owners seem to be hung up on the 'made in Germany' label, conveniently forgetting that a lot of the Nikon or canon equipment they use is made in countries other than Japan. The same thing happened when Leica had their manufacturing facility in Midland, Ontario. What many didn't realize that for a while, the majority of Leica lenses were designed at the Midland plant after their chief lens designer started working there. I don't think it really matters. We Germans don't have some mystical extra capability to make things. In the end it is the standards a company sets, where those standards are being adhered to is ultimately of no consequence.
DeleteDimitris Georgopoulos wrote:
ReplyDeleteThe lens in the photo is not an 180 / 3.4 but an Apo-Telyt 3.4 /135 mm. The only 180mm lens in the M system is the Tele-Elmarit 2.8/180mm of the Visoflex System.
You are mistaken. The labeling of the lens in the photograph clearly reads "Leica Apo Telyt R 1:3.4 180" The R designation means that it is a lens for the former Leica reflex cameras. Not everything Leica made was for the M system.
DeleteMeeHow Bageensky wrote:
ReplyDeleteGreat read...but with all this precision techniques put into production of these beauties, one is left with ‘substandard’ operation based on a vague approximation of human eye/fingers (when focusing) under the pressure of the moment to be captured. Meaning - the human factor fails this process or am I wrong? I’m yet to find a Leica shot that is sharper than average.. it almost seems that it all works in laboratory, not really in the field. In fact, most iconic Leica shots out there are not sharp at all. Beauty of photography, I guess. Please correct me if I’m wrong.
We must separate results that are influenced by the situation of the moment from the times when everything can and is done correctly. Leicas are the premier instrument for street photography. Unfortunately the "nature of the beast" is such that not everything can be done in such situations as correctly as it should. subject movement, possible lack of depth of field are just a few of those influences. The other side of the coin are images that are taken when deliberate, accurate focusing and all else can be done correctly. In those situations, including using the best aperture setting on the lens, a Leica can and will deliver results that rival those of larger format cameras.
DeleteMeeHow Bageensky answered:
DeleteHeinz Richter impressive, indeed. But then again - one would question if, given the fact it’s meant for such ‘imprecise’ use, it’s appropriate to create such gems when not used to the potential...? For precise architectural shots I use P1/IQ3 100mp, but Leica is for the ‘decisive moment’ photography. Rarely (if!) sharp as above. Sounds like an overkill. Don’t get me wrong, I love ‘Leica look’ (especially film) but sharpness in Leica was never my main concern, yet it clearly (unnecessarily?) drives the price.
I can't disagree with what you say. However, even though Leicas are imminently suited for 'the decisive moment' photography, this is by far not the only reason people chose the Leica over other cameras, and we must also consider that the Leica M system is far from being the only Leica system available. We cannot expect Leica to sacrifice overall quality and potential performance of any of their cameras just because they are often used in situations where the full potential often cannot be met.
DeleteMeeHow Bageensky answered:
DeleteHeinz Richter point taken. I was, of course, referring to the M system, not any other where such precision could be justified much easier. Interesting conversation though, thank you.
A friend who shot only Nikon would by five or six of the same lens whenever he purchased a new one. He then shot with all the lenses and compared images. He would choose the best and and return the rest.
ReplyDeleteThe reason being that fluctuations in performance from one lens to the next are substantially higher than is the case with Leica lenses.
DeleteEven if I already knew about it, it is always impressive to read how Leica makes their lenses, and what sets them apart from the rest.
ReplyDeleteI am really proud to be Ambassador of such tradition, craftsmanship and constant aim to perfection!
I’ve been your silent reader for quite some time and now I’m delighted to say that I’m inspired by your articles. You have shared very valuable information and knowledge that people should recognise. Thank you for sharing. I would love to see more updates from you.
ReplyDeleteElcometer