LL, thanks Very nice shots
KL, No lights, just by a window with a white transparent curtain with a reflector. Yes great model to work with. I think the model, camera model that is was a Nikon F1!
Luka - Nice shots. I like #1 best. It looks like you had to pull a lot of detail out of those shots. Am I dreaming or on?
LL - Like the 75 Cron shot. The more I see from this lens the more I like. The OOF area is very nice....very 50 Lux ASPH-like
Charles - I am also in awe with KL that no artificial light was used. The lighting is so good I too would have guessed that strobes or something were used. Very nice. All shots are very nice...#3 is my favorite. I think a little more contrast would also make them pop even more
I was looking into film emulating filters for LR3 to use. I ran across x-equals film filters which emulate several types of film including various fuji, kodak, etc. What a difference, I realize now that my normall pp sucks. First shot was my processing and the second was a fuji (don't remember exact film) preset I downloaded
rsolti13: Superb shots, I certainly would not mind having that cron
lovinglife: Stunning portrait!
charles.K: Great set of portraits. I like the last one alot!
Leica M2 + Cron 50 + Velvia 50
1.
2.
Recently returned home from trip to Prague, Czech Republic. So justed mailed the films I shot there! Hopefully there will be some goodies. But I am not expecting anything special since beer was dirt cheap
Regarding my Lux 50 I got the answer from my dealer that the behavior of my Lux is normal and that the soft corners/edges are the result of field curvature. Since this is very difficult to confirm on a RF I put my Lux on my Nex5 and made some more tests focusing with lifeview and 14x zoom directly on the corner (and after this on the center as a comparison). The result was, that the Lux 50 has at least on a crop camera no significant FC. There was no difference between the images focused on the corner and on the center.
At the same time I tested also the 25ZM for FC. This lens has at MFD a very strong FC, which is reduced significantly at longer distances (>2m).
I still have the question whether the behavior of my 50 Lux Asph is typical or nor.
My dealer says yes, but I'm not 100% convinced. At least I had expected at bit more from this lens (maybe also due to the fact that this is the most expensive lens I've every bought).
Here are the 100% corner crops from my test today (Nex5, focus on the corner), keep in mind that these are the corners from a 1.5x crop-camera, so on a M9 these are not nearly the corners: f/1.4 f/2.0 f/2.8 f/4.0 f/5.6 f/8.0
What do you think? Should I return this lens or not?
Could someone with the same lens do the same test and post some 100% corner crops at different apertures?
Ryan, excellent series. Great colors. My favotrite is the last shot - I really like the composition.
As for the color corrections in image 1 & 2, I'd say #2 is a bit overcooked, so I think the optimum would be somewhere between those versions.
Malkovic, nice shots
--
Boris, you'll have to ask somebody with a NEX or another camera with live view to perform the test. I could do it on the M9, but first of all there's the different crop factor (although this could be cropped in post) but more importantly there's the inaccuracy of rangefinder focusing. Without live view there is no way of guaranteeing that the focus is spot on and comparable.
If those were crops from a FF camera, I'd say that the lens could be OK, but on a 1.5x cropper, I don't think so. If this was a lens available in stock, I'd return it. In the case of the 50 Lux ASPH, I'd estimate if I could live with it for a while. If I could, I'd wait and send it off to Leica at some point in the future. I'm guessing that if you return it, you won't find another one for a couple of months.
Bobu wrote:
At least I had expected at bit more from this lens (maybe also due to the fact that this is the most expensive lens I've every bought).
I don't think you should worry about that part too much. Is there any lens that you've purchased that you were not initially disappointed with? I seem to remember you being quite displeased with the Zeiss 50 MP & Zeiss 35/2 initially.
denoir wrote:
Is there any lens that you've purchased that you were not initially disappointed with? I seem to remember you being quite displeased with the Zeiss 50 MP & Zeiss 35/2 initially.
Yes, for example ZE21, 100MP, 24TSE, 17TSE. If I have to pay a lot for a lens, I also expect a lot. Is this wrong?
By the way I really like the 50MP now but I'm still not 100% sure about the 35ZE.
Bobu wrote:
Regarding my Lux 50 I got the answer from my dealer that the behavior of my Lux is normal and that the soft corners/edges are the result of field curvature.
I don't know the specific issues with your lens or what your expectations are, but looking at the MTF charts for the 50 ASPH do show a pretty large drop in contrast in the far corners. At most apertures. Field curvature sounds like a logical explanation for this behavior.
Personally, I have this lens and love it. I never really pixel peep the photos I get with it though (kind of hard to do on film). That fact is probably directly related to the fact that I'm very happy with it...
Yes, for example ZE21, 100MP, 24TSE, 17TSE. If I have to pay a lot for a lens, I also expect a lot. Is this wrong?
By the way I really like the 50MP now but I'm still not 100% sure about the 35ZE.
No, not at all wrong, but it can take some time to get to know a lens. MTF charts are usually the best predictors that will give you an idea of how it will perform but they represent a rather limited test. Plus they typically only provide information about performance at infinity. The best way of seeing if you like a lens is simply to take hundreds of photos with it.
The case with the 50 Lux ASPH is of course a bit different since you have relatively good reasons at this point to think that you got a defective copy.
kidtexas wrote:
I don't know the specific issues with your lens or what your expectations are, but looking at the MTF charts for the 50 ASPH do show a pretty large drop in contrast in the far corners. At most apertures. Field curvature sounds like a logical explanation for this behavior.
On full frame yes, but he is using a 1.5x crop camera..
Very nice shots from the past few days: Luka (love the 75Cron shot with the runner), Charles (love that 75Lux and the model, um pro photog..!), Ryan (28Cron stuck on your camera? beautiful shots ), Carsten, (finally contributing some pics! ), KL, Gregory, Ron, Max (those Abu Dhabi shots are really stunning!), LL and everyone else.
Ryan, like Luka, I was going to say that the second one is overcooked, and would guess that the preset was for Velvia, which looks something like that. You could study the technique it uses and try to achieve the same result, and then try to hit for a nice point somewhere between the two.
Ryan, like Luka, I was going to say that the second one is overcooked, and would guess that the preset was for Velvia, which looks something like that. You could study the technique it uses and try to achieve the same result, and then try to hit for a nice point somewhere between the two.
Carsten, I agree looking now. I blame it on my tired eyes last night..... . I do think somewhere in between looks good. It was just eye opening seeing how dull my images look next to some of these presets. One major thing I need to work on is pp....frankly I suck compared to some of you guys.
Thanks for the comments Charles, Malkovic, Luka, Gregory, Joe! Joe, the 28 has been GLUED!
As you can see there is definitely a difference between the large and small apertures, but I think less than in your shots.
The standard disclaimers when it comes to rangefinder focusing applies - I can't 100% guarantee that the focus was dead on. I'd be very surprised if the f/1.4 shot was perfectly in focus as it's nearly impossible to perfectly align the camera so that it is perpendicular to the flat subject. When it's near MFD as in this case, DOF is ridiculously thin.
Very nice shots
