A little verbal laziness and still half true, re the Ksanas. People struggle with the one foot in each camp designs, true of all the MF Thys. They chart their own course, the middle path.
damonnomonon wrote:
Saw a review of the Thypoch Ksana 35mm the other day that said it had a ‘vintage vibe’. Sometimes I think these reviewers think a manual lens is automatically vintage.
Here are a few sample shots from the Ksana 35mm f/2 ASPH. The optical performance is sharp and contrasty with well-controlled CA, though there is some field curvature and outlining in the specular highlights at transition zone. Overall, it strikes a nice balance...not quite vintage rendering, but certainly not clinical or ultra-corrected.
The issue here is that potential buyers of the LLL 35 APO are asked to pay a premium for a superlative level of performance, so your taget audience here would be those who are more critical of optical performance across the frame, and in particular, how truly apochromatic the lens is. LLL's other lenses pitch vintage character as the value propostion so a review based on vibes is probably ok for those.
This particular lens, however, is promising peerless optical quality, comes from an unproven lens maker, is twice as expensive as the voigtlander APO, and is on par with used prices of the Leica summicron non APO. Regardless of your personal feelings about how relevant edge to edge sharpness is, it honestly is a miss to review the lens and not do technical review on the areas where the LLL APO is supposed to deliver the value proposition. It also does not help to use a camera that inherently diminishes the peerless optical quality that buyers of this lens are asked to pay a premium for. We dont all get to try lenses out for free . Its like being loaned sports car to review and only demonstrating how well it drives around the neighborhood.
Just my 2 cents and a bit of critique. ...Show more →
I gotta say, the other way to look at this is if you want a technical Fred-like review, be patient and wait for Fred’s review. There’s no rush here since the titanium model has stopped orders. Robbie, or anyone, can do the type of review they want, useful to specific viewers/readers or not.
I can never do a fully technical review. It is way beyond my capability and would not even start to pretend to know how to read the charts and translate the results even if I bought all the equipment needed.
I think it is perfectly acceptable to have non-technical reviews in addition to very technical leaning ones, because I don't want to read/watch the same thing rehashed in ten different voices. The beauty of photography reviews is that there are different styles and skill levels represented in them and that helps showcase the lens/gear in a variety different scenarios and viewpoints.
I think some may find the issue with this being an APO lens and thus "deserving" of technical reviews that point to it's strengths. While I understand this path of thinking, I personally find "vibes" based reviews just as valid as I (usually) do a lot of research and want to see it in as many different ways as possible before dropping a few thousand dollars on something.
I'm also someone who when first getting into photography bought a Voigtlander APO 50/2 for my A7CR on a whim while on vacation in Taiwan without knowing what APO even meant but liking the look of the test shots the store let me take outside. A vibes based purchase of a technical lens.
endergemini wrote:
I think it is perfectly acceptable to have non-technical reviews in addition to very technical leaning ones
I could not agree more. A very long time ago, when dinosaurs walked the earth and I was using films, I remember noticing the lenses getting different grades in technical tests were giving me the same results.
And I'm talking about very professional tests with an excellent methodology. I checked with one of the guys who had designed the tests and he told me "yes, we know that: unless you are using the lens on a strong tripod with a 25 ISO film, you will never see the difference between a 4 star and a 5 star".
Nowadays, it is even worst: if I shoot some of my lenses wide open on a flat subject with a lot of details and a 60 Mpix sensor, I see huge differences.
If I shot real pictures, I do not.
And once post-processed and printed, this is even worse.
So I care less about technical tests and especially sharpness and much more about rendering, bokeh, ergonomics...
Same for cameras: I found that a big viewfinder has more influence on my pictures that 3 times more pixels or a faster AF.
And that ergonomics are maybe even more important.
Robbie_S wrote:
I can never do a fully technical review. It is way beyond my capability and would not even start to pretend to know how to read the charts and translate the results even if I bought all the equipment needed.
I dont necessarily think you need charts. Not even Fred uses those and tbh they are not at all useful when we're thinking about real world photos. Not doing close crops of real world scenes highlighting why one should pay $2,000 for this lens is a missed opportunity though, since you were one of the first to review it. And look I dont think a more technically oriented review is always necessary. It would be similarity off if someone reviewed an 85mm prime and a reviewer was hyper focused on edge to edge performance never evaluated the rendering, bokeh, and the vibes type stuff.
But in that same mindset, if a $2k lens is promising peerless image quality then a reviewer should evaluate the areas in which we, both the consumer of that lens and the audience in your review, probably care most about. It's more again about understanding what it is youre reviewing, what the audience is, and catering to that. No different than those of us who get paid to shoot. We do it on the terms of what our clients want and often that takes us a bit out of our comfort zone. Again just a bit of critique that hopefully youre open to and much respect for you coming here for that.
Robbie_S wrote:
Thank you guys, I came in expecting to be thoroughly rinsed 😂😂
Here’s my rinsing: you’ve done far more interesting reviews even from a vibes perspective. Test charts are boring, but comparisons are great, even if only for casual opinions.
The most helpful thing said in your video was that the finish was too glossy, and I’m being serious. Hopefully, the production finish is more matte. A glossy black aluminum APO sounds gross. Now if they’d made a brass version with glossy black, that’s another story.
There's certainly reason to have both technical and subjective 'impressions' reviews. With this lens I think the big interest is that it's a very similar design to the Leica 35 APO-M and therefore many here are curious if it actually does reach, or exceed, that lens's technical performance level. So that's a reason for a technical type of a review. But the Leica also has quite nice rendering (if you like smooth and modern) and of course we want to know how the LLL compares in this regard, subjectively speaking, plus subjective aspects about ergonomics, finish, etc.
My 'nit' with being directed to videos is that the actual relevant core information to be gleaned from a 10, 15, 30 minute long video can be more efficiently achieved by viewing a handful of photos and reading a text summary. TBH, half the time I just read the transcripts of videos to get the info I am looking for rather than sitting through an entire production, unless I'm trying to fix an appliance or my car, etc.
Thanks for showing up, Robbie. My general feedback is more to put yourself in the shoes of prospective buyers.
How does the lens work in actual usage - how fast is it to focus accurately, how well does it fall into focus relative to the competition (CV more than Leica), is the focus ring damping quick moving or slow, what is the focus throw (approximately), is it linear, and what is the ring rotation from 0.7m to infinity and from 0.7 to MFD? These things we must know in a lens, and reviewers can tell us. I mean, if it is to be used, that is.
Another thing - not all potential buyers are B&W people, so well exposed shots of parks or nature are invaluable, but rare in reviews. We can then see the green separation and red channel handling. cheers!
And don't be put off by some unpleasantness in YT comments, like poor Dave Herring:
'Why is the Photography Community Like This?'
. Its like being loaned sports car to review and only demonstrating how well it drives around the neighborhood.
