Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
p.1102 #1Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
Nice Edwards and everyone else's
I am still waiting for my copy, after I see your shots, I get motivated to shoot
I need to post more often
I am still waiting for my copy, after I see your shots, I get motivated to shoot
I need to post more often
Feb 22, 2015 at 03:56 PM
p.1102 #2Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
Thank you very much for the kind words guys! Much appreciated.
Hiepphotog, regarding the diamond shaped highlights, I did notice them too and they puzzled me for a while, until I realized the lamps were not round but rather squarish shaped coils. But definitely I will watch out to see if this happens again and whether the lens is causing it or not.
Hiepphotog, regarding the diamond shaped highlights, I did notice them too and they puzzled me for a while, until I realized the lamps were not round but rather squarish shaped coils. But definitely I will watch out to see if this happens again and whether the lens is causing it or not.
Feb 22, 2015 at 08:17 PM
p.1102 #3Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
hiepphotog wrote:
Edwards, I see strange diamond-shaped specular highlights toward the edges and corners in the ZM 35 shots. Were they taken at WO? Nonetheless, this lens pops like no others (save the two massive Otii)
Edit: Seeing the same diamond shaped highlights in Lloyd's shots.
I noticed this also in some of my shots with the lens at PPE... The first one Edward posted is a pretty good example. Normally towards the edges the round light balls tend to go more cats eyes, but here it's different. It's like the top and bottom of the cats eye is chopped, leaving an odd angular shape. I'd guess there's mechanical vignetting/blockage somewhere causing this.
Edwards, I see strange diamond-shaped specular highlights toward the edges and corners in the ZM 35 shots. Were they taken at WO? Nonetheless, this lens pops like no others (save the two massive Otii)
Edit: Seeing the same diamond shaped highlights in Lloyd's shots.
I noticed this also in some of my shots with the lens at PPE... The first one Edward posted is a pretty good example. Normally towards the edges the round light balls tend to go more cats eyes, but here it's different. It's like the top and bottom of the cats eye is chopped, leaving an odd angular shape. I'd guess there's mechanical vignetting/blockage somewhere causing this.
Feb 22, 2015 at 08:43 PM
p.1102 #4Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
The simple solution is to just shoot it WO.... Doesn't really bother me either way though.
Doesn't really bother me either way though.Feb 22, 2015 at 08:51 PM
p.1102 #5Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
Here is one from Canmore which is about an hour drive from my house. I really love B&W mountain shots (if you haven't figured out already) with lighting such as this.
ZM18
Edited on Feb 22, 2015 at 09:56 PM · View previous versions
 |
||
 |
||
|
ZM18
Edited on Feb 22, 2015 at 09:56 PM · View previous versions
Feb 22, 2015 at 09:29 PM
p.1102 #6Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
Beautiful Gary!!
ZM35/1.4 OOF speculars...:
Looking at my PPE images, it happens wide open too and seems to be dependent on camera to subject to background relationships.
Images where the subject is quite near, distant specular light sources blur out pretty normally, though at the edges hint at something slightly odd. It's when the subject is somewhat farther away and the background isn't as dramatically blurred that this effect seems to be more noticeable. It may also happen with nearer subjects with little background separation, but I don't have any of those kinds of images with it, yet.
I don't think it will be a deal breaker for me, not even close, because the lens is otherwise such a great performer. But like any lens, it's going to be a matter of learning where it works better and where it shows some less desirable qualities.
Some crops from my PPE images... I think all were wide open:
focus was fairly near ~2.5-3m, crop is at left side of frame, near the edge:
From same position, focus was maybe 6-7m:
Some of the odd shape will be due to the light shining through the structure of the ceiling supports, but there should be some true point light sources there too.
I think some of it is due to how the lens shows double-edged effects towards the outer zones:
Near focus ~2m:
~7-10m focus:
You can see the double images of the Phase One text. It's like as the lens is defocused, the image is split and skewed apart. With specular light sources, it's going to stretch/smear in a diagonal direction. I think this is what's happening in some of the shots, combined with the cats eye effect.. And it gets weirder near the edge of the frame.
In focus, probably ~10m away:
Out of focus - focus was on a subject ~3-4m away. Was also recomposed so it's now at the right edge of the frame:
Left edge of the same frame, model was probably ~20m away:
Couple more examples of the double edge/image defocus:
Both were at the outer right zone of the frame, but not at the edge. The second was about rule of thirds placement.
ZM35/1.4 OOF speculars...:
Looking at my PPE images, it happens wide open too and seems to be dependent on camera to subject to background relationships.
Images where the subject is quite near, distant specular light sources blur out pretty normally, though at the edges hint at something slightly odd. It's when the subject is somewhat farther away and the background isn't as dramatically blurred that this effect seems to be more noticeable. It may also happen with nearer subjects with little background separation, but I don't have any of those kinds of images with it, yet.
I don't think it will be a deal breaker for me, not even close, because the lens is otherwise such a great performer. But like any lens, it's going to be a matter of learning where it works better and where it shows some less desirable qualities.
Some crops from my PPE images... I think all were wide open:
focus was fairly near ~2.5-3m, crop is at left side of frame, near the edge:
From same position, focus was maybe 6-7m:
Some of the odd shape will be due to the light shining through the structure of the ceiling supports, but there should be some true point light sources there too.
I think some of it is due to how the lens shows double-edged effects towards the outer zones:
Near focus ~2m:
~7-10m focus:
You can see the double images of the Phase One text. It's like as the lens is defocused, the image is split and skewed apart. With specular light sources, it's going to stretch/smear in a diagonal direction. I think this is what's happening in some of the shots, combined with the cats eye effect.. And it gets weirder near the edge of the frame.
In focus, probably ~10m away:
Out of focus - focus was on a subject ~3-4m away. Was also recomposed so it's now at the right edge of the frame:
Left edge of the same frame, model was probably ~20m away:
Couple more examples of the double edge/image defocus:
Both were at the outer right zone of the frame, but not at the edge. The second was about rule of thirds placement.
Feb 22, 2015 at 09:39 PM
p.1102 #7Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
Indeed, beautiful shot Gary!
I have reviewed my images of yesterday and I have to agree with Ron. The squarish OOF lightsources are consistent in every frame. They start appearing about the middle of zone B and are not affected by the aperture, as long as they are OOF. It must be some aspherical element causing this phenomenon.
I have reviewed my images of yesterday and I have to agree with Ron. The squarish OOF lightsources are consistent in every frame. They start appearing about the middle of zone B and are not affected by the aperture, as long as they are OOF. It must be some aspherical element causing this phenomenon.
Feb 22, 2015 at 10:31 PM
p.1102 #8Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
rscheffler wrote:
ZM35/1.4 OOF speculars...:
Looking at my PPE images, it happens wide open too and seems to be dependent on camera to subject to background relationships.
Images where the subject is quite near, distant specular light sources blur out pretty normally, though at the edges hint at something slightly odd. It's when the subject is somewhat farther away and the background isn't as dramatically blurred that this effect seems to be more noticeable. It may also happen with nearer subjects with little background separation, but I don't have any of those kinds of images with it, yet.
...
Some crops from my PPE images......Show more →
From same position, focus was maybe 6-7m:
this is one of the things that was reminding me of the c/y 35/1.4. here is a similar crop from it:
ZM35/1.4 OOF speculars...:
Looking at my PPE images, it happens wide open too and seems to be dependent on camera to subject to background relationships.
Images where the subject is quite near, distant specular light sources blur out pretty normally, though at the edges hint at something slightly odd. It's when the subject is somewhat farther away and the background isn't as dramatically blurred that this effect seems to be more noticeable. It may also happen with nearer subjects with little background separation, but I don't have any of those kinds of images with it, yet.
...
Some crops from my PPE images......Show more →
From same position, focus was maybe 6-7m:
this is one of the things that was reminding me of the c/y 35/1.4. here is a similar crop from it:
Feb 22, 2015 at 11:22 PM
p.1102 #9Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
Beautiful, Gary
I see you have solved the colorshift issues with the zm18!
hiepphotog wrote:
Edwards, I see strange diamond-shaped specular highlights toward the edges and corners in the ZM 35 shots. Were they taken at WO? Nonetheless, this lens pops like no others (save the two massive Otii)
Edit: Seeing the same diamond shaped highlights in Lloyd's shots.
Wow, great eye. Now they are obvious.
The Zeiss diamonds
One has to wonder about the aperture also. My little Sonnetar has a wonder german aperture that makes perfect circles always.
But many other lenses I own are making different shapes at different stops.
Missing by unoh7, 28 cron
I see you have solved the colorshift issues with the zm18!
hiepphotog wrote:
Edwards, I see strange diamond-shaped specular highlights toward the edges and corners in the ZM 35 shots. Were they taken at WO? Nonetheless, this lens pops like no others (save the two massive Otii)
Edit: Seeing the same diamond shaped highlights in Lloyd's shots.
Wow, great eye. Now they are obvious.
The Zeiss diamonds
One has to wonder about the aperture also. My little Sonnetar has a wonder german aperture that makes perfect circles always.
But many other lenses I own are making different shapes at different stops.
Missing by unoh7, 28 cron
Feb 22, 2015 at 11:35 PM
|
p.1102 #11Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
Anyone on the page that perhaps this thread should be split up already?
Dedicated R, M, X, T and S threads?
Dedicated R, M, X, T and S threads?
Feb 23, 2015 at 01:11 AM
p.1102 #12Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
There's already an R lens and a medium format thread where some S shooters contribute. Not sure how many X and T shooters there are? This thread should really be renamed Leica Camera Picture Thread, or just add S, which should have been done long ago.
I like the broad scope, though can appreciate that if you want to find images specific to a certain non-M camera, that it is difficult to sift through the thread.
Derek - thanks for that example. I can see there is some similarity.
I like the broad scope, though can appreciate that if you want to find images specific to a certain non-M camera, that it is difficult to sift through the thread.
Derek - thanks for that example. I can see there is some similarity.
Feb 23, 2015 at 01:27 AM
p.1102 #13Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
L1021463-880.jpg by W.Utsch, on Flickr
Feb 23, 2015 at 01:44 AM
p.1102 #14Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
dolina wrote:
Anyone on the page that perhaps this thread should be split up already?...Dedicated R, M, X, T and S threads?
rscheffler wrote:
There's already an R lens and a medium format thread where some S shooters contribute. Not sure how many X and T shooters there are? This thread should really be renamed Leica Camera Picture Thread, or just add S, which should have been done long ago...I like the broad scope...
Seems to me that the value of this thread, besides its general collegiality, is the immediate and recurring gratification of seeing new pictures — as opposed to trying to make it into a compendium for reference, a purpose for which it is too long and not really "searchable". In my view there's little point in making it into something else that exists already on LUF and RFF, both of which I find tiresome (too much pontification and argument by the frequent posters).
Anyone on the page that perhaps this thread should be split up already?...Dedicated R, M, X, T and S threads?
rscheffler wrote:
There's already an R lens and a medium format thread where some S shooters contribute. Not sure how many X and T shooters there are? This thread should really be renamed Leica Camera Picture Thread, or just add S, which should have been done long ago...I like the broad scope...
Seems to me that the value of this thread, besides its general collegiality, is the immediate and recurring gratification of seeing new pictures — as opposed to trying to make it into a compendium for reference, a purpose for which it is too long and not really "searchable". In my view there's little point in making it into something else that exists already on LUF and RFF, both of which I find tiresome (too much pontification and argument by the frequent posters).
Feb 23, 2015 at 02:18 AM
p.1102 #15Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
I would have thought that the R will be sharper than the pre FLE. I also own the pre FLE and I really like the rendering, its sharp while retaining smoothness. The Zeiss seems to have a lot more pop than the pre FLE but it has very different bokeh from the lux. I don't think the difference will always be obvious but under the some circumstances it is easy to see the differences in rendering.
aly324 wrote:
How would you characterize the difference in rendition from the Lux?
I had the pre-FLE Summilux M on my A7R, intending it to replace my beloved but rather ponderous Summilux-R 35. The pre-FLE was obviously sharper (but undone on the edges by the Sony sensor) and more contrasty and consequently more dramatic (1st and 2nd attachments), but I find the colors from the R more pleasing (following attachments), more richly subtle and more drawing you in than punchy.
These samples from the ZM look quite different from both. The ZM looks very transparent. Very beautiful in its own way. They make the...Show more →
aly324 wrote:
rirakuma wrote
Thanks for the samples Ed, they look great and there's a discernible difference in rendering from the lux. It really does remind me of the ZF version. Do you find the size a problem at all? I'm under the impression that they're the same size as the v3 noct.I had the pre-FLE Summilux M on my A7R, intending it to replace my beloved but rather ponderous Summilux-R 35. The pre-FLE was obviously sharper (but undone on the edges by the Sony sensor) and more contrasty and consequently more dramatic (1st and 2nd attachments), but I find the colors from the R more pleasing (following attachments), more richly subtle and more drawing you in than punchy.
These samples from the ZM look quite different from both. The ZM looks very transparent. Very beautiful in its own way. They make the...Show more →
Feb 23, 2015 at 07:45 AM
p.1102 #16Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
Two snapshots from today, 1st is wide open:
M240 ZM 35/1.4 by edward karaa, on Flickr
M240 ZM 35/1.4 by edward karaa, on Flickr
M240 ZM 35/1.4 by edward karaa, on FlickrM240 ZM 35/1.4 by edward karaa, on FlickrFeb 23, 2015 at 07:54 AM
p.1102 #17Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
Thanks for the comments and likes.
Charlie - colorshift with the ZM18 on M240 is very minimal. Much better than it was on the M8/M9. Requires very little color correction.
Edward - been enjoying the ZM35/1.4 pics!
Charlie - colorshift with the ZM18 on M240 is very minimal. Much better than it was on the M8/M9. Requires very little color correction.
Edward - been enjoying the ZM35/1.4 pics!
Feb 23, 2015 at 08:46 AM
p.1102 #18Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
I purchased a M.S. Optical Perar 24mm Superwide and have been experimenting with it in the last few days
Leica Monochrom + M.S. Optical 24mm by ryankarr, on Flickr
Leica Monochrom + M.S. Optical 24mm by ryankarr, on Flickr
Leica Monochrom + M.S. Optical 24mm by ryankarr, on Flickr
Leica Monochrom + M.S. Optical 24mm by ryankarr, on Flickr
MM + 50 Lux ASPH:
Leica Monochrom by ryankarr, on Flickr
MM + 21/1.8 CV:
Leica Monochrom by ryankarr, on Flickr
Leica Monochrom + M.S. Optical 24mm by ryankarr, on FlickrLeica Monochrom + M.S. Optical 24mm by ryankarr, on FlickrLeica Monochrom + M.S. Optical 24mm by ryankarr, on FlickrLeica Monochrom + M.S. Optical 24mm by ryankarr, on FlickrMM + 50 Lux ASPH:
Leica Monochrom by ryankarr, on FlickrMM + 21/1.8 CV:
Leica Monochrom by ryankarr, on FlickrFeb 23, 2015 at 08:19 PM
p.1102 #19Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
Just pause a moment by alabang, on Flickr
X Typ 113 | f/1.7 | 1/250 | ISO 100 | 35mm equivalent
Red by alabang, on Flickr
X Typ 113 | f/8 | 1/40 | ISO 800 | 35mm equivalent
Dyed Chicks by alabang, on Flickr
X Typ 113 | f/8 | 1/40 | ISO 500 | 35mm equivalent
Chestnuts roasting on an open fire by alabang, on FlickrX Typ 113 | f/8 | 1/15 | ISO 400 | 35mm equivalent
Feb 24, 2015 at 12:51 AM
p.1102 #20Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
dolina wrote:
Anyone on the page that perhaps this thread should be split up already?
Dedicated R, M, X, T and S threads?
Thread separation ends in threads dying. Bad choice.
Anyone on the page that perhaps this thread should be split up already?
Dedicated R, M, X, T and S threads?
Thread separation ends in threads dying. Bad choice.
Feb 24, 2015 at 08:13 AM