sebboh wrote:
agreed. i was expecting more given the price and modest spec of the lens. the gondola shot is slightly misfocused but many others aren't and you can see the corners are show a significant drop off. seems only slightly better than what i was looking at from the fuji zoom.
I wouldn't be too quick to judge it from Flickr JPEG files. I bet the photog just did out of camera JPEGs for these. In my experience, out of camera JPEGs from Leica cameras are horrible. The Leica JPEG engine is horrible in all the Leicas I've tried. The raw file is where the magic is at. And a properly processed raw to JPEG should show better I bet.
najibs wrote:
I wouldn't be too quick to judge it from Flickr JPEG files. I bet the photog just did out of camera JPEGs for these. In my experience, out of camera JPEGs from Leica cameras are horrible. The Leica JPEG engine is horrible in all the Leicas I've tried. The raw file is where the magic is at. And a properly processed raw to JPEG should show better I bet.
very likely, but that won't help the drop in sharpness from the center to the corner.
Jon Tainton wrote:
You and a vocal number of ALT FM'rs do seem to be struggling with the concept of the X Vario.
OTOH I was hoping to handle an X Vario today, but a phone call this morning to my nearest Leica premier dealer ascertained they've sold their allocation, including the demo model ...
It boggles the mind how people can be so uninformed and throw away their money.
I disagree with horrible jpg from 'all' Leica camera. My M220 produce excellent jpg images; it has great jpg engines. Saturation, contrast and sharpness is perfect that mostly I dont need any retouching before I print the photos out of the camera.
sebboh wrote:
agreed. i was expecting more given the price and modest spec of the lens. the gondola shot is slightly misfocused but many others aren't and you can see the corners are show a significant drop off. seems only slightly better than what i was looking at from the fuji zoom.
Might not be a good idea to pixel peep these we have no idea how they have been processed.
Also not a good idea to judge the small sized versions, as they don't look great.
Looked at the full version of these on my retina screen, which simulates what a print might look look like. The rendering is pretty good. Sharpness is consistent across the frame.
Quite nice tonality, little bit of 3d. Colours look ok.
There is no way to compare it properly, but here it is, the top image is the new Leica,
the bottom image is my 6 years old compact camera with the smallest sensor...
I much prefer the color, contrast and the rendering of my little tiny compact camera.
It's 4 times smaller, 5 times lighter and 10 times cheaper
SKumar25 wrote:
Might not be a good idea to pixel peep these we have no idea how they have been processed.
Also not a good idea to judge the small sized versions, as they don't look great.
Looked at the full version of these on my retina screen, which simulates what a print might look look like. The rendering is pretty good. Sharpness is consistent across the frame.
Quite nice tonality, little bit of 3d. Colours look ok.
i don't see any reason not to compare sharpness in the center to sharpness on the edges in the same image. the corner of the image is obviously processed the same as the center of the image. if it's significantly worse (it is) it's the lenses fault not the processing.
looking at full versions of images from my 10 year old p&s on a retina screen the sharpness and rendering looks pretty good too.
sebboh wrote:
i don't see any reason not to compare sharpness in the center to sharpness on the edges in the same image. the corner of the image is obviously processed the same as the center of the image. if it's significantly worse (it is) it's the lenses fault not the processing.
looking at full versions of images from my 10 year old p&s on a retina screen the sharpness and rendering looks pretty good too.
Not seeing poor corners
Check out corners of these images. About same sharpness across the frame.
yeah, looked at those earlier. they have obviously weaker corners (sharpness and CA) except for the first which is unsharp everywhere so i'd say slight misfocus.
maybe it's just been too long since i shot with a zoom and i have high standards. if you're looking at a retina screen that might effect what you see depending on your display settings.
Check out corners of these images. About same sharpness across the frame.
I'm seeing it --- not extremely poor, but definitely worse than mid-frame. Loss of contrast, smeared out fine detail, a touch of red/cyan chromatic aberration fringing. It's a bit harder to see in the JPEGs because they appear to have been clobbered with over-enthusiastic too-large-radius sharpening, which hurts the central frame resolution enough to bring it more in line with the corners; when I looked at some of the DNG RAW files provided (processed through RPP with more nuanced sharpening settings), the corner falloff is more clear (compared to improved center resolution/detail available from the RAW files).
I don't think the first is mis-focused, I think that's just how (un) sharp it is at 18mm. Which, for a "kit zoom" is pretty good.
For a fixed lens on a $3k camera. . . I don't know, I can't really say. The whole thing doesn't make financial sense to me so I can't really apply any logic to it beyond that.
Hmmm interesting, the samples posted certainly look very good on my retina screen.
I hope someone does a 1:1 with another high end zoom. To me this camera seems like a great travel camera with a mini-tripod as long as you have a second camera that's F2 or faster and 35mm.
Hmmm interesting, the samples posted certainly look very good on my retina screen.
I hope someone does a 1:1 with another high end zoom. To me this camera seems like a great travel camera with a mini-tripod as long as you have a second camera that's F2 or faster and 35mm.
full sized images look slightly better than the fuji zoom, but still pretty crappy compared a nex or fuji with a small prime.
This set of images looks pretty good to me. If the zoom's pseed had been better, I could have seen myself shooting this. Instead of which I will now try out a RX1-R
