My lenses are:
- Summicron 2/28 ASPH.
- Summilux 1.4/50 ASPH.
- APO Summicron 2/90 ASPH.
But still working on the family
In the next couple of weeks I would like to get one more lens, deciding between the 135/3.4 APO, Summilux 21/1.4 or the Super Elmar 21/3.4.
Quite different lenses...I know!
The 135/3.4 I want because I like a lot to hike in the Alps and love to shoot on the summits where I can pic other summits in dusk or dawn.
The 21/1.4 I want because I was shooting with Nikon in the night alpine sights including the stars. I always used the 14-24/2.8 with f2.8 and ISO's up to 3200 with shutter speeds up to 30 sec.. With the M9P I am almost certain that I don't want to go higher then ISO 800. With a f1.4 it would be possible to realize a setting like with the Nikon. I don't want a longer shutter speed because I would like to avoid star trails. But I am a bit afraid of the purple and green color fringing with trees and sky or other high contrast scenes doing the day. Btw. I would love to have a DNG file with fringing to play with! Is there someone who can help me out?
The 21/3.4 I want because it is a perfect lens but with f3.4 and ISO 800 I would always get star trails
For the price of the 21/1.4 you can buy an M240 (if you can find one) and shoot at the higher ISOs using the 21/3.4, which is definitely a sharper lens across the frame than the 21/1.4. Might also be worth trying the Voigtlander 21/1.8, which past f/4 is difficult to distinguish from the 21/3.4 other than perhaps somewhat lower micro contrast. It has less CA than the Lux but it also has 'normal' field curvature, so it's possible the corners will be somewhat soft wide open at infinity. The 21 Lux also has some strange field curvature-like behavior, but more in the mid zone areas, especially when stopped down between 2.8-4. The other problem will be coma smearing towards the edges. In my 4-way 21mm lens review, I shot a dusk cityscape scene to check point light source characteristics and all of the lenses require until around f/4 to greatly reduce coma. Of course, for the 21/3.4, that's only a half-stop. There are high-rez Jpeg file download links towards the bottom of the page.
I really like the 21 Lux but its images are less technically perfect than the 21 SEM. For anything like landscape (urban or natural) I will invariably go to the SEM, especially if I want to place the subject off center at an aperture at or wider than f/5.6, unless I want shallow depth of field, or it's dark and I'm not using a tripod. For my uses, the Lux really is unique for near distance people photography, such as available light candids during events.
Peter, I agree with Ron, go for the 21/3.4 rather than the 21Lux for your landscape/night-scape shots. The 28-50-90 combo you have is fantastic and I'm sure you'll enjoy using those lenses on your trip.
I have been so busy with work lately and this tread has ben flying Sorry I haven't posted comments in a while but I have been pushing the like button. There has been some amazing work posted the past few pages.
Taylor Sherman, thanks for your opinion. I think CA would be not much of a problem with the stars? But for sure doing the day, at least in my intended use. 28mm is for that special task for my taste in many situation just to tight. It also gets more difficult to avoid star trails with a 28mm lens.
joe88, thanks for your opinion as well.
rscheffler, thanks for the link! I will take defiantly a closer look...
If I summ up all my "thinking" the last couple weeks, I believe that the 21Summilux is a hell of a lens which I would like to have. But with my passionate landscape interests, just the wrong lens. In my case the amount of money would be not spend wisely.
If I browse through my archive the 135/3.4 is the lens I should give the priority first.
And the 21/3.4 will complete one day the family.
Regarding of the new M Type 240, I was actually since 6 month on a list but have canceled my order, although I believe that the camera is great. But to me the M9, M9P, MM and the ME are the last of it's kind, with all the pros and cons. Since the change to Leica was more a emotional decision and since I like my MP so much I believe this is the right way for me personal. The M Type 240 to me is a start of a "new" M area. I will skip this generation but likely will jump on the band wagon with the next generation. But I always would like to keep the MP and the M9P even if it is just for passion and emotional reasons.
There was also two things that troubled me with the M Type 240:
1. if you raise the ISO it changes the longest exposure time! At ISO1600 you have only 8sec. ..... Thats what at least I heard
2. that it is not possible in live view to move the loupe around and therefore have always to recompose the shot
Hopefully they correct those two points via firmware!
Open house at a newly started farm, a lot of people there and the main interest was geared against the cows and a pair of automatic milking machines. M9 with ZM 50 Planar and ZM 25 Biogon.
Nice shots guys.
Muc, Ocasionally shooting film, I can totally understand your position on M9P. If you treat it as film camera with digital back, all complain of M9 will be gone, maybe leave highlight headroom....
Joakim, I like that Cow portrait.
Here are two horse portrait with film, M3 with 35cron V1 and tri-X400
Two similar landscape photos but with different PP done, the secod one is a single exposure an I intently left it with a blue tone because of the dramatic clouds and it was at sunset. The other one is taken directly afterwards but is a blend of two exposures where I processed each exposure individually, maybe to much of a HDR effect because of this. Opinions?
This is all Zeiss, second one with 25 Biogon and first one with 18 Distagon.
Edit: I replaced the first photo with a new version so now they come in the opposite order. Text updated. In case you wonder why I write about them in the opposite order
Nice Joe, glad to see your quest for the 35/1.8 has been fulfilled!
Excellent set, Allen!
Very nice Michael and Scott.
Joakim - very fun and love the cow portrait.
Regarding your last post above, I don't mind the look of the first one except for the attempt to retain detail in the central trees breaking the skyline that results in an odd transition and halos. I'd probably feather that more by darkening the trees somewhat. And the ground is perhaps slightly too light. At this time of day, it feels odd to see the ground appear to be brighter than the sky without some indication of direct sunlight. The second image feels more natural to me.
Joakim, beautiful cows The last cow portrait is really cool. Excellent second set as well, #2 & 4 are my favorites, love how you captured the special moment of the hands of the girl and man in #4. ZM50P and M9 produces some really excellent B&W tonality. On the two landscape shots, I still can't figure out which was the blended exposure, my guess is the shot with the gate? I prefer the gate one as I can immediately identify the main subject (gate?) and there is nice diagonal lines leading from the foreground to background. The red edge does shows up on #1 quite noticeable. #2 looks slightly underexposed to me and I would probably brighten and enhance the rocks in the foreground to make it stand out more?
Michael, excellent set with Tri-X, really like the 1st shot!
Ron, thanks. Not sure if the quest for my 35mm lenses will ever end. 5CronV1 and 35Lux pre-ASPH remains intriguing They are all so different. The W-Nikkor is very interesting, its rendering kind of reminds me of the older 35Crons, very "lush and full" Double Gauss smoothness. What is most impressive is that this lens was released in 1956, two years prior to launch of 35 Summicron V1 in 1958. In my opinion, the 1950s lens superiority clearly belongs to the Japanese As for the w-Nikkor 35 1.8, approx 8000 lenses were released and out of that, around 1800 for LTM (quoting R. Rotoloni Nikon Rangefinder History). Some additional info on the lens can be found here http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/nikkoresources/RF-Nikkor/RF35mm/index2.htm
