That's surreal. I wish I could justify the expense and use it to potential! To me it looks like an oil painting green screen to the bg. Really well done, I like it a lot.
zombii wrote:
As it turns out, today offered a good opportunity to do the comparison I was talking about. In this case, the color rendition was very similar. Both images are raw conversions in Lightroom with default settings. Now the jpegs from the M8 were very different with decidedly yellow/orange clouds.
Sorry for the interruption Paul. This is all I have about this.
First image is from the M8 using a ZM 24. Second is from the 5D2 with a Summicron 35.
This difference of WB from different manufacturers of camera, in this lighting is normal. The 5DII does render better, in comparison without adjustment, but in difficult lighting I would always shoot RAW, and maybe have a white ref pt.
Excellent shots psquared. The sharpness of those two lenses wide open is the only legitimate argument I can see for their exorbitant price. Stopped down even to f/2, the pre-ASPH versions are super sharp and only give up anything appreciable wide open.
Nice shots psquared. I like the bokeh on the #1. What shutter speed were you using?
I find with M9, I can use about 2/3 of the 1/FL rule for shutter speeds now. With the 5DII, I would need to use about 1.5 times the 1/FL, to avoid any camera shack.
Nice side-effect of the Rangefinder design, people who look at you when you take the picture don't look like they're staring down the barrel in the resulting shot.
zombii wrote:
Excellent shots psquared. The sharpness of those two lenses wide open is the only legitimate argument I can see for their exorbitant price. Stopped down even to f/2, the pre-ASPH versions are super sharp and only give up anything appreciable wide open.
Thanks, Rod.
Totally agree. I like the drawing of other lenses as well, but I'm very happy with these ASPH versions.
