charles.K wrote:
Adam, interesting question! I think this will depend on the lens design, and how you wish to shoot. The 35 Lux Asph II, is very nice. Fast and sharp, almost too much so, yet most cases it should not distort too much, in portrait mode. Maybe the 35 Cron, is better from a design perspective, as the lens diameter is smaller at max aperture, and less likely to distort the perspective, when you aren't completely parallel with your subject. The 35 Cron Pre IV is very nice too
Charles, nice shots.
Yeah, I was thinking about lens design, and you're probably right about that, as the 28 Elmarit is better then the 28cron, and the 50cron is better then the 50lux. So likely that the 35cron will be better in that sense.. But is it the best? Does the 50 beat it in that respect? Do any of the ZM lesnes beat the 35cron??
Maybe there's an MTF chart that can give us a definitive answer.
zhangyue - Yeah you're right, you do have to be careful. But honestly, some lenses allow you to be less careful then others. Like the 35/2 ZM, you can get away with that stuff more then you can with even the 50cron, or so it seems from my shooting.
Adam, for portraits shooting portrait orientation, I really like the 50 Nocti f/1.0 and Lux Asph. I always focus and recompose, and my keepers have fortunately improved with practice. The 35 Lux Asph II, I do find I have to be careful as it is easy to distort the face, even though the increased DOF should make it easier to focus and recompose.
Couple more shots from yesterday with M-M 24 Lux and LR4
Thanks Charles. Keep those mono shots coming, really nice set and deep rich blacks on those rocks! I'm seeing banding on ISO 5000 without any adjustments on some shots, not all. but even as I complain, I'm impressed with shooting up to ISO2500, files are really clean and detailed.
Adam, excellent set of wedding pics! No Leica M9 shots? BTW, I don't notice much distortion with my 35 FLE. Not sure about the ZM 35 as I don't have one to compare. But it could be interesting for you to test both lenses and see if the have the same field of view perspective, ie, what is the true field of view angle? Both might be 35mm but from my experience, not every lens in the same focal lenght gives the same field of view. Could be due to design, could be due to length of lens/distance of imaging circle to sensor. For instance, my CV 35/2.5 has a narrower field of view compared to my 35FLE and the CV probably feels more like a 37 or 38 and that could give an impression of less "distortion", but its all relative.
Joe, thanks for the kind words. I'll be attending a friends wedding next month, so I'll try and shoot some frames of the bride before the wedding starts (I'm sure at the annoyance of their photographer, oh well). For work however, I have very little time to pull out the M, so I just don't bring it with me. Although I'm probably going to use it a bit more in the studio just to see how my lenses working at f/11
As far as the 35FLE is concern, I found that on the 35lux-asph that it was worse then the 35/2 ZM, so I'm kinda curious which of the two lenses would be better, 35FLE or 35cron-asph. I didn't actually think about the actual FOV, I forget about these things, but you're right, that would affect the overall image.
Good to know you don't notice much distortion. Do you notice that the point of focus changes considerably if you recompose? As I mentioned, a few lenses are worse offenders then other in this area the 50lux being one of them, even if I stop down to f/2 it's still worse then the 50cron and prototype.
Charles, I'm surprised you're able to recompose with the 75lux and 50noct... Seems like two of the toughest lenses to get a handle on as far as that's concern.
Oh one more thing..
Sometimes I see black and white photos that look black and white, sometimes they look like they have a blue tint and sometimes like they have a brown tint.. Lately 90% of the images I've seen from the MM have a brown tint.. Is there a reason for this? Shouldn't they all just be black and white?
Joe, thank you I am still getting grips with the PP'ing as there are so many variables. I am finding testing and adjusting the curves, definitely non linear, is getting some interesting results. The exposure for landscapes tends to be underexposed, so as to not burn the highlights, so the curves have to be adjusted accordingly. I am recording both dng + fine jpegs, and testing the different presets on the M-M. My logic here that a lot of thought much have gone into getting these jpegs correct. I find when I view the files in LR4, the histograms are very different for the jpeg and dng.
Adam, loved those shots from the wedding! Even it was not a M9 Seriously, with the onslaught of new cams at Photokina, the choice for great cams is going to be endless The new Sony, almost looks to be a Leica killer!
Yes B&W should be from the M-M, should be pure B&W But I have used toning, probably stronger than what I normally use. I'm just keeping it consistent for now. But with printing B&W, the papers I use tend to be warm, and it is the look I prefer is usually a hint of toning. I am not convinced with the toning how it is translating from my screen in LR4/CS6 to how it is appearing on my website, and then in different forums. I need to look more closely at the color management here, as this would need to be sRGB for the raw DNG M-M files, whereas I normally use ProPhoto for the M9
Thanks Charles, BTW, the Sony RX1 had me excited for 10 seconds. When I realized it was a fixed lens camera I gave up hope. It would be awesome if Leica surprised us with an EVF FF interchangeable camera that looked as pretty as the X2. I actually don't mind how the NEX7 and M lenses work together, now if it could be like that in FF glory I'd be set.
Pure B&W good to know. Was just curious because I've seen a lot of images that weren't. Was wondering what the deal was. As i thought it was only black and white, hence no color information, but then I got to thinking maybe not, because a lot of the time I shoot black and white on my M9 and when I load the files into lightroom they're either blue or brown.
Another shot just PP'd, with a slightly different technique, from the other afternoon with M-M and 24 Lux, just LR4 It would interesting, to have tested some different colour filters here.
Nice Charles, I'm thinking that the MM might be a bit to sharp for web viewing, you lucky MM owners
Another really random question, does anyone remember Milich with his 6-bit coded mounts that you could unscrew your own and screw his down. Does he have a website? I'm thinking of buying a non-six bit lens at a good price, and wanted to swap out the mount for a coded mount (without having to wait 2+ months for Germany to do it).
Adam, thank you Yes, the M-M has some amazing detail in the files!
With respect to 6 bit coding, I have a number of lenses without, such the 75 Lux, 50 Nocti f/1.0. All I do is set up a user 1 or 2 for those lenses. With 6 bit coding be careful, as a minor adjustment to the collar, can affect the calibration of the lens.
Another version of the country side shot with the M-M 24 Lux, with different PP'ing in LR4 for comparison, and very similar to the last shot
I think M-M needs handling similar to BW film. Simply color filters in front of lens. Cause Silver Efex cant mimic them without having color photo at first place.
Thanks for the welcome Adam, Charles.. unfortunately, the noctilux wasn't mine.. I borrowed it from the Leica akademie that I attended in NYC over the weekend.. I loved the nocti so much that I'm saving for one now .. the MM @ high ISO is lookin great Charles!! Might have to save for an MM too if you keep posting these MM shots !!
No filters...yet! I have them on order, so I am waiting patiently to try them out. 
Seriously, with the onslaught of new cams at Photokina, the choice for great cams is going to be endless 
