Leica 50/1.4 Lux vs Voigtlander 50/1.2 Nokton vs 50/2 APO

hmzimelka
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.6 #1 · p.6 #1 · Leica 50/1.4 Lux vs Voigtlander 50/1.2 Nokton vs 50/2 APO

Steve Spencer wrote:
No, think of it this way. The center and edges are optimally focussed at 2,000 M (i.e., the infinity stop), but the corners are optimally focussed just at little closer at 1,000 M (i.e., a tad before the infinity stop). This is mild inward field curvature.

I'm sure those numbers are exactly correct, but they should suffice to illustrate how the pattern Fred has shown is inward field curvature.

But the images show that the corners are optimally focused when focus ring is positioned slightly before infinity. That means the focus plane for the corners is behind that of the centre. Isn't that outward field curvature? Inward curvature would mean the corners focus closer to the camera and would require a back-focus correction.

Sep 10, 2022 at 11:44 PM

Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.6 #2 · p.6 #2 · Leica 50/1.4 Lux vs Voigtlander 50/1.2 Nokton vs 50/2 APO

hmzimelka wrote:
But the images show that the corners are optimally focused when focus ring is positioned slightly before infinity. That means the focus plane for the corners is behind that of the centre. Isn't that outward field curvature? Inward curvature would mean the corners focus closer to the camera and would require a back-focus correction.

No as I explained above the images show that the corners are in optimal focus when the plain of focus is closer to the camera (i.e., just a tad short of infinity), than the center and mid-zone that are in optimal focus when the plain of focus is set farther away from the camera (i.e., infinity focus). This is inward field curvature.

Sep 11, 2022 at 08:20 AM

Fred Miranda
Offline
Admin
Upload & Sell: On

p.6 #3 · p.6 #3 · Leica 50/1.4 Lux vs Voigtlander 50/1.2 Nokton vs 50/2 APO

Hi, if I wrote inwards here, it should actually be outwards as mentioned by Martin.

Here you can see the outwards shape from the Leica 50/1.4 Lux. (first image on the post)
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1741370/3#15853850

The reason it is outwards is that in order for the very edges to be in focus, it requires the camera to focus closer.

The image from the post above shows the FC shape at around 4m. At infinity distance, the shape flatten out futher and only the very edges of the frame are curved.

Sep 11, 2022 at 10:08 AM

hmzimelka
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.6 #4 · p.6 #4 · Leica 50/1.4 Lux vs Voigtlander 50/1.2 Nokton vs 50/2 APO

Sep 11, 2022 at 10:09 AM

Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.6 #5 · p.6 #5 · Leica 50/1.4 Lux vs Voigtlander 50/1.2 Nokton vs 50/2 APO

Fred Miranda wrote:
Hi, if I wrote inwards here, it should actually be outwards as mentioned by Martin.

Here you can see the outwards shape from the Leica 50/1.4 Lux. (first image on the post)
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1741370/3#15853850

The reason it is outwards is that in order for the very edges to be in focus, it requires the camera to focus closer.

The image from the post above shows the FC shape at around 4m. At infinity distance, the shape flatten out futher and only the very edges of the frame are curved.

I think it is just Martin and you in this post are using inward and outward in a different way than I am. I call it inward if the edges focus at a closer distance than the center. I guess you are calling this outward. I really don't care about such terminology. The point is that with this lens we know that the edges and corners focus at a closer distance than the center. It has always made sense to me to call that inward field curvature because the edges are bending inward toward the camera, but if people want to call that outward curvature that is fine with me.

Sep 11, 2022 at 11:13 AM

Fred Miranda
Offline
Admin
Upload & Sell: On

p.6 #6 · p.6 #6 · Leica 50/1.4 Lux vs Voigtlander 50/1.2 Nokton vs 50/2 APO

Steve Spencer wrote:
I think it is just Martin and you in this post are using inward and outward in a different way that I am. I call it inward if the edges focus at a closer distance than the center. I guess you are calling this outward. I really don't care about such terminology. The point is that with this lens we know that the edges and corners focus at closer distance than the center. It has always made sense to me to call that inward field curvature because the edges are bending inward toward the camera, but if people want...Show more →

Think about it this way:

Because of the outwards curvature, the corners are behind true infinity at center. In order to bring the corners in focus, the lens has to be focused closer.

In the illustration below, the red line (out of focus corners) has to match the black line (true infinity) in order to be in focus.

Sep 11, 2022 at 11:25 AM

Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.6 #7 · p.6 #7 · Leica 50/1.4 Lux vs Voigtlander 50/1.2 Nokton vs 50/2 APO

Sep 11, 2022 at 12:36 PM

highdesertmesa
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.6 #8 · p.6 #8 · Leica 50/1.4 Lux vs Voigtlander 50/1.2 Nokton vs 50/2 APO

Fred Miranda wrote:
Think about it this way:

Because of the outwards curvature, the corners are behind true infinity at center. In order to bring the corners in focus, the lens has to be focused closer.

In the illustration below, the red line (out of focus corners) has to match the black line (true infinity) in order to be in focus.

This finally makes sense to me now.

If a lens did have *inward* field curvature wide open at infinity, the corners could never be brought into focus wide open without focusing past infinity — would that be right?

Sep 11, 2022 at 01:58 PM

gordec
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.6 #9 · p.6 #9 · Leica 50/1.4 Lux vs Voigtlander 50/1.2 Nokton vs 50/2 APO

The VM 50 APO doesn't look that much bigger compared to the 50 Lux, but it seems to handle bigger than the 50 Lux. I'm pretty happy with Zeiss Planar 50 right now. It seems to do everything I want out of a 50. For the M mount, every little size increase makes a big difference in quality of of life.

Sep 13, 2022 at 11:27 AM

Fred Miranda
Offline
Admin
Upload & Sell: On

p.6 #10 · p.6 #10 · Leica 50/1.4 Lux vs Voigtlander 50/1.2 Nokton vs 50/2 APO

gordec wrote:
The VM 50 APO doesn't look that much bigger compared to the 50 Lux, but it seems to handle bigger than the 50 Lux. I'm pretty happy with Zeiss Planar 50 right now. It seems to do everything I want out of a 50. For the M mount, every little size increase makes a big difference in quality of of life.

They have exactly the same length although the Lux is a stop faster. Both have great axial CA correction but the Lux is capable of smoother rendering even when both are set to f/2.

I find the Zeiss 50/2 Planar a wonderful lens, especially stop down a bit. It has a double gauss design similar to Loxia 50/2 E-mount and Leica 50/2 Summicron with 6 elements and no aspherical.

Sep 26, 2023 at 03:22 PM

1 2 3 … 5 6 end
FM Forums \| Leica & Alternative Gear \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 … 5 6 end

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.