denoir
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.140 #14 · Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread | |
Charles, fantastic portraits! I especially like the B/W 50 Lux shot. 
Ryan, nice shots with the Heliar. I especially like the bicycle sign and the bokeh.
Nice shots Gregory - excellent colors. I would have not guessed it's film. Technically speaking this is a thread for M8/M9/X1 cameras but I personally would not mind some film shots
carstenw wrote:
This reminds me of the 3D thread here on FM. When it started there was a lot of discussion, and at times there was wide general agreement about what factors play into 3D, how to get it, and which lenses produced it the most. But whenever someone posted a photo, opinions were all over on whether it had 3D or not. Photos can really get in the way of photo theory
Indeed.
The new one is an awesome accomplishment, and I like the rendering very much. In fact, from f/1.4 and down, the rendering is meant to be almost identical to the 50 Lux ASPH, even down to the MTFs. It is basically the 50 Lux ASPH with one more stop, plus a bit. For this reason, and because of the price and size, it leaves me a little cold. The difference between f/0.95 and f/1.4 is there, but it is often not huge. You would have to go looking for things to shoot to maximize the difference.
The old Noctilux (well, the f/1 version) I love wide open. It is problematic, has sometimes nutsy boke, some visible CA, and so on, but it also has a deep charm. Somehow, it is my 50 Sonnar, except that I only accept it in the Noctilux because it goes to f/1 and has sometimes the creamiest boke of any lens I have seen, apart from the 75 Lux, which is very similar. The Noctilux is a real problem-child. I would like to own one, but it will have to wait a while, at least until I get an M10....Show more →
Interesting. I expected you'd like the old Noctilux and it has a fairly wild rendering, so that's why I asked. I would not agree with you on the new Nocti being similar to the 50 Lux. I say this simply based on that I've seen very few 0.95 samples where I have not liked the rendering and very few 50 Lux samples where I've liked the rendering. B/W shots are an exception where I often like the rendering of the 50 Lux. The main and very important difference between the two is how the DOF falloff is handled (sharpness-to-blur transition). The Nocti at f/0.95 and Lux at f/1.4 have completely different transitions with the nocti having a longer, more gradual drop off to blur whereas the Lux has a very sharp transition.
Speaking of lenses that I like and don't like, there is one lens currently in my lineup that I'm suspicious of. I have thought on numerous occasions that I don't like it but when I've tried to find pictures to confirm it, I have not been able to substantiate it. I have gone over some older shots and made some conclusions
First we have performance at infinity:
Not bad, I'm happy with it. Nice color separation, high local contrast, sharp etc I don't like my 35/2 ZE at infinity but the ZM is quite alright.
Medium distance:
Again, not bad. Nice DOF falloff. Somewhat too smudged corners relative to the out of foucs blur, but nothing too dramatic. No weird field curvature or anything like that and zero distortion.
Close up:
Ugh, awful. I don't like the sharp edges around the bokeh blobs, the lack of good color separation in the OOF areas and the spherical aberrations.
Close up, but not as close as the previous one:
Hmm. Passable. I like the DOF transition but not the bokeh. I think this is as close as one should get with this lens.
At MFD:
Umm, well, perhaps as a substitute for taking psychadelic drugs. The only thing done to the image apart from resize is an increase in contrast.
So my conclusion so far is that I generally like the lens except for close ups where I hate it. When I get some time I'll do a full 35mm lens comparison. I have four 35mm lenses so it should be interesting.
|
. The PP was done in ACR, and still yet to try C1 Pro.
[/url]
