fredmiranda.com
Login

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

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

1       2       3              37              39              46       47       end
  

Archive 2009 · what is '3d' ?

  
 
Cableaddict
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.38 #1 · what is '3d' ?


Lotusm50 wrote:
Remember my comments. There maybe small differences in the point of focus and there are differences in field curvature between the lenses. Objects to towards the edges of the frame may show differences in focus becuase of this. Accordingly, I would not draw conclusions from which one might appear slightly sharper on certain object .



How do you explain the fact that #2 has more linear distortion? - Or do you not see that, either?



Mar 25, 2010 at 05:30 PM
trenchmonkey
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.38 #2 · what is '3d' ?


Many of my shots with the 200 f2 VR exhibit a "3D" pop if you will. Could just be my misspent 60's flashin' back.

http://i244.photobucket.com/albums/gg31/rvrsbnd/DSC_1507.jpg



Mar 25, 2010 at 05:36 PM
RustyBug
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.38 #3 · what is '3d' ?


trenchmonkey ... Wow, that's not even funny (i.e. serious 3D) ... I thought I had a 3D shot or two, but I'll go crawl under my 3D rock now ...

Edited on Mar 25, 2010 at 10:57 PM · View previous versions



Mar 25, 2010 at 06:08 PM
Cableaddict
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.38 #4 · what is '3d' ?


trenchmonkey wrote:
Could just be my misspent 60's flashin' back.


Hmmm. That could explain some of what I've been seeing as well. You know us musicians!


Love seeing that shot of the horse again. I reminds me of the one in Blazing Saddles, just after Alex Karas punches it in the head.



Mar 25, 2010 at 06:21 PM
Lotusm50
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.38 #5 · what is '3d' ?


Cableaddict wrote:
How do you explain the fact that #2 has more linear distortion? - Or do you not see that, either?



What do you mean by "either"? Is there something else that I am supposedly not seeing?

If you see more linear distortion in #2, I have no explanation for it. I would just say that the no one said that the 50/2 MP is without distortion, but it does have less than the 50/1.4. How much linear distortion do you see and how have you assessed this? When I switched to the 50/2 MP there could have been a little movement on the tripod head along the panning axis (the pan was a little loose) and that could produce some small difference in the way some of the straight lines are represented. But I am fishing for a reason here.

Regardless, I'm not sure why you continue to attack this I am absolutely certain, beyond any doubt, that my #2 image above was indeed the 50/2 Makro-Planar. There is no mistake, no mix-up, irrespective of any linear distortion you may or may not see. You need to take my word on this. Further refutation of my word on this is not only pointless but but verges on being insulting.




Mar 25, 2010 at 07:21 PM
Cableaddict
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.38 #6 · what is '3d' ?


Lotusm50 wrote:

If you see more linear distortion in #2, I have no explanation for it... When I switched to the 50/2 MP there could have been a little movement on the tripod head along the panning axis (the pan was a little loose) and that could produce some small difference in the way some of the straight lines are represented. But I am fishing for a reason here.



I suppose that's possible. -Another example of how hard it is to do these tests with absolute accuracy.

Yes, I will take your word for it, but not easily.



Mar 25, 2010 at 08:57 PM
Lotusm50
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.38 #7 · what is '3d' ?


For those of you who would like further evidence of the exceptional 3-dimensionality or plasticity that the the ZF/ZE 50/2 MP can produce -- even at distances approaching infinity, please look at the images of Norway that Bobu captured with the lens in this thread: https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/881865


Mar 25, 2010 at 10:51 PM
philber
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.38 #8 · what is '3d' ?


Lotus, I don't think that there is any doubt of the 50 MP's potential for plasticity. Any difference with the f:1.4 in this respect is very slight IMHO (on a scale that also incorporates non-Zeiss lenses).


Mar 25, 2010 at 11:55 PM
staticInc
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.38 #9 · what is '3d' ?


Hey folks, would you confirm 3D-ness for this one?
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4039/4464544054_ae545ccd94_o.jpg

Edited on Mar 26, 2010 at 04:13 AM · View previous versions



Mar 26, 2010 at 03:24 AM
Cableaddict
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.38 #10 · what is '3d' ?


philber wrote:
Lotus, I don't think that there is any doubt of the 50 MP's potential for plasticity. Any difference with the f:1.4 in this respect is very slight IMHO (on a scale that also incorporates non-Zeiss lenses).


You really don't see it?

I just give up.



Mar 26, 2010 at 03:31 AM
Cableaddict
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.38 #11 · what is '3d' ?


staticInc wrote:
Hey folks, would you confirm 3D-ness for this one?
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2798/4464497656_f2063790e0_o.jpg
no sharpening, ISO 500, cloudyWB on a bad weather day


Static, that's not a good pic for making a judgement. There's too little DOF, and the flower is a little blown-out so contrast is gone.

With that caveat, (and realizing now that most people just don't see it so why even worry) I'd say your pic is pretty flat. Sorry.

But you know, at this point you probably shouldn't be worried about my opinion on this issue.

Ask Lotus.



Mar 26, 2010 at 03:33 AM
Lotusm50
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.38 #12 · what is '3d' ?


philber wrote:
Lotus, I don't think that there is any doubt of the 50 MP's potential for plasticity. Any difference with the f:1.4 in this respect is very slight IMHO.



I agree, the differences are small. Nearly all Zeiss lenses (at least the ones that I've come across) excel in this area. I think the 50/2 MP might have a leg up in this area over the 50/1.4, but it's a very, very short leg and hardly worth worrying about.



Cableaddict wrote:
You really don't see it?



See what? I'm really not sure what you're driving at here.




Mar 26, 2010 at 11:07 AM
omeega
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.38 #13 · what is '3d' ?


3D? Or just shallow DOF? I still don't really understand what qualifies, haha.
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4026/4455771661_19bb2ae528_o.jpg



Mar 26, 2010 at 11:29 AM
philber
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.38 #14 · what is '3d' ?


Cableaddict wrote:
You really don't see it?

I just give up.



I do see a difference, but it is small compared to the difference with, say, Canon zooms, Leica primes etc..



Mar 26, 2010 at 11:34 AM
RustyBug
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.38 #15 · what is '3d' ?


philber wrote:
I do see a difference, but it is small compared to the difference with, say, Canon zooms, Leica primes etc..


+1 at small differences ... which is corroborated by the 'small difference' in the MTF's. Part of the issue isn't always the issue of one being BETTER than another, but WHERE do they differ relative to frame composition & subject distance. This could be in part why one person is finding the 1.4 preferable to the 2.0, while the reverse is true for others. If you found the SWEET spot for the 1.4 vs. the 1.7 vs. the 2.0 ... I'd expect they all show a different subject distance/aperture/frame composition zone (A,B,C) for which they optimally render the effect.

IIRC .... Thrice did a nice test showing how the 3D effect was different at varying subject distance for a given lens / aperture (50/1.7 iirc) ... as such, I wouldn't put TOO MUCH stock in 'very minor' differences.



Mar 26, 2010 at 11:57 AM
Luvwine
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.38 #16 · what is '3d' ?


Well, that sure is 3D, Paul. Thanks for sharing.


Mar 28, 2010 at 11:37 PM
Cableaddict
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.38 #17 · what is '3d' ?


RustyBug wrote:
IIRC .... Thrice did a nice test showing how the 3D effect was different at varying subject distance for a given lens / aperture (50/1.7 iirc) ... as such, I wouldn't put TOO MUCH stock in 'very minor' differences.


That's a good point.



Mar 28, 2010 at 11:48 PM
rsolti13
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.38 #18 · what is '3d' ?


I just got my Zeiss 100 makro....feels 3D to me

http://i732.photobucket.com/albums/ww329/rsolti/DSC_9837.jpg

http://i732.photobucket.com/albums/ww329/rsolti/DSC_9853.jpg



Mar 30, 2010 at 10:11 PM
tsdevine
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.38 #19 · what is '3d' ?



Well, this may be considered flat...but my oldest son seems closer to me, the hats seem to project forward (wish they weren't wearing them) and my youngest son's hand seems to be coming out of my monitor. It may just be my imagination though.

http://www.devine.us/img/v9/p266680928-5.jpg

Shot with a 5D/CV 125

-Tim



Mar 31, 2010 at 12:21 PM
Bobu
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.38 #20 · what is '3d' ?


Cableaddict wrote:
OK, do you guys REALLY not see a difference in the two Buddah shots?

Really?

That's frightening to me. Here's a tip: Look only at the blue roll of tape. Or, look at the entire pic as a whole, and see which has more depth & "pop." If you don't see a difference, you need to find a new hobby!

Landscape test coming soon.


Sorry, I don't see any differences regarding 3D in these two pictures.

Boris



Mar 31, 2010 at 02:58 PM
1       2       3              37              39              46       47       end




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

1       2       3              37              39              46       47       end
    
 

Welcome back
Log in to your account