Uofoducks15 wrote:
It does seem a bit silly to have a “limited edition” titanium version and then bring it back again but I’m glad others that missed out are able to order it.
It does seem a bit strange. Maybe based on Fred's comment they are just clearing out the remaining inventory of parts. It does show as sold out again already.
I've never been a fan of field curvature where the corners start to sharpen up/become more in focus than the center.
Fred, how would you describe this? Inwards or outwards?
Fred Miranda wrote:
That's a great question, and I think it's an optical design decision. What you call outwards, I'd call inwards. For instance, the Zeiss 28/2 Distagon has inward curvature because the field bends toward the camera (foreground) at the sides. I prefer this type of curvature since it helps with depth of field in landscapes. The outward type (bends towards infinity), like the LLL 35/1.4 and others you mentioned, is much more common, especially in 35mm and 50mm lenses.
The issue with the LLL 35/1.4 AA on Sony is that the lens already has strong field curvature by design, so on the Sony it becomes extreme....Show more →
dumplinknet wrote:
I've never been a fan of field curvature where the corners start to sharpen up/become more in focus than the center.
Fred, how would you describe this? Inwards or outwards?
Outwards. That's the more common type. At mid-distance, say a subject is in focus at the center, the field curvature extends outwards toward the edges, which sit at a longer distance. So the edges, which should technically be out of focus, end up looking sharper than they should.
This is actually the same effect a thicker sensor stack has on an image. If a Leica M lens already shows this behavior on the Leica M, using it on a Sony will make that effect even more extreme. (Like the LLL 35/1.4 AA)
Fred Miranda wrote:
That's a great question, and I think it's an optical design decision. What you call outwards, I'd call inwards. For instance, the Zeiss 28/2 Distagon has inward curvature because the field bends toward the camera (foreground) at the sides. I prefer this type of curvature since it helps with depth of field in landscapes. The outward type (bends towards infinity), like the LLL 35/1.4 and others you mentioned, is much more common, especially in 35mm and 50mm lenses.
The issue with the LLL 35/1.4 AA on Sony is that the lens already has strong field curvature by design, so on the Sony it becomes extreme....Show more →
Yes--definitely an optical design decision...but I do wonder why. On lenses that are optimized for technical IQ, like a CV 35/2 APO or whatever, I understand giving up bokeh rendering in the periphery for small size + technical IQ. With lenses like this LLL 35/1.4 or CV 35/1.5 or CV 35/1.2 (and many others) that lean more rendering, it seems like a better trade off would be for rendering. Perhaps if they made the field flat, or bend away from the camera in the corners, it would be even much worse IQ which CV or whoever won't allow for.
Hmmm...my CY 28/2 and ZF 28/2 had FC that meant if the the subject was central and 5 meters away, the corners would be less in focus as the lens is not flat field. You are saying that the Zeiss 28/2 that has corners that would be more in focus? I call this type of FC outward as the corners bend away from the camera.
Most of the RF lenses I have shot (especially fast ones) like the CV 50/1, Noct 50/1, CV 35/40/50 -/1.2 trio, LLL 35/1.4 etc have the opposite of the CY 28/2 with corners that come into focus. This I refer to as inward as the plane of field bends into the camera.
My "11873" has finally returned from service (front-focusing issue), and I've optimistically taken it as a single lens kit to a family get-together - I'm about to go and have my film developed later today; fingers crossed they won't all be out of focus
Like some others, I've expected the focusing action will become smoother with use. Unfortunately for me it's quite the opposite, since the focus helicoid has started binding to the point that focusing the lens moves the aperture ring. I've treated the lens like a precious gem (no knocks, dings nor seaside visits), so I'm not quite sure what's happened here - anyone else seeing similar issues?
Anyway, I'm on the fence RE: servicing. If the focusing issue is resolved, I'm considering having the lens seen by a local (EU) tech - obviously the lens is still in warranty, but the first service took about 4 months, and I'm not exactly looking forward to the wait.
Halkotron wrote:
My "11873" has finally returned from service (front-focusing issue), and I've optimistically taken it as a single lens kit to a family get-together - I'm about to go and have my film developed later today; fingers crossed they won't all be out of focus
Like some others, I've expected the focusing action will become smoother with use. Unfortunately for me it's quite the opposite, since the focus helicoid has started binding to the point that focusing the lens moves the aperture ring. I've treated the lens like a precious gem (no knocks, dings nor seaside visits), so I'm not quite sure what's happened here - anyone else seeing similar issues?
Anyway, I'm on the fence RE: servicing. If the focusing issue is resolved, I'm considering having the lens seen by a local (EU) tech - obviously the lens is still in warranty, but the first service took about 4 months, and I'm not exactly looking forward to the wait....Show more →
4 months? Mine was sent in on April too. Funny - i thought it was front focusing as well, but it behaved the same on both my M9 and M10D at the time. I checked on my Leica glass, and they also seem to be consistent with this. Oddly enough, my 50mm Summilux, i can hit focus at a very high rate, wide open. I did some tests on and for whatever reason on either bodies, what I see in the patch as in focus, translates to a very high probability of keepers. This lens was serviced by DAG. He did a really good job. I have to receive my 11873 back. It’s taking much too long.
nehemiahphoto wrote:
Yes--definitely an optical design decision...but I do wonder why. On lenses that are optimized for technical IQ, like a CV 35/2 APO or whatever, I understand giving up bokeh rendering in the periphery for small size + technical IQ. With lenses like this LLL 35/1.4 or CV 35/1.5 or CV 35/1.2 (and many others) that lean more rendering, it seems like a better trade off would be for rendering. Perhaps if they made the field flat, or bend away from the camera in the corners, it would be even much worse IQ which CV or whoever won't allow for.
Hmmm...my CY 28/2 and ZF 28/2 had FC that meant if the the subject was central and 5 meters away, the corners would be less in focus as the lens is not flat field. You are saying that the Zeiss 28/2 that has corners that would be more in focus? I call this type of FC outward as the corners bend away from the camera.
Most of the RF lenses I have shot (especially fast ones) like the CV 50/1, Noct 50/1, CV 35/40/50 -/1.2 trio, LLL 35/1.4 etc have the opposite of the CY 28/2 with corners that come into focus. This I refer to as inward as the plane of field bends into the camera.
Or am I miscommunicating/missing something...Show more →
Yep, only the lens designer can say why one compromise was made over another. All in all, most shooters seem to like the LLL 35/1.4 AA's rendering. Perhaps the outward field curvature accentuates the look, or people just don't mind if their corners are sharp where they should be soft in the OOF rendering.
Regarding the CY 28/2 and ZF 28/2 field curvature: if you focus on a subject at 5m, the corners at that same distance will be soft due to its inward FC. That's not what I meant though. I meant the foreground corners (at closer distance) will be sharper than they should be. Another lens I'm reviewing right now that behaves the same way, even more aggressively, is the Simera 21mm f/1.4 ASPH.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Yep, only the lens designer can say why one compromise was made over another. All in all, most shooters seem to like the LLL 35/1.4 AA's rendering. Perhaps the outward field curvature accentuates the look, or people just don't mind if their corners are sharp where they should be soft in the OOF rendering.
Regarding the CY 28/2 and ZF 28/2 field curvature: if you focus on a subject at 5m, the corners at that same distance will be soft due to its inward FC. That's not what I meant though. I meant the foreground corners (at closer distance) will be sharper than they should be. Another lens I'm reviewing right now that behaves the same way, even more aggressively, is the Simera 21mm f/1.4 ASPH.
This makes me think of the The Fuji 35mm f1.4R, which has this design and it’s pretty much sought after by most on that system precisely because of the field curvature making subjects seem to pop.
damonnomonon wrote:
This makes me think of the The Fuji 35mm f1.4R, which has this design and it’s pretty much sought after by most on that system precisely because of the field curvature making subjects seem to pop.
I wish I hadn't read this lol. This was my favorite lens on the fuji system when I shot it and the last one to go when I sold all my fuji gear when I went to Leica. Looks like I might post a few things soon in B&S
ByChrisJones wrote:
I wish I hadn't read this lol. This was my favorite lens on the fuji system when I shot it and the last one to go when I sold all my fuji gear when I went to Leica. Looks like I might post a few things soon in B&S
This is the only vid where I've seen it clearly explained with samples:
spendychucky wrote:
After a lot of emails back and forth with David, my third copy of the titanium 11873, numbered 104/300, is finally focusing correctly at MFD and at infinity wide open.
How does one go about testing this the one possess no technical skills and is at most a novice photographer?
You take take a photo of a ruler/ tape measure, focusing on a specific number.
Or you can spread out a deck of playing cards and focus on a specific card.
Check the result and see if it coincides with what you focused on with the RF focus patch.
Easiest to tell using maximum aperture and close to minimum focusing distance for the shallowest depth of field.
The high polished edition I ordered has shipped, so looks like I’ll get it before the end of the week — provided it’s already at the CA location that FedEx lists as the shipping origin.
It's always a treat seeing your work around here. Helped me a lot in deciding on certain lens-purchases!
— provided it’s already at the CA location that FedEx lists as the shipping origin.