Worldinlens -- Great idea about testing the ghosting. So far, I've seen no flare or loss of contrast from broad bright areas intruding into darker portions. I'm somewhat fanatical about keeping direct sun from hitting the front of the lens, but checking the direct flaring is worthwhile to know. The lens coatings seem very good.
Great shots, John. That color is just amazing, as is the extremely shallow DOF -- I never see that shallow from my Samyang 85/1.4. What's the secret? (Don't say, "Leica" )
And they say 28-70mm isnt true Leica and doesnt have any magic.
Seems that it is Leica as much as any other.. Looks pretty good, thanks for photos Gunzorro. Kinda like that first one, separation between sky and building/trees create nice bit of 3Dish.
Btw. difference is that f1.4 doesnt always mean same DOF. DOF depends on lens design and distance from object. Every lens have different "visible" DOF even if they have same specs. Just compare Sigmalux 85mm f1.4 to anything else. It has very interesting DOF "wall of bokeh".
Great shots, John. That color is just amazing, as is the extremely shallow DOF -- I never see that shallow from my Samyang 85/1.4. What's the secret? (Don't say, "Leica" )
spherical aberration.
it has great control of CA wide open by the looks of it!
Great shots, John. That color is just amazing, as is the extremely shallow DOF -- I never see that shallow from my Samyang 85/1.4. What's the secret? (Don't say, "Leica" )
Ta. Definitely too shallow for this kind of shot. Makes it hard to get shots that are sharp enough where you need them which is normally over a larger area. The 5d2 is a bit too hard to use for this kind of thing (compared to the 1ds2).
spherical aberration.
it has great control of CA wide open by the looks of it!
Wide open SA is always there a bit but it's still not a problem. CA is pretty good too, not perfect, but not a problem either.
JohnJ wrote:
Wide open SA is always there a bit but it's still not a problem. CA is pretty good too, not perfect, but not a problem either.
JJ
i didn't mean the SA looked like it was a problem just that was what gave the narrower dof look than what one would get with a modern aspherical design like the samyang gunzorro referenced. very different look to the bokeh between the two lenses, also almost certainly a very different look to the transition from in focus to out of focus.
CA looks much better than i would expect from most 85/1.4s wide open with chrome fenders in the direct sun light.
Hi Jim,
I just got the Leica 50mm f1.4 Summilux R E60 and it mounts on a FF Canon (1D series and 5D) with adapter by removing the rubber rear element shield on the back (just pulls off). The adapter protects the rear element. See www.pebbleplace.com leica DB for all lenses that will fit. I've mounted it on a 1Ds iii with no problems and will take my first real images with it on an upcoming trip. It mounts on crop bodies as is with just the adapter. This is supposed to be the best Leica 50mm f1.4 R, but those who have used it more can better evaluate that.
Dave
A question about the various Summicron models and updates...
What's with the price difference between these two (factoring in the used quality of the lenses too)? Is the ROM version the latest model and the 3rd cam the one that preceded it? And is the difference in price worth it for the latest model? I've read that the earlier 50Cron R's are more contrasty wide open.
I really like what I've seen from the Summicron Leica-R's versus the Zeiss C/Y 50/1.7 I used to own. The Summicrons produce photos much, much more flattering for people. And looking at the MTF of the latest model it maintains a strong plot right out to the edge (where the Zeiss falls off). There's a difference in speed though.
What's with the price difference between these two (factoring in the used quality of the lenses too)? Is the ROM version the latest model and the 3rd cam the one that preceded it? And is the difference in price worth it for the latest model? I've read that the earlier 50Cron R's are more contrasty wide open.
I really like what I've seen from the Summicron Leica-R's versus the Zeiss C/Y 50/1.7 I used to own. The Summicrons produce photos much, much more flattering for people. And looking at the MTF of the latest model it maintains a strong plot right out to the edge (where the Zeiss falls off). There's a difference in speed though....Show more →
Optically these two are the same. ROM might mean it's newer, or might not. The ROM will only matter if you're using the lens on a Leica R8 or R9.
Didn't they shut down their Canadian operations before the introduction of the R8 (meaning there would've been no ROM lenses out of Canada)? I'm fairly certain that lens had the ROM added afterwards, particularly after looking at the 360.
telyt wrote:
Optically these two are the same. ROM might mean it's newer, or might not. The ROM will only matter if you're using the lens on a Leica R8 or R9.
From somewhere in the serial numbers 36xxxxx R50/2 were produced in Germany. However, any difference in the coating I have not noticed.
phuang3 wrote:
Great shots! I got a 560/5.6 telyt-r and never feel it sharp at any focus distance. Is the f/6.8 version really that good?
In my experience the f/5.6 is a weaker performer. Aside from detail, it has lower contrast & flares more readily. The f/6.8 isn't without optical quirks but in the central region (at least the area covered by the DMR) it's quite sharp with good color saturation and very little flare. It has some field curvature and color fringes in higher-contrast OOF areas; I've learned to work around these problems.
