uhoh7 wrote:
@mawz
not that I can tell lots about the glass--though I love the shot, but for a near subject like that the sony 24 looks to be world class from the samples I've seen, aside from the aberations it can throw out--or fringes or whatever you sometimes see with it. A bit quirky and sometimes brilliant--why they could not produce something great overall and forgiving, I really can't understand.
I'm of a somewhat differing opinion on the 24, I like the fact it's a lens with some problems. But I do prefer very good lenses with character to near perfect lenses without (which is why I'll probably never own a 50 Lux ASPH, most boring lens ever made IMHO). I'm also a big fan of Sonnars and how they render, right now my NEX kit is 3 Sonnars (ZA E 24, Nikkor-S.C 5cm f1.4, Sony 85/2.8) and two others (C-Skopar 35/2.5, Tamron 17/3.5).
Now I would prefer somewhat less CA in a $1100 lens but aside from that I quite like how it performs. And it is rather unique, I don't believe there are any other Sonnar wides.
mawz wrote:
But I do prefer very good lenses with character to near perfect lenses without (which is why I'll probably never own a 50 Lux ASPH, most boring lens ever made IMHO).
Heh. We may be kindred spirits on this - the 50 Cron has loads of character next to the Lux, but we'd be pilloried for making such a statement in another parts of this forum. It's too bad I can't keep the character and get another stop.
The 50 Cron is also wonderful on the NEX, though f/2 doesn't seem quite so fast on this sensor.
Jonas, I think the halos is a result of non-perfect selective lighting work with the sky. Or you could just say a bit sloppy :-)
One impressive thing with the Contax G's is that nothing happens when you move the clarity-lever, the "native" LCE is quite amazing. I cant say that about many lenses in my collection. Bravo Zeiss.
corposant wrote:
Heh. We may be kindred spirits on this - the 50 Cron has loads of character next to the Lux, but we'd be pilloried for making such a statement in another parts of this forum. It's too bad I can't keep the character and get another stop.
lux pre asph has loads of very beautiful looking character, i'm always tempted to get a version I.
corposant wrote:
Heh. We may be kindred spirits on this - the 50 Cron has loads of character next to the Lux, but we'd be pilloried for making such a statement in another parts of this forum. It's too bad I can't keep the character and get another stop.
The 50 Cron is also wonderful on the NEX, though f/2 doesn't seem quite so fast on this sensor.
I'm not the biggest Leica fan in terms of rendering, but I agree on the 50 Cron. They're gems. I've actually come to the conclusion that there's 4 M lenses I really do want to own at some point. The 28 Cron ASPH and latest 50 Cron, the 35 Lux ASPH and the 90 AA.
Oddly, that would make a really nice NEX kit paired with a UWA of some sort (ZA E 14/2.8 Distagon ideally).
sebboh wrote:
lux pre asph has loads of very beautiful looking character, i'm always tempted to get a version I.
That it does, both in 50mm and 35mm forms, if anything it's the exact opposite of the ASPH in terms of performance vs character. But I'd still rather have the modern 50 Cron over the older 50 Lux.
mawz, there is no 50 Cron ASPH Are you sure you don't mean the Lux? The 50 Lux ASPH is awe-inspiring in its rendering. Too bad, I have sold all these four lenses in recent months.
carstenw wrote:
mawz, there is no 50 Cron ASPH Are you sure you don't mean the Lux? The 50 Lux ASPH is awe-inspiring in its rendering. Too bad, I have sold all these four lenses in recent months.
I thought the latest 50 cron was ASPH. Guess I was wrong. Read 'Latest 50 Cron' instead. The 50 Lux ASPH is just about the most boring lens I've run across. Incredible optical performance in a singularly uninspiring package.
carstenw wrote:
You mean the metal is boring? That is the strangest accusation I have ever heard
No, the rendering is boring. The optics are technically perfect, or as close as we're likely to see in a lens. But utterly boring. It renders like a mediocre 50mm macro IMHO, just sharper.
I think you need to look at more shots, to be honest. I owned both a Dual-Range Summicron and the 50 Lux ASPH. The DR50 is a great lens, but the Lux is breathtaking, never seen anything like it. Have you seen Luka's (denoir) shots on the Leica thread, not to mention everyone else's? Have you owned one?
carstenw wrote:
I think you need to look at more shots, to be honest. I owned both a Dual-Range Summicron and the 50 Lux ASPH. The DR50 is a great lens, but the Lux is breathtaking, never seen anything like it. Have you seen Luka's (denoir) shots on the Leica thread, not to mention everyone else's? Have you owned one?
I've seen a ton of shots from both those lenses. The DR 'Cron shots do it for me, the Lux doesn't. Shoot the same composition with both and I will most likely choose the Cron.
Yes, I've seen Luka's stuff. I don't find his work with the Lux to be his most interesting. They do hang well due to his generally excellent composition but I'd personally think he'd do better with a 50 with a less clinical rendering. I certainly don't think the lens adds to the strengths of his work.
I haven't owned the 50 Lux ASPH. And I won't barring a massive change in opinion. I'm not spending that sort of money on a lens I find so uninspiring.
What it does well I can do with a 55 Micro-Nikkor or any other good 50-60mm macro. But otherwise it's got mediocre bokeh, generic Leica colour (good, as most Leica lenses are, but nothing special in the Leica lineup) and a complete lack of anything resembling a lens signature.
mawz wrote:
(...) The 50 Lux ASPH is just about the most boring lens I've run across. Incredible optical performance in a singularly uninspiring package.
Is "run across" meaning you have used it?
My opinion the 50Lux ASPH is anything but "boring". I would say it is the best 50mm lens I ever tried (and I have tried a lot, really), the one most to my taste, by ease, and the day a FF LIVE camera surfaces i'll be happy to buy one again. I liked the crispness, the high contrast, the high resolution and the bokeh which is not Zeissish harsh but still with some character and not too soft.
EDIT: OK, I see your reply above. We posted at the same time. Different preferences obviously. "Nothing like a lens signature" sounds just strange though, it does after all perform better than anything at 50mm and f/1.4.
Jonas B wrote:
Is "run across" meaning you have used it?
My opinion the 50Lux ASPH is anything but "boring". I would say it is the best 50mm lens I ever tried (and I have tried a lot, really), the one most to my taste, by ease, and the day a FF LIVE camera surfaces i'll be happy to buy one again. I liked the crispness, the high contrast, the high resolution and the bokeh which is not Zeissish harsh but still with some character and not too soft.
I haven't used one (the only Leica ASPH lens I've shot personally is the 35 Lux V1), but I have seen an awful lot of work with it, both here and elsewhere. The rendering just doesn't do anything for me. Note my current favourite 50's are the C/Y 50/1.4 Planar and the Nikkor-S.C 5cm f1.4, although I've got a soft spot for the Zeiss C Sonnar and may upgrade to it from the Nikkor for the better wide aperture performance. I prefer character to absolute optical performance and IMHO the 50 Lux ASPH is exactly the opposite of my preferences being a lens of absolute optical performance over character.
Note I'm not saying that you can't produce stunning work with it. Luka(denoir)'s example clearly puts the lie to that.
Jonas B wrote:
"Nothing like a lens signature" sounds just strange though, it does after all perform better than anything at 50mm and f/1.4.
Aside from DoF, the shots from the Lux ASPH wide open look like they could have been shot at any other aperture. The lens doesn't add or subtract anything from the image. That's what I mean by 'No lens signature'. Most lenses, especially at wide apertures, have aberrations and/or differences in cross-frame sharpness & contrast which colour the image.
For a musical reference, the 50 Lux ASPH is like a very high-end solid-state Jazz Guitar amp. It'll amplify the signal but there's nothing of the amp in the final sound, it's totally transparent, all you hear is the guitar and the player's playing. Technically superb output, but nothing of the amp in it.
The 50's I prefer are like classic Fender tube amps, the final sound is as much a product of the distortion & colouration in the tubes as it is of the natural sound of the guitar and the players playing.
mawz wrote:
Aside from DoF, the shots from the Lux ASPH wide open look like they could have been shot at any other aperture. The lens doesn't add or subtract anything from the image. That's what I mean by 'No lens signature'. Most lenses, especially at wide apertures, have aberrations and/or differences in cross-frame sharpness & contrast which colour the image.
For a musical reference, (...)
I see what you mean, and I also understand the guitar amp analogy. To me the 50LuxASPH performance is a signature by itself. With no other 50/1.4 or 50/1.2 I have experienced the freedom offered by a lens accepting all my ideas without returning a lesser result. Admittedly, I'm not a Sonnar guy, and I'm also about to sell my 35Lux ASPH due to its "flaws".
corposant wrote:
Heh. We may be kindred spirits on this - the 50 Cron has loads of character next to the Lux, but we'd be pilloried for making such a statement in another parts of this forum.
I think you were being ....um.....optimistic.... thinking that you would not catch flack for making this statement anywhere on this forum.
Are you sure you don't mean the Lux? The 50 Lux ASPH is awe-inspiring in its rendering. Too bad, I have sold all these four lenses in recent months.