Makten wrote: Paul Yi wroteIf you're not limiting yourself of buying them new, you could get them pretty quickly...
I bought M9, Cron 28, Lux 50 ASPH, and 75AA in about 2 weeks....Good luck with that in Sweden! The market here is very limited and I don't want to use Ebay.
I'm currently selling my used Summicron 28. If you are interested, please send me a personal message.
denoir wrote:
Hmm, not easy to find an image at a high shutter speed (to eliminate camera shake as a source of blur) shot at f/2 and infinity. At that point I stop the lens down.
Exactly. I've only had the lens for two weeks and probably never shot it at anything faster than 1/125. Still I can't find one single image at infinity that is really sharp, even at f/5.6. Could of course be camera shake, I don't know.
seekuh wrote:
I'm currently selling my used Summicron 28. If you are interested, please send me a personal message.
I already have one of those. My "problem" is whether I should get a 35/1.4 ASPH or the 50. If I get the 35 I will get rid of the Summicron. There is a used one for sale locally for ~70% of the retail price. But it's of course the older version, from 2002.
Makten wrote:
I already have one of those. My "problem" is whether I should get a 35/1.4 ASPH or the 50. If I get the 35 I will get rid of the Summicron. There is a used one for sale locally for ~70% of the retail price. But it's of course the older version, from 2002.
It's the first ASPH, right (i.e not the 2011 updated one but the one before that)? That's what I have - mine is from 2010 and it was a deliberate choice of getting it over the 2011 FLE version. The reason is simple - it has IMO a much nicer rendering (less harsh bokeh and nicer sharpness to blur transitions). It's not that simple however - the 35 Lux ASPH v1 suffers from focus shift and whether it falls within DOF depends on the sample you get. What Leica considers to be within specification can range from it being not noticeable to being a big problem. I had the luck to find a copy where the shift was well within DOF at all apertures. If you can't find such a copy then the newer FLE may make more sense.
As for 50 Lux ASPH vs 35 Lux ASPH, my answer would probably be neither.. It's a real waste to use those lovely lenses on a crop camera. So I'd say - get an M9. As for lenses, 35 Lux if you can pull it off - otherwise a Zeiss 35/2 ZM would perhaps be a good starting point and then at a later time change it to a 35 Lux ASPH.
For a one-lens-kit on FF, the 35 Lux ASPH is definitely the best choice. For two lenses, I'd say the 28 Cron and the 50 Lux ASPH. The latter is probably the best lens I've ever used - it's in a league of its own. I think however three lenses are the sweet spot for flexibility/portability and 28/50/90 is a good combo.
Makten wrote:
Exactly. I've only had the lens for two weeks and probably never shot it at anything faster than 1/125. Still I can't find one single image at infinity that is really sharp, even at f/5.6. Could of course be camera shake, I don't know.
Sounds like the rangefinder needs to be calibrated. It's easy to find out:
1) Put the camera on a tripod
2) Set focus to mechanical infinity
3) Pull back focus in small steps, taking an image between each step
Then review the images - if you find a sharp frame then it's the rangefinder. If you don't then it's the lens.
It's inconvenient and frustrating but it usually takes some time to get a kit calibrated. It is however definitely worth it. The RF and lenses calibrated and a correct diopter (if you need one) makes a huge difference. These days I never miss focus when shooting stationary subjects - never - not even with the 90 @ f/2. That kind of certainty really allows you to enjoy the photography and not worry about trivial technical issues such as correct focus.
denoir wrote:
It's the first ASPH, right (i.e not the 2011 updated one but the one before that)? That's what I have - mine is from 2010 and it was a deliberate choice of getting it over the 2011 FLE version. The reason is simple - it has IMO a much nicer rendering (less harsh bokeh and nicer sharpness to blur transitions).
Yes, that's the one. I haven't even seen examples from the newer one, but it seems impossible to get anyway.
It's not that simple however - the 35 Lux ASPH v1 suffers from focus shift and whether it falls within DOF depends on the sample you get. What Leica considers to be within specification can range from it being not noticeable to being a big problem. I had the luck to find a copy where the shift was well within DOF at all apertures. If you can't find such a copy then the newer FLE may make more sense.
As for 50 Lux ASPH vs 35 Lux ASPH, my answer would probably be neither.. It's a real waste to use those lovely lenses on a crop camera. So I'd say - get an M9. As for lenses, 35 Lux if you can pull it off - otherwise a Zeiss 35/2 ZM would perhaps be a good starting point and then at a later time change it to a 35 Lux ASPH....Show more →
The plan is to get an M9 before buying more lenses. My D700 and ZF lenses are for sale, but I don't expect them to be sold in a rush. People aren't very interested in expensive MF lenses, as you might know.
I've also got a nice Summicron-C 40/2 that seems to focus correctly on the M8, so that might do fine on an M9 as well.
For a one-lens-kit on FF, the 35 Lux ASPH is definitely the best choice. For two lenses, I'd say the 28 Cron and the 50 Lux ASPH. The latter is probably the best lens I've ever used - it's in a league of its own. I think however three lenses are the sweet spot for flexibility/portability and 28/50/90 is a good combo.
I wish I was rich! Whatever I do, I have to take a small loan. The Nikon gear and the M8 should do for getting the M9, but then the lenses...
Makten wrote:
Sounds like the rangefinder needs to be calibrated. It's easy to find out:
1) Put the camera on a tripod
2) Set focus to mechanical infinity
3) Pull back focus in small steps, taking an image between each step
Then review the images - if you find a sharp frame then it's the rangefinder. If you don't then it's the lens.
If there's a calibration error, it's definitely the lens. The rangefinder patch lines up perfectly at the infinity stop and focus is spot on at all distances that are close enough to actually be able to see where sharpness rolls off in the image.
Now, if the infinity stop of the lens does not correspond to optical infinity, there will be an error that is larger the further away I focus. I think that was the problem with all of the Voigtländer lenses I tried on the previous M8.
It's inconvenient and frustrating but it usually takes some time to get a kit calibrated. It is however definitely worth it. The RF and lenses calibrated and a correct diopter (if you need one) makes a huge difference. These days I never miss focus when shooting stationary subjects - never - not even with the 90 @ f/2. That kind of certainty really allows you to enjoy the photography and not worry about trivial technical issues such as correct focus.
One good reason to stick with only one single lens.
I recently got a Leica x1 and took it with me to Athens and Pireas for two weeks. It is a very new experience for me, because I normally use the Nikon D700 with Leica-R lenses, but I wanted something small and practical with good IQ. Here are a few of the first pictures I took with the little thing:
1) A hip-shot of a woman in the market of Pireas, cropped
2) A fish-seller with marvellous blue eyes, also in Pireas
3) The mother of my friend in Pireas, a wonderful woman of 80 years, who is not only a nice person, but also a marvellous cook.
4) The famous symmetric Syntagma in Athens with the guards, who perform their miraculous choreography to the great entertainment of us tourists.
5) One of the thousands of grafitti that can be found all over Athens
6) The train-station at Pireas. Colours as they came out of the cam.
Makten wrote: denoir wroteIt's the first ASPH, right (i.e not the 2011 updated one but the one before that)? That's what I have - mine is from 2010 and it was a deliberate choice of getting it over the 2011 FLE version. The reason is simple - it has IMO a much nicer rendering (less harsh bokeh and nicer sharpness to blur transitions).Yes, that's the one. I haven't even seen examples from the newer one, but it seems impossible to get anyway.
Charles has the newest one and knows how to use it - check out his pictures for an idea of the rendering.
I wish I was rich! Whatever I do, I have to take a small loan. The Nikon gear and the M8 should do for getting the M9, but then the lenses...
Yes, I seem to vaguely recall a discussion where I tried to point this out (it's the lenses that kill your budget) but you disagreed and muttered something about CV lenses
What does help a bit is the supply situation - even if you are willing to go crazy with lens spending, you can't because you can't get buy them. Before I got into the whole Leica racket I bought on average a new lens each month. Exploring a new lens always gives me incentive to go out and shoot so it was a simple way of keeping up the interest in photography. However, while one lens per month was reasonable when we talk about Zeiss lenses and similar but I realized rather quickly that doing the same with Leica lenses was a good receipt for financial suicide.
The most damnable thing is that after a brief honeymoon with the lens when you explore its rendering and get to know it, you get used to it and take it for granted. I'm not amazed by the image quality of say the 50 Lux ASPH - I'm instead appalled by the rendering of lesser lenses. In short, you simply raise your own expectations. While giving it up is impossible, you don't appreciate it for what it is. Human beings are far more sensitive to differences than to absolute values - you notice when something is better or worse but you quickly get used to an absolute level and take it for granted.
Makten wrote:
Now, if the infinity stop of the lens does not correspond to optical infinity, there will be an error that is larger the further away I focus. I think that was the problem with all of the Voigtländer lenses I tried on the previous M8.
My 75 Cron had a problem with the mechanical infinity - it went a bit beyond it. Before I got it calibrated (three trips to Solms) I solved the problem by slightly pulling back the focus from the mechanical stop. Of course, if it doesn't reach infinity then it's a real problem.
One good reason to stick with only one single lens.
The trouble with Leica glass is that it's so diverse - even if you don't care a bit about having different focal lengths, you still want to enjoy the varied rendering of the different lenses...
denoir wrote:
Yes, I seem to vaguely recall a discussion where I tried to point this out (it's the lenses that kill your budget) but you disagreed and muttered something about CV lenses
The thing is, I would probably be happy with CV lenses (the 28/1.9 was fantastic optically) if I could get them to focus correctly.
What does help a bit is the supply situation - even if you are willing to go crazy with lens spending, you can't because you can't get buy them. Before I got into the whole Leica racket I bought on average a new lens each month. Exploring a new lens always gives me incentive to go out and shoot so it was a simple way of keeping up the interest in photography. However, while one lens per month was reasonable when we talk about Zeiss lenses and similar but I realized rather quickly that doing the same with Leica lenses was a good receipt for financial suicide. ...Show more →
Errrr, you must earn like five times more per month than I do. I was very happy with the 35/2, 50/1.4 and 100/2 for a long time. It was (and still is) only the size and weight that I don't like.
The most damnable thing is that after a brief honeymoon with the lens when you explore its rendering and get to know it, you get used to it and take it for granted. I'm not amazed by the image quality of say the 50 Lux ASPH - I'm instead appalled by the rendering of lesser lenses. In short, you simply raise your own expectations. While giving it up is impossible, you don't appreciate it for what it is. Human beings are far more sensitive to differences than to absolute values - you notice when something is better or worse but you quickly get used to an absolute level and take it for granted....Show more →
And we're obviously very different here as well. I want something that is as good as possible and I like the idea of only having one lens, so that everything about the photographing is up to me.
One reason for some lenses being off at infinity could be optimization for film rather than digital. Especially with lenses that are focus shifters, since the SA won't be seen as much on film anyway, so they don't have to reach infinity wide open.
If my financial little plan works, I'll buy the M9 tomorrow and we'll see what happens next.
denoir wrote:
Exploring a new lens always gives me incentive to go out and shoot so it was a simple way of keeping up the interest in photography.
Well, this is where I bring out *my* old harp, and repeat something I have said before: it should not be about the equipment anyway, but about the vision. Or, in my old words, you need a project you care about, and you will be able to forget about buying new lenses.
I am all for buying the best equipment possible, don't get me wrong, but when you get there, use it, don't look around for the next thing. After Zeiss lenses on a DSLR, and Leica M lenses on an M9, the next quality step would probably be medium format digital anyway, but the size would kill this idea.
I have been there with new lens incentive to shoot. It does foster a renewed energy. Problem with Nikon or Canon is, there's so many lenses, you get caught up in it, and before you know it, your bloated in equipment.
I got to a point where LESS is MORE. I just looked around one day and I had so much equipment with me, the fun was gone, it was just about being an equipment whore, and worrying about carrying it all, instead of about the photography. So, I refocused myself with Leica, to a less is more strategy. One nice thing about Leica, for me anyway, I figure I want 5-6 lenses tops, that's it, no more, but I can shoot a lot with less than that. I am at 4 lenses now, likely though if I get a 50 lux, one of mine goes now, so still at 4. The only other thing I might add is a 75 lux, maybe way later a noct, but that is outside chance at this point that I will spend that much. For sure, for me it's about quality, not quantity though. That is why I really stretched the budget to get a great wide lens in 24 lux. now I am done at wide end, 35 cron is a nice general photography lens, a 50 lux would be nice,but I have the 50 CV 1.1 for now. I also have a 90 Cron. (version 3)
Makten wrote:
And we're obviously very different here as well. I want something that is as good as possible and I like the idea of only having one lens, so that everything about the photographing is up to me.
Perhaps, but you have to admit that your rate of gear acquisition/change by far outstrips mine. While I have high standards for optical quality what usually attracts me to a lens is a specific rendering style.
As for having just one lens - there is a charm to it, but having multiple lenses doesn't exclude using just one for a while. Generally I don't favor to be limited by technology and although I usually shoot with one lens during a photo session, I prefer to have the option to switch. If I see a scene where where another lens will produce results that are more to my liking, I switch. It's not about focal length primarily but about rendering - I've on occasion gone out shooting with four different 35mm primes.
As for my general philosophy and how I choose lenses to us, I'll just copy-paste my response to a question about a travel kit:
denoir wrote: Ok, so now we get to the travel kit. There's not much to it - I pack as many of the lenses I like as will be convenient to carry. For the M9 it's usually a Domke F-803. If weight had not been an issue or if I had had a bunch of assistants carrying my gear for me then I'd take every lens and every camera system I own. That doesn't mean that I would necessarily use everything but it would not hurt to have it accessible should I want to use it.
I'm not more fond of carrying too heavy camera gear than the next guy. On my recent trip to the US southwest I had apart from the M9 and M6 a complete DSLR kit as well. I won't be bringing that along next time as I barely used it and it's difficult to justify the weight.
Alright, so say I'm on the trip at some interesting spot. I've got some interesting looking rocks in the foreground and majestic mountains in the background. It's the middle of the day. First I see some composition that I'd like to try and determine that a wide angle or ultra wide angle would work best. Since the light is harsh there's a risk of colors appearing washed out. There are no clouds in the sky and I risk getting a boring flat and too bright sky. My decision is simple - I pick the 28 Cron ASPH. Apart from being between WA and UWA so that it works with the composition I had in mind, it produces outrageous vignetting even at f/5.6 which helps a lot in keeping the sky interesting. Furthermore its color rendering is exceptionally strong so I reduce the risk of washed out colors. The MTF charts that I've looked at tell me that it produces a high micro contrast in the fine detail (40 lp/mm), which should bring out the texture of the rock quite nicely. I also know I should watch the edges as both the vignetting and a drop in micro contrast at all spatial frequencies will affect the image. It will create a more closed in space and give a more personal experience. And so on.
So I take the shot, or perhaps several shots until I get the framing exactly the way I want it. I keep the lens on the camera and look for other shots that would work well with the 28 Cron. After some time of using it I discover another potential shot that I'd really like to take but where another focal length would work better. Subsequently I switch to say the 90 Cron AA instead and start working on that shot with my knowledge of what to expect from that particular lens.
In short, I select a lens to work with and do so until I encounter a situation where I think another one would be more suitable and I switch.
You see why I can't really answer your questions. I don't pick my lenses for a travel kit based on artistic considerations - I pack as much as I'm comfortable carrying and make the decision about which lens to use on the spot in the field. Even if I have no problem using just one lens for a longer time I like to have choices available to me - especially since I may never get the opportunity again to photograph a certain place. ...Show more →
Makten wrote:
If my financial little plan works, I'll buy the M9 tomorrow and we'll see what happens next.
Cool
carstenw wrote:
Well, this is where I bring out *my* old harp, and repeat something I have said before: it should not be about the equipment anyway, but about the vision. Or, in my old words, you need a project you care about, and you will be able to forget about buying new lenses.
Projects are dull - being systematic is not my thing. As for what it's all about: it's a hobby so it's all about my own enjoyment. It's not about anything except what I want it to be about. What does it for me is the spontaneous excitement of finding a neat composition and overall visual look, the fun of exploring a new lens, the feel of the camera and a bunch of other things. I don't have any ambitions of creating a serious body of work and I do get bored easily so thematic projects are not my thing.
I am all for buying the best equipment possible, don't get me wrong, but when you get there, use it, don't look around for the next thing. After Zeiss lenses on a DSLR, and Leica M lenses on an M9, the next quality step would probably be medium format digital anyway, but the size would kill this idea.
The MFD sensors are still too small to interest me, but when 6x7 digital cameras will be available I'm sure to get one. For now I don't have any particular camera gear cravings - I don't really want or need anything more. The 0.95 Nocti could perhaps be interesting but I'm not interested enough in it to justify the expense. Apart from that I can't think of anything that I'd want right now. My last lens purchase was the 90 Cron AA and that was some five months ago.
There are some potentially interesting DSLR lenses, but I can't honestly see myself going back to using a DSLR on a regular basis. There are occasions when I do and it warrants keeping the gear that I have, but that's about it.
Wow, great concert shots Charles! If I was ready for one, and could get past Chrome, I'd be a prospect, but my M9 is black and I think needs black. But I have to get solvent from my 24mm before I consider something else anyway. The 50 lux is on my short list though.
My "problem" is whether I should get a 35/1.4 ASPH or the 50. If I get the 35 I will get rid of the Summicron. There is a used one for sale locally for ~70% of the retail price. But it's of course the older version, from 2002.
