This topic is in the 2009 archive. You can read it and like its posts here. It is read only.
Archive 2009Contax N Image Thread
p.17 #1Contax N Image Thread
Here's a quick snapshot with my new 24-85N
Love the colours
Love the colours
Jul 07, 2010 at 07:08 PM
p.17 #2Contax N Image Thread
and pretty lady as well! 
.. despite the higher aperture, bokeh on the lens isnt too shabby 
.. despite the higher aperture, bokeh on the lens isnt too shabby Jul 07, 2010 at 08:10 PM
p.17 #3Contax N Image Thread
thanks for the comments!
yeah the bokeh is pretty nice for this aperature type of lense,
Love these N lense!
yeah the bokeh is pretty nice for this aperature type of lense,
Love these N lense!
Jul 07, 2010 at 08:22 PM
p.17 #5Contax N Image Thread
Thanks. The horse didn't seem to care that I did not get his permission first. (Image taken on a recent hot summer day in Charlotte, NC)
Jul 12, 2010 at 04:55 AM
p.17 #6Contax N Image Thread
kop.cppua wrote:
shamelessly cross post from another thread.
also, my first outing with this lens.
Contax N 70-300mm
CP
GREAT shot!
I love the way OOF reflections on water look with telelenses. I have some shots like that too and it really gives a special effect.
I think it would look better without the white border because it creates such a big contrast that it becomes more difficult to see the fine tonalities in dark parts of the picture.
shamelessly cross post from another thread.
also, my first outing with this lens.
Contax N 70-300mm
CP
GREAT shot!
I love the way OOF reflections on water look with telelenses. I have some shots like that too and it really gives a special effect.
I think it would look better without the white border because it creates such a big contrast that it becomes more difficult to see the fine tonalities in dark parts of the picture.
Jul 12, 2010 at 05:49 AM
p.17 #8Contax N Image Thread
It's been ages since I did anything on FM but I have a few images I would like to contribute to this thread so could someone please tell me what the best resolution and size is for uploaded images?
Jul 12, 2010 at 09:02 AM
p.17 #9Contax N Image Thread
MarkJones wrote:
It's been ages since I did anything on FM but I have a few images I would like to contribute to this thread so could someone please tell me what the best resolution and size is for uploaded images?
I'd say no bigger than 1024x1024. I don't enjoy the smaller ones that are around 600px max. dimension, because you can't see any detail. 900x600 should be ok for everyone but you could go slightly bigger.
When you convert your image to JPEG for the web, look carefully that you do not use too much compression (to lower filesize) because you will lose a lot of detail, get compression artifact, posterization (smooth gradients become blotchy). If you're hitting a filesize limit, then sacrifize image size before throwing away detail and color information.
It's been ages since I did anything on FM but I have a few images I would like to contribute to this thread so could someone please tell me what the best resolution and size is for uploaded images?
I'd say no bigger than 1024x1024. I don't enjoy the smaller ones that are around 600px max. dimension, because you can't see any detail. 900x600 should be ok for everyone but you could go slightly bigger.
When you convert your image to JPEG for the web, look carefully that you do not use too much compression (to lower filesize) because you will lose a lot of detail, get compression artifact, posterization (smooth gradients become blotchy). If you're hitting a filesize limit, then sacrifize image size before throwing away detail and color information.
Jul 12, 2010 at 09:46 AM
p.17 #10Contax N Image Thread
AhamB wrote:
also, my first outing with this lens.
Contax N 70-300mm
CPI love the way OOF reflections on water look with telelenses. I have some shots like that too and it really gives a special effect.
I think it would look better without the white border because it creates such a big contrast that it becomes more difficult to see the fine tonalities in dark parts of the picture.
Thanks, Benjamin and teh_rebel. Glad that you like it.
CP
kop.cppua wrote
shamelessly cross post from another thread.also, my first outing with this lens.
Contax N 70-300mm
CP
I think it would look better without the white border because it creates such a big contrast that it becomes more difficult to see the fine tonalities in dark parts of the picture.
Thanks, Benjamin and teh_rebel. Glad that you like it.
CP
Jul 13, 2010 at 12:15 AM
p.17 #11Contax N Image Thread
Doc, Kop & Andi - nice shots - good to see something from the 70-300.
Jul 13, 2010 at 10:30 PM
p.17 #12Contax N Image Thread
Brilliant set, mMontag. I particularly love the second!
Jul 13, 2010 at 11:11 PM
p.17 #13Contax N Image Thread
mMontag wrote:
Doc, Kop & Andi - nice shots - good to see something from the 70-300.
Thanks, mMontag. True, it is one of those N lenses that lacks attention /love.
BTW, I enjoy looking at your pics. Looking forward to seeing more.
CP
Doc, Kop & Andi - nice shots - good to see something from the 70-300.
Thanks, mMontag. True, it is one of those N lenses that lacks attention /love.
BTW, I enjoy looking at your pics. Looking forward to seeing more.
CP
Jul 14, 2010 at 06:48 AM
p.17 #14Contax N Image Thread
Andi Dietrich wrote:
nice!
teh rebel, your images are always well made and I remember you had some doubts about the N zoom, so how do you like the 24-85? does it work out for you?
24-85, slight crop
http://www.andidietrich.com/fm/07/fangis.jpg
Thanks Andi .. the lens is great. definitely dont have no regrets getting rid of the 24-70 for this. Even though its a "fat" lens, its much lighter than the brick and AF is very good.
Great image by the way!!
nice!
teh rebel, your images are always well made and I remember you had some doubts about the N zoom, so how do you like the 24-85? does it work out for you?
24-85, slight crop
http://www.andidietrich.com/fm/07/fangis.jpg
Thanks Andi
.. the lens is great. definitely dont have no regrets getting rid of the 24-70 for this. Even though its a "fat" lens, its much lighter than the brick and AF is very good.Great image by the way!!
Jul 15, 2010 at 11:22 AM
p.17 #15Contax N Image Thread
No kidding - another wonderful A.D. shot - My only comment beyond the creative content would be that, from a photo stand point the bare foot adds simple "curiosity" to the image. However that young lady would be crippled is she was running in the fields I've shown above - our grasses are completely riddled with cactus - sometimes my dogs won't follow me into areas they have learned to stay out of - they wait out on the path.
Jul 15, 2010 at 12:23 PM
p.17 #16Contax N Image Thread
Andi, the lens does indeed show some promise. I finally bought one (again), but this time pre-converted. The Leica 50 Lux-R E60 definitely has more resolution at F4 to F8, but the Contax 50N is very good performer. I definitely think it's better than the 50mm F1.4 Planar ZE. I need to put the lens through the usual test subject to get feel for its bokeh, etc. So far I like it alot. Here's a F1.4 and F4 -
Some more pictures here - Contax 50N.
 |
||
| http://www.pebbleplace.com/offload/Review_Contax_50N/J10_4957.jpg | ||
|
|
||
| http://www.pebbleplace.com/offload/Review_Contax_50N/J10_4969.jpg | ||
|
Some more pictures here - Contax 50N.
Jul 18, 2010 at 02:21 PM
p.17 #17Contax N Image Thread
Nice use of the flares, John!
I also like the other images on your site.
I think that in your review you should probably add the word "not" in this sentence:
"Resolution at F5.6 is good, but as high as the Leica 50mm F1.4 Summilux-R E60."
I also like the other images on your site.
I think that in your review you should probably add the word "not" in this sentence:
"Resolution at F5.6 is good, but as high as the Leica 50mm F1.4 Summilux-R E60."
Jul 18, 2010 at 10:23 PM
p.17 #18Contax N Image Thread
Andi Dietrich wrote:
I am not sure you should write this
In that case he shoud exchange "but" for "and".
I am not sure you should write this
In that case he shoud exchange "but" for "and".
Jul 19, 2010 at 05:57 AM
p.17 #19Contax N Image Thread
Andi, that is referencing an older version of the Summilux 50 R, "The second version of the Summilux (around 1962) offered a much higher contrast wide open..." I am using the last version introduced in 1998 with a new optical design (8 elements, 7 groups). I'm not sure what Erwin is referencing because that 1962 date doesn't jibe with my reference books... Anyway, whether or not you accept Erwin's conclusions, here's what his site says about 8 element version that I am referring to (from here):
Test report of Summilux-R 1:1,4/50 (#3797918)
At full aparture this eight element lens is of medium to high contrast and thus very visibly above the low to medium contrast of the seven element predecessor. This is quite a performance as conventional wisdom will tell you that more lens elements will degrade contrast. Very fine detail is recorded with good clarity from center to well into the outer zones. In the far corner area a slight drop in performance can be noted. At f/2,0 the image outlines crispen, as does the rendition of extremely fine detail and at f/2,8 overall contrast improves again....Show more →
I have several Leica books and the one I'm looking at shows a much better MTF curve at F4 for this latest version of the Lux-R (1998). In terms of resolution and the rendering of textures, the R has an advantage over the Contax N. But I don't know if that would be "the" reason to pick the Leica over the Contax. It's going to come down to bokeh, performance at near distance, wide open performance, rendering mannerisms, etc. One area where the Leica does have a clear advantage is build quality. If well built lenses with well dampened focus rings, etc., turn your screws, the Leica delivers.
Anyway, it's going to be several months before I can revisit that review (the "not" typo was fixed - Thanks Aham). I need to rack up a couple thousand images with each lens to get a feel for them. As a side note, there is also the Voigtlander 58mm F1.4 SL II in the Nikon mount that gets good reviews. If that gets released in an EF mount, that might be the affordable option.
Test report of Summilux-R 1:1,4/50 (#3797918)
At full aparture this eight element lens is of medium to high contrast and thus very visibly above the low to medium contrast of the seven element predecessor. This is quite a performance as conventional wisdom will tell you that more lens elements will degrade contrast. Very fine detail is recorded with good clarity from center to well into the outer zones. In the far corner area a slight drop in performance can be noted. At f/2,0 the image outlines crispen, as does the rendition of extremely fine detail and at f/2,8 overall contrast improves again....Show more →
I have several Leica books and the one I'm looking at shows a much better MTF curve at F4 for this latest version of the Lux-R (1998). In terms of resolution and the rendering of textures, the R has an advantage over the Contax N. But I don't know if that would be "the" reason to pick the Leica over the Contax. It's going to come down to bokeh, performance at near distance, wide open performance, rendering mannerisms, etc. One area where the Leica does have a clear advantage is build quality. If well built lenses with well dampened focus rings, etc., turn your screws, the Leica delivers.
Anyway, it's going to be several months before I can revisit that review (the "not" typo was fixed - Thanks Aham). I need to rack up a couple thousand images with each lens to get a feel for them. As a side note, there is also the Voigtlander 58mm F1.4 SL II in the Nikon mount that gets good reviews. If that gets released in an EF mount, that might be the affordable option.
Jul 19, 2010 at 09:01 AM
p.17 #20Contax N Image Thread
John, did you miss the text below the 4th MTF graphs from the bottom?
Leica has also stayed on the safe side with its 1.4 designs for the R-system. Some studies in the past indicated that a 1.2 design would not be up to the Leica expectations. On the other hand, the company had to accept that the original version was no longer up to date and a new eight element design was introduced in 1998. It was not a major jump forward but stopped down the performance increased substantially, making it now a fully univeral standard lens.
Leica has also stayed on the safe side with its 1.4 designs for the R-system. Some studies in the past indicated that a 1.2 design would not be up to the Leica expectations. On the other hand, the company had to accept that the original version was no longer up to date and a new eight element design was introduced in 1998. It was not a major jump forward but stopped down the performance increased substantially, making it now a fully univeral standard lens.
Jul 19, 2010 at 09:34 AM