Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
p.301 #1Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
Thanks Charles 
Nice shot and pretty girl! Nice work for a 1/12s exposure!! I actually prefer the 35Lux over the 50Lux for low light work as I can get away with a lower shutter speed.
Nice shot and pretty girl!
Nice work for a 1/12s exposure!! I actually prefer the 35Lux over the 50Lux for low light work as I can get away with a lower shutter speed.Jun 11, 2011 at 08:29 PM
NikkorAIS
Offline
Activity
[X]
Details
p.301 #2Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
Charles, Stunning work. Thanks for sharing.
Gregory
Gregory
Jun 11, 2011 at 11:37 PM
p.301 #3Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
50/asph/lux
i thought i saw a .....
i thought i saw a .....
Jun 12, 2011 at 12:39 AM
p.301 #4Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
charles.K wrote:
Joe, thank you Appreciate the comments! Excellent set of shots. Love the composition in all, and the PP is great. My fav here is #1
Shot with the 35 Lux:, at f/1.4, 1/12 sec at iso 1250 I really don't know why you need higher iso, as you can barely focus at this light level!
very nice shots Charles--but in all honesty, she would look great even taken with my cellphone camera
Joe - Love that airplane picture!
Joe, thank you
Appreciate the comments! Excellent set of shots. Love the composition in all, and the PP is great. My fav here is #1Shot with the 35 Lux:, at f/1.4, 1/12 sec at iso 1250
I really don't know why you need higher iso, as you can barely focus at this light level!very nice shots Charles--but in all honesty, she would look great even taken with my cellphone camera
Joe - Love that airplane picture!
Jun 12, 2011 at 12:53 AM
p.301 #6Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
Charles, good portrait of that girl and an impressive shutter speed.
Joe, I love the fourth photo because of the guys pose and how is right arm and the extended handle is parallel to the shadow line on the wall.
LL, good photo with nice use of negative space.
Joe, I love the fourth photo because of the guys pose and how is right arm and the extended handle is parallel to the shadow line on the wall.
LL, good photo with nice use of negative space.
Jun 12, 2011 at 01:40 AM
p.301 #7Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
AhamB wrote:
Note that Boris did the test on his NEX-5. I don't know how different the designs of these two lenses are, but perhaps the lack of off-set microlenses in the NEX-5 sensor is more critical with the ZM25? The NEX-5 doesn't even show the true corners of these lenses...
I repeated the test today with my M8 und you were right that the result of the last test had something to do with the characteristic of the NEX imager. On the M8 the corner sharpness of the ZM25 is much better. Here are some examples at f/4.0 (100% corner crop):
ZM25:
Elmar 24:
If you compare the file sizes (as a rough estimation of resolution/sharpness) of the JPG-images (converted from LR with identical settings) between the two lenses at different appertures you get this result:
Highest overall resolution is at f/5.6 with both lenses and the difference between the two lenses is small.
Boris
denoir wrote
Boris, thanks, interesting test and observation. I'm not surprised by your 18mm comparisons but I am by your ZM 25 / Elmar 24.I repeated the test today with my M8 und you were right that the result of the last test had something to do with the characteristic of the NEX imager. On the M8 the corner sharpness of the ZM25 is much better. Here are some examples at f/4.0 (100% corner crop):
ZM25:
Elmar 24:
If you compare the file sizes (as a rough estimation of resolution/sharpness) of the JPG-images (converted from LR with identical settings) between the two lenses at different appertures you get this result:
Highest overall resolution is at f/5.6 with both lenses and the difference between the two lenses is small.
Boris
Jun 12, 2011 at 03:53 AM
p.301 #8Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
Today I also tested most of my 46mm filter. I used my M8 with the Elmar 24 at f/5.6 and the same white wall from the ZM/Elmar test above. Here is the result of the JPG file sizes:
As you can see there is a resolution difference between the filters, but this difference is very small. There is no visible (sharpness) difference between no filter and the MRC UV-filter and the difference between no filter and the Cokins is just visible at 100%.
Boris
As you can see there is a resolution difference between the filters, but this difference is very small. There is no visible (sharpness) difference between no filter and the MRC UV-filter and the difference between no filter and the Cokins is just visible at 100%.
Boris
Jun 12, 2011 at 04:31 AM
p.301 #9Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
I finally got my first test roll of Velvia 50 shot with the Leica M2 and the Nokton 50/1.5 from the lab and managed to scan the roll yesterday. As I already assumed some posts ago, scanning the slides is a great relief compared to the negatives. No stupid color casts (the lab I use now is phantastic), great saturation, you get what you expect without fiddling around in PP.
Now, as Luka and me did our little sharpness test, trying to find out what maximum resolution and sharpness you can get out of a 24 x 36 negative, here is one of the first test shots after I got the Nokton.
This image is straight out of the scanner, only white balance adjusted slightly in LR. Absolutely NO sharpening, NO clarity added, LR settings to zero, even NO sharpening after resizing for web.
What do you think?
Metal Smiley by pictorlucis, on Flickr
100% crop:
Metal Smiley by pictorlucis, on Flickr
Now, as Luka and me did our little sharpness test, trying to find out what maximum resolution and sharpness you can get out of a 24 x 36 negative, here is one of the first test shots after I got the Nokton.
This image is straight out of the scanner, only white balance adjusted slightly in LR. Absolutely NO sharpening, NO clarity added, LR settings to zero, even NO sharpening after resizing for web.
What do you think?
Metal Smiley by pictorlucis, on Flickr
100% crop:
Metal Smiley by pictorlucis, on Flickr
Jun 12, 2011 at 05:36 AM
p.301 #10Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
Thanks LL, Joakim
Charles, the 75Lux portraits are really nice. You've probably convinced me that if I get a 75mm lens, it will be the Lux rather than the Cron! Also, nice set with the 28Cron!
LL, super sharp portrait of the cat, very nice!
John, great lighting! Very nice!
Boris, thanks for sharing! Interesting results with the filters test.
Heinz, the results from the Velvia scan looks good. What resolution of scanning/scanner was used?
Charles, the 75Lux portraits are really nice. You've probably convinced me that if I get a 75mm lens, it will be the Lux rather than the Cron! Also, nice set with the 28Cron!
LL, super sharp portrait of the cat, very nice!
John, great lighting! Very nice!
Boris, thanks for sharing! Interesting results with the filters test.
Heinz, the results from the Velvia scan looks good. What resolution of scanning/scanner was used?
Jun 12, 2011 at 07:11 AM
|
p.301 #11Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
Nice work Charles. I really like these.
Jun 12, 2011 at 08:35 AM
p.301 #12Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
Charels, great shots. The 75 Luxified monk and the girl on the bench are my favorites
Nice composition with the cat LL.
Boris, thanks - interesting that the M8 & NEX produce so different results. File size is not a reliable metric as a measure of information though as the compression algorithm optimizes away a lot of stuff based on a simple model of what is most noticed by the human eye. The ZM 25 is probably more contrasty which means that the algorithm will clip black levels more.
Heinz, cool velvia shot. Excellent colors!
--
So, I've been doing some comparisons between the 90 Cron V3 and 90 AA the last two days. This is probably the most ambitious lens test I've ever made.
=====================
Resolution
=====================
To counteract rangefinder focusing errors, each shot has been focus bracketed (4 shots) and the sharpest one was picked.
Near/at infinity, apertures f/2, f/2.8, f/4, f/5.6, f/8 & f/16
::Zone A
::Zone B
::Zone C
-----------------
Middle distance, apertures f/2, f/4, f/5.6, f/8
::Zone A
::Zone B
::Zone C
---------------------
Close distance, apertures f/2, f/5.6 & f/8
::Zone A
::Zone B
::Zone C
======================
Bokehlisciousness
======================
All shot at f/2. Open the images in separate tabs in your browser and flip between them.
--------
Blur series. The shots were taken at fixed focusing distances of 1m, 2m, 4m & 7m.
1m:
-Cron V3 - 1m
-Cron AA - 1m
--2m:
-Cron V3 - 2m
-Cron AA - 2m
4m:
-Cron V3 - 4m
-Cron AA - 4m
7m:
-Cron V3 - 7m
-Cron AA - 7m
----
Flower
-Flower, Cron V3
-Flower, Cron AA
----
Branches
-Branches, Cron V3
-Branches, Cron AA
----
Bench
-Bench, Cron V3
-Bench, Cron AA
======================
Apochomaticity
======================
Test chart, apertures f/2, f/2.8, f/4 & f/5.6
============================
Purple fringing in highlight areas, f/2, f/5.6:
==================================
Summary: Well, you can draw your own conclusions. I must admit I was surprised. The difference in raw optical performance, especially at larger apertures was greater than I expected. At the same time the difference in out of focus rendering and bokeh is smaller than I expected. Also, a bit surprising is that the AA is no better than the V3 at elminating certain types of CA.
You might have noticed that there is a definite difference in temperature between the lenses. The white balance has been equalized but a noticeable difference remains.
Nice composition with the cat LL.
Boris, thanks - interesting that the M8 & NEX produce so different results. File size is not a reliable metric as a measure of information though as the compression algorithm optimizes away a lot of stuff based on a simple model of what is most noticed by the human eye. The ZM 25 is probably more contrasty which means that the algorithm will clip black levels more.
Heinz, cool velvia shot. Excellent colors!
--
So, I've been doing some comparisons between the 90 Cron V3 and 90 AA the last two days. This is probably the most ambitious lens test I've ever made.
=====================
Resolution
=====================
To counteract rangefinder focusing errors, each shot has been focus bracketed (4 shots) and the sharpest one was picked.
Near/at infinity, apertures f/2, f/2.8, f/4, f/5.6, f/8 & f/16
::Zone A
::Zone B
::Zone C
-----------------
Middle distance, apertures f/2, f/4, f/5.6, f/8
::Zone A
::Zone B
::Zone C
---------------------
Close distance, apertures f/2, f/5.6 & f/8
::Zone A
::Zone B
::Zone C
======================
Bokehlisciousness
======================
All shot at f/2. Open the images in separate tabs in your browser and flip between them.
--------
Blur series. The shots were taken at fixed focusing distances of 1m, 2m, 4m & 7m.
1m:
-Cron V3 - 1m
-Cron AA - 1m
--2m:
-Cron V3 - 2m
-Cron AA - 2m
4m:
-Cron V3 - 4m
-Cron AA - 4m
7m:
-Cron V3 - 7m
-Cron AA - 7m
----
Flower
-Flower, Cron V3
-Flower, Cron AA
----
Branches
-Branches, Cron V3
-Branches, Cron AA
----
Bench
-Bench, Cron V3
-Bench, Cron AA
======================
Apochomaticity
======================
Test chart, apertures f/2, f/2.8, f/4 & f/5.6
============================
Purple fringing in highlight areas, f/2, f/5.6:
==================================
Summary: Well, you can draw your own conclusions. I must admit I was surprised. The difference in raw optical performance, especially at larger apertures was greater than I expected. At the same time the difference in out of focus rendering and bokeh is smaller than I expected. Also, a bit surprising is that the AA is no better than the V3 at elminating certain types of CA.
You might have noticed that there is a definite difference in temperature between the lenses. The white balance has been equalized but a noticeable difference remains.
Jun 12, 2011 at 08:41 AM
p.301 #13Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
Gary and Luka, thanks guys
Luka, wow...thanks !! What a great comparison test of the 90 Cron's You mentioned there is a definite difference in colour temp between the lenses also. If I am taking a lens, it is usually the 90 AA. But I do find the 90 V3, is easier to focus, probably different focus throw.
Luka, wow...thanks !! What a great comparison test of the 90 Cron's You mentioned there is a definite difference in colour temp between the lenses also. If I am taking a lens, it is usually the 90 AA. But I do find the 90 V3, is easier to focus, probably different focus throw.
Jun 12, 2011 at 08:58 AM
p.301 #14Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
denoir wrote:
Boris, thanks - interesting that the M8 & NEX produce so different results. File size is not a reliable metric as a measure of information though as the compression algorithm optimizes away a lot of stuff based on a simple model of what is most noticed by the human eye. The ZM 25 is probably more contrasty which means that the algorithm will clip black levels more.
Luka, you are of course right that the file size is no scientific measurement for contrast/sharpness/resolution, but in my experience these number correlate very good with the visual impression.
I would bet with you, that the JPG file sizes (setting max quality) of your 90 AA images are in nearly all situations higher than the file sizes of your 90 V3 images. And I would also bet, that the file sizes of images shot of the same subject (and same framing) with the Cron 28 are smaller than the file sizes shot with your ZM25.
If anybody want's to see the crops of the filter test I can post them, but 10 nearly identical crops of a white wall can look very boring ;-)
And thanks for your interesting test with the 90s.
Boris
Boris, thanks - interesting that the M8 & NEX produce so different results. File size is not a reliable metric as a measure of information though as the compression algorithm optimizes away a lot of stuff based on a simple model of what is most noticed by the human eye. The ZM 25 is probably more contrasty which means that the algorithm will clip black levels more.
Luka, you are of course right that the file size is no scientific measurement for contrast/sharpness/resolution, but in my experience these number correlate very good with the visual impression.
I would bet with you, that the JPG file sizes (setting max quality) of your 90 AA images are in nearly all situations higher than the file sizes of your 90 V3 images. And I would also bet, that the file sizes of images shot of the same subject (and same framing) with the Cron 28 are smaller than the file sizes shot with your ZM25.
If anybody want's to see the crops of the filter test I can post them, but 10 nearly identical crops of a white wall can look very boring ;-)
And thanks for your interesting test with the 90s.
Boris
Jun 12, 2011 at 10:35 AM
p.301 #15Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
When comparing the bench shots, it looks like the AA has some barrel distortion, and the V3 has much more noticeable vignetting. I slightly prefer the V3 rendering in that shot, slightly more pop...
Jun 12, 2011 at 11:31 AM
p.301 #16Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
Joe: Awesome set!
John Black: Stunning capture!
Luka: Interesting comparison
John Black: Stunning capture!
Luka: Interesting comparison
Jun 12, 2011 at 11:46 AM
p.301 #17Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
I did another comparison today between my ZM lenses and their Leica Elmar counterparts. All shots with my M8 at f/5.6. This is the test subject, focus was on the nearest flower:
And here are the full-size images to draw your own conclusions:
25 ZM
24 Elmar (without in-camera correction)
24 Elmar (with in-camera correction)
18 ZM
18 Elmar (without in-camera correction)
18 Elmar (with in-camera correction)
Short summary: the differences between the ZM and Elmar lenses are again very small. In my opinion the Elmar 24 is slightly better (mainly sharpness and bokeh) than the ZM25 and the ZM18 is slightly better (mainly color, contrast and center sharpness) than the Elmar 18, but in a print you probably won't see these differences.
Boris
And here are the full-size images to draw your own conclusions:
25 ZM
24 Elmar (without in-camera correction)
24 Elmar (with in-camera correction)
18 ZM
18 Elmar (without in-camera correction)
18 Elmar (with in-camera correction)
Short summary: the differences between the ZM and Elmar lenses are again very small. In my opinion the Elmar 24 is slightly better (mainly sharpness and bokeh) than the ZM25 and the ZM18 is slightly better (mainly color, contrast and center sharpness) than the Elmar 18, but in a print you probably won't see these differences.
Boris
Jun 12, 2011 at 02:38 PM
p.301 #18Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
Interesting Boris. Have you use the same white balance in the shots?
Based on those images, I agree with your general assessments.
AhamB wrote:
When comparing the bench shots, it looks like the AA has some barrel distortion, and the V3 has much more noticeable vignetting. I slightly prefer the V3 rendering in that shot, slightly more pop...
Yes, I was a bit surprised by the increased barrel distortion myself.
Based on those images, I agree with your general assessments.
AhamB wrote:
When comparing the bench shots, it looks like the AA has some barrel distortion, and the V3 has much more noticeable vignetting. I slightly prefer the V3 rendering in that shot, slightly more pop...
Yes, I was a bit surprised by the increased barrel distortion myself.
Jun 12, 2011 at 03:37 PM
p.301 #19Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
joe88 wrote:
Heinz, the results from the Velvia scan looks good. What resolution of scanning/scanner was used?
Joe, thanks. As always I am using my Minolta Dimage Scan Multi Pro and scanned at 4800dpi.
Thank you Charles and Luka.
Charles, your street shots are getting more and more magic. I really love them.
Luka, thank you for that test. It is amazing how much sharper the AA is.
Heinz
Heinz, the results from the Velvia scan looks good. What resolution of scanning/scanner was used?
Joe, thanks. As always I am using my Minolta Dimage Scan Multi Pro and scanned at 4800dpi.
Thank you Charles and Luka.
Charles, your street shots are getting more and more magic. I really love them.
Luka, thank you for that test. It is amazing how much sharper the AA is.
Heinz
Jun 12, 2011 at 03:42 PM
p.301 #20Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
denoir wrote:
Interesting Boris. Have you use the same white balance in the shots?
No, the camera was set to AWB and I did not changed this in LR.
Here are some smaller images with manual WB set to the same value:
ZM 25:
24 Elmar (without in-camera correction):
24 Elmar (with in-camera correction):
18 ZM:
18 Elmar (without in-camera correction):
18 Elmar (with in-camera correction):
Interesting Boris. Have you use the same white balance in the shots?
No, the camera was set to AWB and I did not changed this in LR.
Here are some smaller images with manual WB set to the same value:
ZM 25:
24 Elmar (without in-camera correction):
24 Elmar (with in-camera correction):
18 ZM:
18 Elmar (without in-camera correction):
18 Elmar (with in-camera correction):
Jun 12, 2011 at 03:57 PM