carstenw
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.58 #18 · Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread | |
(Re. 35L)
denoir wrote:
I think you would find quite a few people that would strongly disagree with that. Me included - I've had it and it's a very good lens. My objection against it is the same I have against the 35 summilux asph - flat rendering and soft uninteresting bokeh.
Well, having just viewed a very large number of 35L shots, I can safely say that the tendency to double-boke which I find so horrendous is something it most definitely does not share with the 35 Lux ASPH, which is one of my most used lenses of all time. The 35L also has a tendency towards flat colours, but perhaps that is the Canon cameras, not the lens.
I know that you like boke with life, and that you like high-contrast lenses, and that is perhaps why you should *not* buy a Leica. That is the Zeiss philosophy, not the Leica philosophy. If you cannot make your peace with a calmer, less obtrusive boke and more neutral contrasts, then definitely do not buy a Leica. The 50 Lux ASPH is very, very special, and I can imagine you liking that lens, regardless of your opinion of the rest. I would lump the 90AA in with the 50/1.4A, but not everyone agrees with me. The 90AA also has tremendous sharpness and beautiful boke. Some people love the 75/2A, but for me, this one is a little sterile, so I never got it. At the lower reaches, you might like the 21 Lux or 24 Lux, or even the 24 Elmarit, but then, you might prefer the ZM25.
One trouble with evaluating Leica glass is that for some reason there is an inordinate amount of crap photos in the dedicated Leica forms. (...) I'm sure I'm not the only one that has noticed this (h00ligan mentioned it a couple of pages back as well), but I don't really have a clue why that is. Any theories?
I have more than a theory. I used to spend huge amounts of time over there, and back in the day, it was every bit as good as the Alt forum here. It ended though.
The Leica camera is a system quite different to almost every other system. It has a huge folklore, massive history, myth, legend, and a long lineage of top photographers using it. The Leica owner is far, far, far less likely to be a forum-browsing pseudo-geek like us than almost any other camera owner. After the initial release of the M8, there was a golden age over in the Leica forum, but after about a year, it waned, and never really returned. There are a few very talented people who used to post in the forum, and a great number of mediocre ones, just like here or most places. Most of them left, or simply stopped posting, myself included.
At some point, the place changed. First of all, I think of a Leica M as a Leica M, but the forum was split into film, M8 and M9, which to me is just wrong and really not helpful. I complained but was ignored. The split focuses entirely on the technical side and completely ignores the photo side. Posting images in the technical forums is also actively discouraged, and so art has been separated from science, further dividing the community. Threads examining specific lenses were moved from the M8 and M9 forums to more general forums. Here, everything mixes, Canon, Nikon, Leica, Sony, etc., and images with tech, which is very stimulating, but it is still primarily a forum for tech-heads and geeks, not for hard-core photographers. Internet forums will always be like that.
Anyway, the M8 struggled against the negative reviews it had received, and eventually the M9 solved most of the problems with the M8, and then the floodgates started slowly opening. The problem is that it is a very expensive camera, and talent and money don't often come together. Anyone can buy a 550D or a D3000 and start shooting, and many with a high degree of motivation do start this way, and work their way up. With the Leica, only the rich or extremely dedicated can play. This reduces the size of the pool of talent somewhat. There was a great influx of well-off people who bought M9s and suddenly fancied themselves HCB. The arguments increased, the same old questions were posted again and again, and things got dreary. The technical level dropped a couple of notches at the same time.
Most of the best Leica photographers are also not really forum members, because they are too busy. There are still many Magnum members who use Leicas, and so on, but they don't hang around there.
I also have to say that while there are some very good photos posted here, there is also a very distinct Alt-sensibility, and an Alt-look. Shots posted here would not be well received everywhere. Many of the shots posted here are essentially test shots taken to artistic extremes, such as boke shots, sharpness shots, colour shots, bench shots, and so on. Anyone who hangs around here for a long time will feel their taste slowly changing. I went for a walk with Bernie in a cemetery the other day, and every once in a while one of us, usually me, would exclaim: "here is an Alt shot!"
Focusing through range finding is interesting but the focus patch is smaller than I thought. Although I don't wear glasses, I don't have perfect vision so it may be an issue unless I add a diopter to the viewfinder. The focusing wasn't very intuitive to me but I'm pretty sure that's just a question of practice.
It is, but it is also a question of taste. The fact that you could learn it doesn't mean that you would enjoy it. This is one reason I never recommend that anyone get a Leica M cold turkey. The sharpness of the focusing area is extremely sensitive to the correct diopter, btw, so I would get a camera set up for you before judging it finally. A perfectly set up rangefinder with a good lens will deliver results which provoke a "Wow!" even on the shitty little screen on the back. The screen is dim and low-res, but it reproduces colour better than a D3 or 5DII.
|
I love the Zeiss look, but sometime it is really nice to return to the subtlety of Leica. It lets the subject dominate, rather than the rendering.
