DocsPics wrote:
Anybody had any hands on expereince with the Leica 35-70/2.8 ASPH? Anybody know where I can rent one for a test drive?
I have one and use it infrequently now that I've sold my R8/DMR. I should use it more because I went to the trouble to cut the mirror on my canon 5D2 to provide clearance for the metal protective shroud on the rear. Some other FM member is shooting their 35-70 elmarit without the metal cover - read it here a few months ago - cant recall if they had clearance probs or not but think not.
Anyhow, it's a wonderful lens with fantastic optics and the macro feature is really quite useful too. Considering its size its also very light weight. Optically its probably the best zoom ever made. Beautiful color, incredible detail, great bokeh and very low distortion. I have compared it to the Leica 60mm macro and 100mm apo macro lenses and its as good or better than both lenses at macro shots as distance too.
Have you tried PPR in Atlanta - I think they used to rent Leica R glass? But probably this one will be hard to find as a rental.
PM me if you want more info. I had posted images taken with the lens and my DMR a while back.
EricH wrote:
I have compared it to the Leica 60mm macro and 100mm apo macro lenses and its as good or better than both lenses at macro shots as distance too.
Just curious what is the magnification of this macro, 1:3?
ManWearPants wrote:
Just curious what is the magnification of this macro, 1:3?
From the spec sheet its 1:2.8
It's definitely higher magnification than the 35-70mm f/4 rom lens can do in its macro setting - which is also very good btw. Seems like you can focus on objects just a few inches from the front element.
Tri Tran wrote:
It's hard to believe that the lense could beat the 100 APO especially at macro. Do you have samples comparing the two?
Ok. Don't believe it then. Both are fine lenses. I'm sure you'd be happy with either. What metric would you consider anyhow? Sharpness, distortion (or lack thereof), color, bokeh, or character? It's a difficult thing to test and so many only consider sharpness which is not the only thing I think makes a great lens. But I can tell you that my 35-70mm elmarit captured the same amount of detail as my 100 apo at close range in my testing.
Once you get into it, there's plenty of great lenses for macro work. I really like my 90mm apo rodagon, schneider 80mm macro symmar, my rollei 90mm and 150mm apo macro lenses for example and use them a ton more than I use either of the leicas mostly because I prefer my digital backs to my canon 5d2 for real work.
But for a single lens that can do it all really, really, well? I think the leica 35-70 elmarit wins there.
EricH wrote:
Ok. Don't believe it then. Both are fine lenses. I'm sure you'd be happy with either. What metric would you consider anyhow? Sharpness, distortion (or lack thereof), color, bokeh, or character? It's a difficult thing to test and so many only consider sharpness which is not the only thing I think makes a great lens. But I can tell you that my 35-70mm elmarit captured the same amount of detail as my 100 apo at close range in my testing.
......
Thanks for sharing your experience with this uncommon as well as very good lens. I'm also finding it hard to believe that 35-70/f2.8 is "as good or better than both lenses at macro shots as distance" without knowing how you've arrived at that conclusion and which criteria you've used.
At least from the datasheets published by Leica based on infinity distance, the 35-70/f2.8 doesn't have better mtf and distortion curves than the macros especially the 100/f2.8 APO. The exception is the distortion curve of 35-70/f2.8@55mm which is practically zero. However, those curves don't tell the whole story.
Perhaps, you could share in slightly more details which area (resolution, contrast, bokeh, colour, etc. ) you think it's better and under what kind of conditions (focal length, f-stops, camera used, focusing distance).
makron wrote:
Thanks for sharing your experience with this uncommon as well as very good lens. I'm also finding it hard to believe that 35-70/f2.8 is "as good or better than both lenses at macro shots as distance" without knowing how you've arrived at that conclusion and which criteria you've used.
At least from the datasheets published by Leica based on infinity distance, the 35-70/f2.8 doesn't have better mtf and distortion curves than the macros especially the 100/f2.8 APO. The exception is the distortion curve of 35-70/f2.8@55mm which is practically zero. However, those curves don't tell the whole story.
Perhaps, you could share in slightly more details which area (resolution, contrast, bokeh, colour, etc. ) you think it's better and under what kind of conditions (focal length, f-stops, camera used, focusing distance). ...Show more →
I wrote already that the amount of fine detail each lens rendered at close subject distances (8 inches) was equal - but also that its subjective and very hard to test all the other parameters. I did my testing by shooting flowers, ferns, and some product labels with fine print but did not save the shots after I finished. Bokeh is beautiful on macro shots with the 35-70 f/2.8 but so it is with the 100mm apo.
One more thing about testing... I found out that most of these good lenses may out-resolve the sensors in terms of fine detail. It's just really hard to know what's the better lens even in terms of sharpness alone and a lot of the other factors such as bokeh and color are subjective. In the end I think everyone really just needs to do their own testing.
The 35-70/2.8 is a wonderful lens.It's as good as any prime in the focal range, except that it doesn't do f/1.4 (or f/2.0 for that matter). It is a very competent macro lens as well. I have no qualms of leaving the 100 AME home if I take the zoom. Having said that, I have never compared the two directly. I must say, I do use the 100 AME for most of my macros.
Here are some sample pictures taken with Vario-Elmarit 35-70 ASPH on R9/DMR.
Just bougth a Summicron 90mm/2 and there's something very odd about it. Wide open, under certain light conditions, there's a terrible yellow stain on the photo. Can't see anything looking the glass. By f4, it's gone. Check some test shots I just did...f2 and f 5.6 side by side. http://gallery.me.com/andrevallejo#100018
The last two are wide open under natural light.
An aging element maybe
vallejo wrote:
Just bougth a Summicron 90mm/2 and there's something very odd about it. Wide open, under certain light conditions, there's a terrible yellow stain on the photo. Can't see anything looking the glass. By f4, it's gone. Check some test shots I just did...f2 and f 5.6 side by side. http://gallery.me.com/andrevallejo#100018
The last two are wide open under natural light.
An aging element maybe
Hard to analyze anything without access to the EXIF data for the two shots. Did they use the same WB setting, relative exposure, flash or not? While i agree that there is a definitely something causing a yellow-orange discoloration, it looks more like a lighting issue (flash in one and not the other, for example) without more info.
Jim
It's probably due to the flourescent lighting. Faster shutter speed (with the wider aperture) will get you only a portion of the cycle of the flourescent bulbs. Check to see if this occurs under other lighting conditions.
What's the going rate of a APO Leica-R 90 f/2 ASPH new in box?
Also, what's the adapter procedures of this type of lens, it's auto aperture right? So how do you get it to work on a 5DII? Does the 5DII get auto aperture, though focus is manual?\\
@adam: There are no adapters for Canon which give auto aperture.
Only Contax N can converted to have auto aperterture and AF, but that requires a quite costly mount and electronics (circuit board) replacement.
