Joe... thanks Great rendering to your street shot! Really nice capture
Lovinglife, I personally really like the 75 Cron APO It is a very different lens compared to the 75 Lux, and has a unique rendering IMO. It is the reason why I did not sell the 75 Cron, after finally getting a good copy of the Lux.
Very interesting read Luka. The second 50 Lux photo, of the statue, is great.
Nice street photo Joe, I really like how you used DOF in that photo. You have the 35 Cron IV as well don't you? Do you find them very different to work with?
lovinglife, isn't that the 75 cron you're talking about? Because then as you can see Luka has used it and posted about it quite a lot and I also think Charles has it or was that the 90 cron?
Interesting summary Luka. It certainly has been a learning experience and I'm sure I'm not the only one who appreciates your efforts to explain your opinion. I really like #1 and #2 of the house series.
Charles, great use of the lens - a very nice feel to the photos in that set.
Joe - it's almost like being there in person - there is a sense of immersion.
Joakim - great tonality!
The last remnants of winter, as of this past Saturday:
Ron, I really like the ice shots. #2 is probably my favorite.
lovinglife wrote:
Guys - what are the general opinions regarding the 75mm f/2 ASPH/APO lens?
Are there any images on this thread taken with that?
Thx in advance.
Hehe. Start from your post and go a couple of posts up and you'll see a bunch os samples. My own opinion of it, which is by now rather well known by the regulars here is that I'm not crazy about its rendering in many situations but like it for some. I think a lot of it has to do with the fact that I've never found a good natural use for it while other photographers have and get great shots from it.
They were taken very soon after I got the lens, before I got to know it a bit better and its limitations.
joe88 wrote:
I wonder why the 75Cron has such poor MFD performance? Did you ask Leica to check while it was there?
Yes, they tested it fully the first time. Apparently it's supposed to be that way.
From what I've seen, this lens is really beautiful for portraits and people.
I agree, but I don't do people photography a lot and finding a use for it has been a bit difficult. As for portraits, Charles showed an excellent comparison a while ago of the 75 Cron and the 75 Lux for portraits. The 75 Cron made the image look like a very high quality formal portrait while the Lux had an interesting dreamy look about it.
Luka, with the type of photography you do, eg creative and shallow DOF, you ought to try the Noct 0.95 at some point. I'm quite sure you'll like the 0.95 now that the 50Lux ASPH works for you. As an example, both the #2 & 3 shots can benefit with an even shallower DOF for the kind of look that you like.
I would probably like it, but I don't like it $10,000 though. It passes some sort of level for me where I think the price is unjustifiable. Although I've seen some nice shots with it, I'm not very interested in the older f/1 Nocti. There is something with its drawing style wide open that bothers me.
charles.K wrote:
I was going through the Leica blog of the Cuban boxers, and wow I love the rendering of those shots
Yeah, amazing shots. I would love to know how to get the colors like that. The skin tones are just amazing.
Looking around at the Leica blog and its featured gallery, something that I've noticed before struck me. It seems like there is a certain approved style of photography with M gear. Primarily it's some form of naturalistic people photography. If you look at their chosen top photos, featured photography and competition winners you seen the pattern very quickly. 90% of the shots are taken in poorer countries and of poor people. I wonder if it is some form of social commentary or simply people imitating each other. I think the latter as I can't really see why Leica shooters per se would be more interested in those types of shots compared to Canonikon shooters.
In effect however if you take a shot that Canon shooters rate highly, it's likely to be an idealized portrait, soft colors, creamy bokeh and a beautiful model with perfect skin and teeth. If you look at a shot that Leica shooters rate highly it's likely to be a gritty environmental portrait, strong colors & textures with an interestingly ugly model - usually somebody older, preferably without teeth and very textured skin.
Ron, Bluetsunami and Luka ... thanks guys
Ron, great set of shots! I really like the way you work your PP!
Luka, you are right about the gritty portraits It may have to do Leica's heritage in photo journalism, where the richness of tones in B&W and colours, in shots from troubled areas around the world just gave that extra realism and feeling.
Joe - great shot! I feel like I'm there. Great PP!
Ron - like the shots with the Planar
Charles - I have seen most of those 75 Cron shots before but I gladly looked again. They are great! The pp is perfect for those shots as well
Luka - I agree with you on the traditional shots taken by the different camera makers. It seems like if it isn't a street shot in some impoverished nation it isn't worthy of being shot by a Leica. But, maybe that is just the look that most with a Leica are after. Most Nikon and Canon users have their preferences and the traditional Leica users have theirs. You (and probably all of us contributing to this post) aren't 'traditional' Leica users
denoir wrote:
In effect however if you take a shot that Canon shooters rate highly, it's likely to be an idealized portrait, soft colors, creamy bokeh and a beautiful model with perfect skin and teeth. If you look at a shot that Leica shooters rate highly it's likely to be a gritty environmental portrait, strong colors & textures with an interestingly ugly model - usually somebody older, preferably without teeth and very textured skin.
Have you guys noticed this?
I think this is way too generalising.
Those grittier kind of shots are also really loved amongst canon/nikon/whatever brand shooters.
Those shots often win awards, not the shiny model photos
That's because there's a story/emotion to them.
Linking this to -in this case- leica is kind of absurd to me.
The fact that you see many of these kinds of shots with leica is that it's very popular for street photography, photojournalism,...
Plus the userbase of those other brands is huge compared to that of Leica. So you have to filter these photos out of the massive amount of idealized portraits/landscapes/...
See a difference in the character of the shots? Yes there is some overlap, but the difference is unmistakable.
Linking this to -in this case- leica is kind of absurd to me.
The fact that you see many of these kinds of shots with leica is that it's very popular for street photography, photojournalism,...
Is it absurd or not then? First you say that it is absurd then you say that it's natural...
Leica hasn't been popular for photojournalism since the 70's. There are very few photojournalists today that don't use DSLRs. As for street photography, yes - but these are for the most part not at all cases of street photography but portraits.
I think it has more to do with following the examples of others. For various reasons there are styles that become mainstream within a subgroup and not another.
Ron, nice icicles shots.
Ryan, nice set and colors, like the cart shots best.
Luka, have you considered replacing the 75Cron and 90CronV3 with a 90Cron AA?
joakim wrote:
You have the 35 Cron IV as well don't you? Do you find them very different to work with?
Very different look depending on subject. But right now I'm using the 35Lux more because of the additional stop of light. Even on film, the 35Lux is much sharper over the 35CronIV. I like the 35Lux ASPH for this "trendy" modern look and sharpness. However, the 35CronIV is a no slouch. It has that imperfect Leica "glow" (flare + CA?) and the color rendering is "different". I still prefer the softer look of the older 35CronIV (and my 50CronV3) for portraits. To me, in "denoir" speak, the 35CronIV is akin to The Impressionist while the 35Lux ASPH is more like the Dutch Masters (This is my own opinion and subjective).
denoir wrote:
Looking around at the Leica blog and its featured gallery, something that I've noticed before struck me. It seems like there is a certain approved style of photography with M gear.
To me, the Leica M has a legacy linked to capturing many of the great moments in photography over the past Century with a small unobtrusive camera (and partly because SLRs were not widely available until the 1960s). For example, many of these photographers were from Magnum or other agencies and were shooting for LIFE, Stern, etc. I guess from a marketing standpoint, Leica is drawing on its strength and knows its target audience, a small well built unobtrusive digital camera for keen amateurs or pros who are more into into the "art" or documentary photography. This is in contrast to the majority of Canonikon shooters who are mostly into wildlife, sports, studio and family snapshots.
BTW, my favorite Canon shooter is James Nachtwey, check out his book "Inferno" or the documentary "War Photographer", highly recommended.
I think this is by far more complicated, Luka. One would have to analyze a lot of parameters to judge. One parameter that comes to my mind at first, but is off course a randomly picked one, is the culture group the photographers come from and their allocation in percentage in the entire group of users of say Leica or Canon photographers...
denoir wrote:
Leica hasn't been popular for photojournalism since the 70's. There are very few photojournalists today that don't use DSLRs. As for street photography, yes - but these are for the most part not at all cases of street photography but portraits.
Not too sure about 70s but in the early 90s, when our "world" switched to digital and color because of what the editors and viewers wanted, many photographers had to abandon their film Leicas for Canon or Nikon. Having said that, Leica is now collaborating with Magnum again and this might spur some interest among photojournalist. I mean, if you are doing lots of walking or covering a war zone, would you rather carry 2 Leica M9 and a small assortment compact lenses or 2 D3s/1DMks with a 24-70 and 70-200? Don't know about the rest of you, but I'll take the lighter setup (although the reliability of the M9 probably needs to be addressed at some point). Even then, unless you are an extremely well known photographer (who has $$) or if your gear is sponsored, most photo journalist won't be able to afford the M system
joe88 wrote:
Luka, have you considered replacing the 75Cron and 90CronV3 with a 90Cron AA?
Yes, but I'm not ready to make that decision yet. I do not accept defeat at the the hands of the 75 Cron! Getting the 90 AA would have of course been the smart decision in the first place - and I seem to remember both Charles and Carsten recommending it. I was however quite convinced that focusing was impossible on 90mm, so I got the 75 instead. The 90 Cron V3 was an impulse buy. I saw it in a camera store when I was sending in the 75 for repairs. It was reasonably cheap and I didn't want to have to go without a tele lens for a longer time so I bought it. And it was a really pleasant surprise.
Although I really like the rendering of the 90 Cron V3, I suspect that replacing it with a 90 AA is inevitable. As you know I do quite a bit of landscape photography and the V3 is unfortunately in terms of raw optical performance not up to modern standards.
Morfeus wrote:
I think this is by far more complicated, Luka. One would have to analyze a lot of parameters to judge. One parameter that comes to my mind at first, but is off course a randomly picked one, is the culture group the photographers come from and their allocation in percentage in the entire group of users of say Leica or Canon photographers...
Of course, I'm not saying it's only one thing or the other. Just that it's an interesting fact that the selection of images that a Canon user group chooses is quite different from the one a Leica user group chooses.
It's not just Canon or Leica. Look at the Zeiss thread in this forum - there is a general theme to the type of photography you see there. There is actually less variation there than in this thread - most images there are in the general urban/landscape photography. Then again there are many more people posting there. I'm sure that if there were more Leica users on FM we'd see more street photography. Right now Joe is our only resident street photographer
joe88 wrote:
Not too sure about 70s but in the early 90s, when our "world" switched to digital and color because of what the editors and viewers wanted, many photographers had to abandon their film Leicas for Canon or Nikon.
I think it was when the SLR made its entrance that there was a large switch. For instance if you look at this (google book search):
Great rendering to your street shot! Really nice capture 
It may have to do Leica's heritage in photo journalism, where the richness of tones in B&W and colours, in shots from troubled areas around the world just gave that extra realism and feeling. 
