Home · Register · Search · View Winners · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username   Password

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Alternative Gear & Lenses | Join Upload & Sell

1      
2
       end
  

Archive 2012 · Leica 100mm f/2.8 APO-Macro MFD
  
 
Lee Saxon
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #1 · p.2 #1 · Leica 100mm f/2.8 APO-Macro MFD


Mislabeled units cost NASA a $125 Mars orbiter.

Half the people that label their figures "lp/mm" have actually measured "lp/ih" or "l/mm." Numbers from different sources cannot therefore be compared.



Dec 20, 2012 at 11:56 AM
carstenw
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #2 · p.2 #2 · Leica 100mm f/2.8 APO-Macro MFD


Lee Saxon wrote:
Mislabeled units cost NASA a $125 Mars orbiter.


I didn't realize that the Mars orbiters were that cheap. Maybe I'll pick one up to play with.





Dec 20, 2012 at 12:30 PM
alundeb
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #3 · p.2 #3 · Leica 100mm f/2.8 APO-Macro MFD


thrice wrote:
...400lpmm...

alundeb wrote:
Lovely photo!

Some supplementary info:

The diffraction limit for resolving power is about 560 lp/mm at f/2.8, 400 lp/mm at f/4, 280 lp/mm at f/5.6 and so on. (Numbers rounded quite a bit to make them easier to remember)

With the high pixel density camera Pentax Q it is easy to measure resolving power up to about 300 lp/mm. It is fairly easy to find lenses in the 35 mm world that resolve more than 200 lp/mm. The Canon 70-200 2.8 IS II outresolves the Pentax Q sensor. I have to use teleconverters to be able to measure resolving power even on that
...Show more
R10 wrote:
Just out of curiosity - by which (comparable) standards has this been measured then (e.g. 50% contrast or what, and with what kind of motifs) ?
These numbers are a bit confusing since Leica doesn't claim any of their lenses to exceed 150 and 80 lp/mm (center and FF-corner) that much, even not their clearly unbeaten ones.
And I happened to use the EF 2.8/70-200L IS II, and the visibly superior Nikkor AF-S 4/70-200 VR and Leica-R 4/80-200. By no means do they get anywhere near to the Leica APO-Macro-Elmarit-R 100's resolution (esp. micro contrast), 'already' (pixel-density-wise) on a 5DII or D800,
...Show more

It was measured at a very low contrast rate, it is not calibrated but definitely not above 10%. The measurement target was a printed siemens star.

When speaking about resolving power / absolute resolution, and 400 lp/mm like Thrice mentioned, it is not common to use the 50% criterion, more likely 10%. The Rayleigh diffraction limit criterion uses 9%.

If you are seeing any sharpness / micro contrast limit with the 70-200 2.8 IS II in the center with normal cameras, I don't know what is going on. My copy as said outresolves a sensor with 3-4 times the (linear) pixel density.

I would low to try the APO-Macro 100 2.8 and the APO-Telyt 280 4 on the Pentax Q. I have the APO-Telyt 180 3.4, and it does not resolve nearly as fine detail as say the Canon 70-200 4 IS ( at near infinity). But it is better in the corners and the color correction is exceptional.



Dec 20, 2012 at 03:15 PM
R10
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #4 · p.2 #4 · Leica 100mm f/2.8 APO-Macro MFD


alundeb wrote:
It was measured at a very low contrast rate, it is not calibrated but definitely not above 10%. The measurement target was a printed siemens star.

When speaking about resolving power / absolute resolution, and 400 lp/mm like Thrice mentioned, it is not common to use the 50% criterion, more likely 10%. The Rayleigh diffraction limit criterion uses 9%.

If you are seeing any sharpness / micro contrast limit with the 70-200 2.8 IS II in the center with normal cameras, I don't know what is going on. My copy as said outresolves a sensor with 3-4 times the (linear) pixel density.

I
...Show more


Ah, thanks.

Well, “when speaking about resolving power”, I prefer criteria with some more practical relevance, i.e., visible impact on usual photographs, looked at from reasonable viewing distances. The “50%/5-40lp/mm” criterion, or even more %, have their reasons in this respect while 9 or 10% is of rather indirect importance here (and more for the engineers). I bet, these reasons cause Leica and others to use the 5-40lp/mm in their MTFs. Btw, Canon only shows 5-30lp/mm. I may have missed it, but I’ve never come across a Canon MTF with a 40lp/mm graph...
Don’t get me wrong, I’m pretty interested in the more ‘academic’ aspects too, and really appreciate such information.

As for the 70-200 2.8 IS II (I used two copies, btw), it may ‘scientifically’ outresolve a Pentax Q sensor (as the AME100 does with ease) but, ‘even’ on the 5DII or D800, its ‘visible resolution limits’, which have a lot to do with color and tone rendition and separation, and with the level of micro contrast way above 50% and below 100lp/mm, come to light way before those of a Leica 4/80-200 or even the AME100 do - throughout the field.

The AME100 is, for me, close to a perfect balance of optical qualities (throughout the frame and on an insanely high level). Nevertheless, the more 3D-ish fingerprint of the Zeiss Contax T* Macro-Planar 2/100mm has always temped me, albeit the underlying even higher (micro) contrast and (center) resolution comes at the expense of a less creamy color rendition. Life is a tradeoff...

PS: Btw, I’m a scientist but, all in good time...




Dec 22, 2012 at 02:14 PM
Grenache
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #5 · p.2 #5 · Leica 100mm f/2.8 APO-Macro MFD


The feature of the lens to me that is most appealing is its gradual transition to blur. The Zeiss drops off fast and is much more blurred. Depends on the look you seek.

Jim



Dec 25, 2012 at 05:33 AM
zhangyue
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #6 · p.2 #6 · Leica 100mm f/2.8 APO-Macro MFD


Grenache wrote:
The feature of the lens to me that is most appealing is its gradual transition to blur. The Zeiss drops off fast and is much more blurred. Depends on the look you seek.

Jim


From samples, I can see its Bokeh advantage to MP100. It is very smooth. Though MP100 is a f2 lens, which is more useful for isolation and low light.

I heard it has 720 degree focus range, which is a bad news for me, too slow. Can any people tell me how many degree from 2M to 3M and 3M to infinity? That is the range I interested most. I know MP100 attribute most of its range from MFD to about 1M, then very fast.



Dec 25, 2012 at 06:34 AM
wayne seltzer
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #7 · p.2 #7 · Leica 100mm f/2.8 APO-Macro MFD


Zhangyue,
The R 100/2.8 APO only needs a 90 degree focus ring turn to go from 1.7m to infinity.
Below is a shot of the focus scale of the lens.
I have successfully shot weddings, portraits, and luau dancers at night with the lens on my D800E.It's a great macro lens, portrait lens and landscape lens. Has slow focus transition.
I also have the C/Y 100/2 Planar for my 1ds3.








Dec 25, 2012 at 08:45 AM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



zhangyue
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #8 · p.2 #8 · Leica 100mm f/2.8 APO-Macro MFD


Wayne, thanks for the info. That is awesome. It put hope back. I like what I see from this lens. I can imagine it is a versatile lens as you said. I don't see it has any flaw actually other than f2.8.


Dec 25, 2012 at 08:55 AM
Grenache
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #9 · p.2 #9 · Leica 100mm f/2.8 APO-Macro MFD


Assuming bokeh advantage goes to the lens with the least featured bokeh is perhaps a knee jerk answer. Consider non-macro uses, and having some sense of subject in the background can be an asset. There is no right or wrong answer. It is a matter of personal taste and goal in shooting. What I can say is that after using about a half dozen macro lenses, including the 100/2 MP, I still have my Leica.

Bokeh on the Leica can be quite delicious...
Jim


I had a Farm in Africa by Only_to_be_kind, on Flickr


Shimmer by Only_to_be_kind, on Flickr


Smile by Only_to_be_kind, on Flickr

And this one is at f/4.....


Stubby by Only_to_be_kind, on Flickr



Dec 25, 2012 at 06:15 PM
Lee Saxon
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #10 · p.2 #10 · Leica 100mm f/2.8 APO-Macro MFD


Lee Saxon wrote:
Mislabeled units cost NASA a $125 Mars orbiter.


carstenw wrote:
I didn't realize that the Mars orbiters were that cheap. Maybe I'll pick one up to play with.




Keeping me on my toes, Carsten!



Dec 26, 2012 at 10:45 PM
zhangyue
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #11 · p.2 #11 · Leica 100mm f/2.8 APO-Macro MFD


Grenache wrote:
Assuming bokeh advantage goes to the lens with the least featured bokeh is perhaps a knee jerk answer. Consider non-macro uses, and having some sense of subject in the background can be an asset. There is no right or wrong answer. It is a matter of personal taste and goal in shooting. What I can say is that after using about a half dozen macro lenses, including the 100/2 MP, I still have my Leica.

Bokeh on the Leica can be quite delicious...
Jim



consider at Macro distance, Most macro lens has about same Gaussian blur without shape. But leica's smooth DOF transition can be seen/compared to MP100, that is the advantage I am talking. And general speaking, it has nice smooth feel to the sample I see. MP100 could have it, just more often and effortless with 100APO.

With subject at long distance, the background shape will start show, if photographer want more shape, stop down the lens.

Based on samples I see, from Flickr and Madmansu(Thomas)'s portrait with this lens, I don't see Bokeh problem with Leica 100APO at long distance as well. For Half body portrait, no crop, if you shoot Zeiss P85 or MP100 at f2.8, you will have Gaussian type Blur as well. (at about 1`1.5M distance)

Knee jerk answer or not, I don't see any problem call APO100 has good Bokeh.



Dec 27, 2012 at 01:25 AM
Grenache
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #12 · p.2 #12 · Leica 100mm f/2.8 APO-Macro MFD


Then I guess I misunderstood your prior comment and thought that you were saying only the MPs had good bokeh.

Having used both (and several other macro lenses) I see the Primary difference as being the steepness of the falloff from in focus to out fo focus and not one of business or texture to the bokeh. Both are smooth and fairly saturated - the MPs a little more so than the Leica.



Dec 27, 2012 at 04:43 AM
zhangyue
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #13 · p.2 #13 · Leica 100mm f/2.8 APO-Macro MFD


Grenache wrote:
Then I guess I misunderstood your prior comment and thought that you were saying only the MPs had good bokeh.

Having used both (and several other macro lenses) I see the Primary difference as being the steepness of the falloff from in focus to out fo focus and not one of business or texture to the bokeh. Both are smooth and fairly saturated - the MPs a little more so than the Leica.


No wonder! (Look like I am not very cleared in my post, I guess.) That is why I am so surprised to see your comments as I thought 100APO has very beautiful Bokeh and smooth focus transition.



Dec 27, 2012 at 05:56 AM
Lee Saxon
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #14 · p.2 #14 · Leica 100mm f/2.8 APO-Macro MFD


This turned into a really interesting thread, thanks guys!


Dec 28, 2012 at 12:37 PM
1      
2
       end




FM Forums | Alternative Gear & Lenses | Join Upload & Sell

1      
2
       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password    Reset password