lithos wrote: ...many lenses, especially the older ones, show less resolving power of sensors on a large megapixel camera. So the terrible question is: does it makes more sense to invest in modern zeiss optics than older leica lenses on large megapixel sensors?
For starters, I would check this thread started by Sebboh where he and many knowledgeable users share their opinions on a topic of Leica vs. Zeiss look: https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1190503
Now, back to your ‘terrible question’; it depends. It depends which Zeiss or Leica lens you’re after. Not all Zeiss lenses are sharper than Leica’s equivalent and vice versa. See Worldinlens’ new R180mm toy that has no current Zeiss equivalent; choice is easy. Elmarit-R 60, if you plan to use it strictly for macro work and don’t care about rendering style, may have a stiff competition from many current production Canon/Nikon equivalents.
However, I can only comment on Summicron-R 35 and 50 vs. Zeiss Distagon 2/35 and MP 50. I find Summicron-R 35 to be sharper in the center than Zeiss. Cron’s out of center performance is another issue, especially wide open, but I wouldn’t use it for any architectural or landscaping shots wide open and expect sharp edges and uniform performance. Zeiss Distagon 2/35 or 1.4/35 would be better choices.
Summicron-R 50 appears very sharp stopped down, especially at mid to infinity distance. It clearly outresolves MP50. At shorter distance MP50 really shines as it should being a macro lens.
I have never compared Elmarit-R 28 E55 to any of the two current Zeiss 28mm lenses. My decision to purchase it was based on reviews and samples. Said that, I feel this is a lens that really shows its outstanding capabilities on higher MP cameras.
As you see individual lenses from both companies have their strong and weak sides. For me lenses’ sharpness/resolution on high MP camera was not a decisive criterion, though important one, but only if a lens was purchased for landscaping work. One may have to end up with multiple copies of identical focal length lenses to have a cake and eat it
Exceptional reply, JaKo!
I'm surprised by the summicron 50 result. For 35mm, I agree, zeiss 35 or both brands 35-70 are sharper for landscape work than summicron.
Jako, an awesome post. I echo pretty much everything you say. I am really surprised for MP50 infinity results though.
A big plus for both cron are size, they are about 1/2 to 2/3 of volume and weight. I feel their value will keep going up for their size advantage (meaningful for MILC) and no more production.
zhangyue wrote: I am really surprised for MP50 infinity results though.
A big plus for both cron are size, they are about 1/2 to 2/3 of volume and weight.
Thanks. Indeed, both Crons appear compact next to their Zeiss equivalents. Cron-R 50 is especially convenient. It's not that much larger than my Voigtländer 40 mm F 2.0 Ultron SLII + its attached dome hood.
As for MP50 performance at infinity, well, in its defence the distance to provided 100% crop location was nearly 3 km, which may be too much for a macro lens. I think Summicron-R 50 is simply a great lens by comparison to MP 50 and overall.
I went back and reprocessed my Sunset photo that I posted earlier taken with my Fuji X-E1 and Leica 35mm-70mm f4 Vario Elmar lens. Image now processed through the LR 4.4RC.
carstenw wrote:
Very nice shot! How close were you?
maybe 10 to 15 meters. Blondie was a regular visitor at Taylor Creek where there are always people & she's known to the forest service as a very tolerant bear, even with her cub nearby, so they don't try to shoo her away:
))
