Lotusm50
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.1 #10 · Voigtlander SL Nokton 58mm | |
Tariq Gibran wrote:
It could be the angle but even in the extreme highlights, it appears to me that there is still a hint of tone in the Nokton whereas the ZF goes straight to pure white. A more controlled test would be preferable but there does seem to be some evidence of lower contast with the Nokton.
Whether extreme contrast lenses ala Zeiss are preferable or not is definately a preference. It is somewhat ironic though that a lens with less contrast due to lens design, veiling glare, coatings or whatever might actually give more information to work with in PP due to what technically might not seem optimal. "Optimal" perhaps should be attached to what the desired outcome is. Uber contrast would not seem to always be "optimal" in certain lighting conditions and with digital sensors which have a straight line curve compared to film.
In the end, I think you are correct in that it comes down to preferences. "Quality" or "superiority" can likewise not always be attached to the lens which produces more contrast IF that is not seen as the optimal outcome for the lens design and use. ...Show more →
I am not necessarily debating that the Nokton doesn't have lower contrast, I think it probably is a bit lower. But what I was disagreeing with was the notion that, based on these couple of images that the ZF lens was harsher and produced more blown out highlights. I was merely pointing out that conclusion can not be effectively drawn from these images because of the different angle of the shot meaning that there could in fact be MORE highlight in one section of an image than the other image and that could appear more blown out just because there is more of it in one image. Both lenses were clearly blowing out the highlights (the scene is such that is virtually impossible not to) and in my view of the overall image, equal amounts. In addition, I made the point that the ZF image also apparently had more exposure, being lighter in overall tone and that this could also be a contributing factor to what you think you are seeing.
To be frank, in a controlled, well executed test, I don't think you will find that much difference between them, contrast wise. The ZF probably has a touch more, but I do not believe that based on these images or a more formal test that the difference is "extreme", large, or even all that significant. The SL Nokton, as I mentioned before, appears to be an excellent value, and a very fine lens. There is no doubt about that.
I think I don't like the term "extreme" or "über" contrast applied to a lens. There is nothing "extreme" or over the top about it. The scene might have extreme contrast, but a lens can only convey, with varying degrees of efficiency, the actual contrast of the scene. Lenses do not create or enhance contrast, but they can lower it. Quite franakly the sensor (or film) is link in the imaging chain that provides the limit on the tonal range that can be represented -- not the lens. I also do not think that merely accurately conveying the contrast of the scene means that it is supplying less information to the sensor, than a lens that does so less-accurately. I think you have to look at both the highlights and shadows for this, and all the information contained throughout the tonal range. It is quite possible that the contrast reducing lens is actually losing information be it's inability to properly convey contrast and distinguish between similarly toned objects.
Tariq Gibran wrote:
This is not always the case. Its clear that both Leica and Voigtlander like to "design in" certain subtleties which might distinguish a certain look or charecter which is not a reflection of accurately presenting a scene. The out of focus rendition of a lens is one such area where lens makers are paying more attention to designing a certain look which is not a relection of reality.
Sure, designers are paying more attention to the out of focus character of lenses -- absolutely. But what does an out of focus area supposed to look like? Is there, in fact, an accurate way of portraying it? But I think what we were really discussing in this was contrast, sharpness and resolution, of in-focus areas (not much resolution in out-of-focus areas), and this is where accurately conveying the scene IS the design criteria as designers continually try to make better and better lenses.
Leica and Voigtlander, are of course, the King and Prince of niche lens products. They should be commended for their excellent service to these markets. Voigtlander has explicitly brought out old designs to capture the niche market for old fashioned look of less-efficient, lower contrast lenses of the past. They have even produced single coated versions of lens in an attempt to produce this look. These attempts are, of course, trading off the technical capabilities and efficiency of the lens for a desired look. Certainly there is a place and use for such specialty products.
|
