Upload & Sell: Off
Did u try the 21 SE leica? Someone I know having used both zeiss 21 ZF and the 21 SE says the leica has the upper hand.
I've never tried the SEM but I love the samples I see from it. The thing is I like to use my 21 as an everyday lens including portraiture and I don't think I can get the composition I wan't with the SEM. The MFD for Zeiss 21mm ZF is 22cm and I usually take portraits wide open around 40-50cm. The MFD for 21 SEM is 70cm and I think I will feel very constricted using it.
This is an example of a shot taken with the 21 ZF. I was around 40cm away for this shot, if I took this...Show more →
I think I've seen that image previously either on the ZE/ZF thread, or your Flickr, and like it very much. While difficult to make a direct comparison, here's one (nothing fancy) done with the 21 Lux at about 70cm and I think it was wide open. I'm not sure how petite your friend is, but going from overall body and head size, there doesn't seem to be a huge difference, though she does look a bit closer.
But, I'm not disagreeing with your general feeling that 70cm is restrictive for a 21mm lens. I definitely felt this way when I got my first Leica 21 and still run into situations where I would like to move in a bit closer. For portraits though, other than for creative effect, I have found 70cm is bearable. It's not too close as to really start stretching features if the subject is kept in the center, which you've done in your image. But this is one advantage of the ZM21 and CV21/1.8, which both focus to 50cm, and would be perfectly usable on the M240 in live view.
Thanks also for posting a few DNGs. Looking forward to playing with those.
I finally looked through some of my old M9 files, and I came to the conclusion that at ISO 800 both cameras have the same noise, maybe the slightest win goes to the M240... But at 1600+ you can definitely see that the M240 has a really clear advantage. However, I don't do much noise processing in LR, if anyone wants to bestow upon me, a secret formula, I'd be willing to try, as I have two files take at the same place, so it'll be easy for me to test noise at iso 800 with NR software implemented.
Oh and...Show more →
The origin for that specific sentiment about difference in grain structure between images from CCD and CMOS sensors appears to originate with Thorsten Overgaard. I'm skeptical the sensor type is the reason, but there could be other factors in the imaging chain? My most current CMOS camera is the Canon 1DX and the grain structure does not feel any less random to me than what I see from the M9. Its high ISO files are tighter and more finely structured grain, while the M9 feels coarser. The first M240 higher ISO files I played with reminded me of the 1DX's grain. It could be that the underlying nature of the M240 to reveal banding when files are pushed in post might be the basis for the claim? But then I also see streaked banding in some of my M9 files when pushed...
Nice image Adam, I like the feel of the light and the mood of the backdrop and wardrobe.
Phil, very nice! I don't mind your B&W rut.
Peter, I commend you on your ability to get up so early! Great colors and scenes, once again.
Alberto, I like these, particularly the one of your children.
Gary, thanks for the comments!
Joakim: perhaps responding too late to offer anything meaningful, but I think if it was an open-ended trip without a certainty of what will be photographed, I would bring a bit more to be on the safe side. My base set would be the 18, 28 Cron, 50 Lux ASPH and 90. To that I might add the 35 Lux ASPH. If it's a lot of landscapes, then the 24/3.8 would also be difficult to leave behind and could potentially replace the 28 Cron.
Sorry, I don't really have a continuation of the "want broom" series. But here is one after he was told to stop banging on the doors of the aluminum shed that can be seed in the background of the broom series:
Also with the 28 Cron, though cropped a bit due to guesstimated framing that was a bit off.