fredmiranda.com

Moderated by: Fred Miranda

New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site

New Feature: SMS Notification alert

New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist

FM Forums | Leica & Alternative Gear | Join Upload & Sell

1 2 3 … 70

72 … 2749 2750 end

Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread

charles.K
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.71 #1 · Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread

Thank you Luka! Yes, you are right

I must say it has improved since having the M9

Oct 26, 2010 at 07:23 AM

carstenw
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.71 #2 · Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread

I didn't realize that the ZM lenses had a bump. I will have to check it out. I am thinking of getting either the ZM18 or ZM21 anyway, so that will give me an opportunity to do so.

If you insist on tight framing in camera, I guess stitching is not an option. However, if it would allow you to carry 3 instead of 4 lenses, could it not be worth it? Simply compose in your mind, then shoot two overlapping shots with enough space to stitch and crop. Anyway, just an idea.

Oct 26, 2010 at 08:59 AM

adamdewilde
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.71 #3 · Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread

carstenw wrote:
Using this DoF calculator with an M9:

http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html

the numbers look very different (don't forget that the DoF is proportional to the distance squared):

75/1.4 @ 80cm: 8.7mm
75/2 @ 70cm: 9.3mm
90/2 @ 100cm: 13.5mm
50/1.4 @ 70cm: 15.4mm
50/0.95 @ 100cm: ?
50/1.0 @ 100cm: 22.8mm

Where did you get yours from?

I am not sure anyway that measuring at minimum focusing distance is an interesting thing to do. The reproduction ratios of these are wildly different. Let's say that a portrait is interesting with a 75mm lens at 2m. The equivalent distance for 50 would be 1.33m, and for 90mm about 2.4m, all at the same reproduction...Show more →

jhapeman, carstenw, thank you guys for the explanation.
I was only really wondering because I seen the shot of the boxer that was done to promote the M9 and it was shot with a Noct.95 and I really liked the shallow DOF, so was wondering in the M world, what lenses work out to giving you the shallowest DOF at given distances (assuming that you're going to stand at different distances with differed focal lengths).

So ideally the 50 1.4s and below are ideal, followed by the 75 1.4, that's kinda what I thought, but I wasn't sure if the 75 1.4 would give you better results considering it's a 75 with pretty close focusing.
Guess one could consider the 50 nokton 1.1 or even the 75 1.8 as someone mentioned.. I've not seen many 85ZM photos, I'll have to take a look, but I guess my heart is set on a Noct.95 my wallet just couldn't handle the stress.. So I'm thinking maybe try the 50 nokton 1.1 or just get myself a 50lux pre-asph (if I got the asph I'd probably feel the sticker shock to much to ever dare a noctilux).

Anyway thanks for the help, saves me from having to test all the lenses again at the shops...

Best,
Adam

Oct 26, 2010 at 09:07 AM

adamdewilde
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.71 #4 · Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread

carstenw, take a look at denoirs ZE posts... You'll quickly realize stitching haphazardly just wouldn't work for him

Oct 26, 2010 at 09:09 AM

kidtexas
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.71 #5 · Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread

Adam - just make sure to check the minimum focus distance on whatever lenses you end up looking at. If you want the smallest DOF, for example, a 50/1.1 that only focuses down to 1m might have more DOF than a 50/1.4 at .7m.

I specifically say this because many of the 50/1.4 pre-ASPHs only focus down to 1m. The last batch did go down to .7m, but they usually cost a fair bit more on the used market. When I was looking for one, I just ended up buying a 50 ASPH - at the time, it was only about $800-900 more than pre-ASPHs were going for.

Oct 26, 2010 at 09:18 AM

kidtexas
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.71 #6 · Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread

carstenw wrote:
Yes, the ZM glass is not as good as the ZF/ZE glass, in general. Specifically, the 21, 35 and 50 options are not as good.

Interesting. I guess the zero distortion on the 35/2 and the very small distortion on the 21/2.8 (especially compared to the ZE 21's complex distortion) doesn't factor in to the equation?

Also, from what I've read the ZE 50 doesn't 'shine' at shorter focal distances. I've not head similar complaints with the ZM 50/2.

The ZM lineup as a whole might not be as sharp or have as much contrast as the ZEs, but in my mind, it's incredibly balanced, more so than most other lens lineups. Sharp enough, very well controlled distortion in almost every lens, an appropriate amount of contrast, and great colors.

Not trying to be argumentative, just curious to know what people think. I come from the rangefinder side of things, whereas many here come from the SLR side.

Oct 26, 2010 at 09:32 AM

carstenw
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.71 #7 · Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread

adamdewilde wrote:
carstenw, take a look at denoirs ZE posts... You'll quickly realize stitching haphazardly just wouldn't work for him

I see his photos

I don't mean that he should stitch haphazardly, but simply set up, focus, and then one-two shots in quick succession. It only wouldn't work with motion.

Oct 26, 2010 at 10:13 AM

carstenw
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.71 #8 · Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread

kidtexas wrote:
Interesting. I guess the zero distortion on the 35/2 and the very small distortion on the 21/2.8 (especially compared to the ZE 21's complex distortion) doesn't factor in to the equation?

It is an interesting point, but it is relatively rare that the mustache distortion prevents someone from getting a nice shot with the ZF21, I would say, although it is a complex type of distortion, and difficult to correct. Far more important is the look, and this is where the Zeiss DSLR lenses seem to shine above the ZM compatriots.

Also, from what I've read the ZE 50 doesn't 'shine' at shorter focal distances. I've not head similar complaints with the ZM 50/2.

I presume you mean ZE50/1.4, not 50MP. There are multiple options here. The ZM50 could not focus closer than 70cm, like all M lenses, so maybe that is why you haven't heard that

The ZM lineup as a whole might not be as sharp or have as much contrast as the ZEs, but in my mind, it's incredibly balanced, more so than most other lens lineups. Sharp enough, very well controlled distortion in almost every lens, an appropriate amount of contrast, and great colors.

Not trying to be argumentative, just curious to know what people think. I come from the rangefinder side of things, whereas many here come from the SLR side.

I agree with your sentiment, btw, which is also why I like the Leica M lenses so much. They are not as flashy and punchy as the Zeiss alternatives, but have a very subtle, quality look, and very uniform characteristics and colours across the lineup. However, Luka is a Zeiss child

Oct 26, 2010 at 10:17 AM

kidtexas
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.71 #9 · Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread

carstenw wrote:
It is an interesting point, but it is relatively rare that the mustache distortion prevents someone from getting a nice shot with the ZF21, I would say, although it is a complex type of distortion, and difficult to correct.

One could argue that the difference in sharpness between the ZF21 and the ZM21 never prevented someone from getting a nice shot either

I presume you mean ZE50/1.4, not 50MP.

Yes that is true. I was referring to the 50/1.4.

And obviously the ZM lenses don't compete on focusing closer than .7m. Just like the ZE lenses don't hold a candle when it comes to over size.

I agree with your sentiment, btw, which is also why I like the Leica M lenses so much. They are not as flashy and punchy as the Zeiss alternatives, but have a very subtle, quality look, and very uniform characteristics and colours across the lineup. However, Luka is a Zeiss child

Indeed. I have a mix of Zeiss, Leica, Cosina, and other lenses. It's good to mix and match. I really enjoyed my ZM 35/2 when I had it and the 21/4.5 is killer. I would have been quite happy with the 21/2.8 too, and would be interested in the 25 if I wasn't already perfectly content with my lens at 28mm. There are some great lenses in this line.

Though I do feel like some of the newer Leica designs are pursuing sharpness at the cost of distortion, and speed at the cost of lens size. In my experience, compared to Leica, the Zeiss ZM line gives up some speed, a bit of sharpness, and a bit of size, all in return for affordability (yay!) and distortion control. It's a balance I'm ok with.

Oct 26, 2010 at 10:33 AM

adamdewilde
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.71 #10 · Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread

carstenw wrote:
I see his photos

I don't mean that he should stitch haphazardly, but simply set up, focus, and then one-two shots in quick succession. It only wouldn't work with motion.

I know, I just liked the way the conversation was headed

Oct 26, 2010 at 10:48 AM

adamdewilde
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.71 #11 · Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread

What about the CV line?
A long long time ago, when I had an M8 I ran up and down NYC with a 35 1.4 and a 50 1.5 (that was a good vacation).
And on film Bessa R3a(?) I had the 15cv, 35cv, 50cv, 75cv and loved them all.. Though hated the 50 1.5 on a M8!

I'm asking because I don't really like wide angle and it probably wouldn't be worth it for me to buy a 28cron, but I'd like a 28, so would the Ultron 28/2 be worth buying?

That and, since I'm not buying a Noctilux anytime soon, would a Nokton 1.1 be a decent solution?
Keep in mind I have the 50cron for walk around small lens work.
And a 90 2.8 to tie me over till a good deal on a 75Lux or 90cronAA comes around.

Best,
Adam

Oct 26, 2010 at 11:05 AM

kidtexas
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.71 #12 · Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread

The CV line is good stuff. I have the 28/3.5 and the 15/4.5. Both great lenses. I would use the 28/3.5 more if I didn't have a 28 Summicron. Which goes to show you what I think about having more than one lens at the same focal length. Despite my best intentions, it's mostly a waste - I hardly ever take the slower 28 out with me.

While I wouldn't turn down a free 50/1.1 or a Noctilux, the Noctilux is just too damn expensive and the 50/1.1 doesn't really appeal to me. The gain in speed from f/1.4 doesn't justify the bulk for me.

Again, its good stuff, you just need to figure out what kind of shooter you are and where you want to put your money. I personally don't like the 35, 50, 75 trio and think it's way too close. I'm much happier with 28, 50, and 90. Which is why I sold my 35.

Oct 26, 2010 at 11:25 AM

adamdewilde
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.71 #13 · Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread

Yeah, I'm more oldschool like that.. 28, 50, 90 would be my preference.

To sum it up:
1) 28CV or 28cron (ones $600, other is $3,000)? Do both fit in slim jeans pocket? And if I did buy the 28cron I'd have to give up on the idea of getting either the 50lux and 90AA for now... But will eventually own them (if I keep the M9).

2)Keep 50cron and add 50 1.1 (for that shallow dof look) or sell 50 cron buy 50lux-asph (and forget about f/1.1)?

3)I have 90 2.8 tele-elmerit and it fits in the pocket, is selling it and giving up portability worth the 90AA? (I'm looking for shallow DOF for portraits, and sharpness). Also keep in mind my 90 seems to give off a vintage vibe that I don't always like, though for a lot of applications it's kinda neat.

Read my thoughts if your'e bored, but the above sums it up.
It's just that I've been thinking about the 50Lux-asph which isn't much more then the pre-asph and it's really damn expensive if you think about it. I might as well cough up the extra couple of K and get myself the noctilux f/1. and just forget about the 90AA

Honestly, the only real reason I like the M9 is two fold.
First, it's small so I'm not uncomfortable taking it everywhere (took the 5DII ZE combo everywhere sometimes hated it). Which I guess is a strike against something like a f/1 or 1.1 lens because of the size/weight.

Second, the M9 is overlooked by most unwilling/willing subjects, they really don't seem to care if I take photos of them, and some people actually smile at me when I take photos of others. Then it gives me the opportunity to ask them if they'd mind a photo, and most so far have said yes. Something they don't do with my DSLR. The 50Lux shouldn't change this, but a f/1.1 or wider lens may!

For studio use, outdoor location shoots, event work... I don't think that my M9 will ever replace my DSLR, I couldn't even stand using a MFD for outdoor location magazine work (mind you I loved the quality). It's just when I'm working I need something that just... works. And has no quirks.

So with that said, I was thinking I could probably get by with just a 50, but would also like to have a wide angle lens that can fit in my jeans pocket. And perhaps a portrait lens (which I typically think should be something 50mm++).
Though everything but the 90 2.8 (which I have) is to big to fit in my jeans pocket (I wear straight leg to slightly slim jeans). And although I like the 90 2.8 it's an older design and it's a bit to oldschool for me sometimes. Oh and all the other 90's I've tried defiantly won't fit in the pocket.

The 28cron would honestly be a casual shooter type lens, as again I'm not to keen on wide angle photography (well not keen enough to pay $3k ). So would the Ultron 28/8 CV be sufficient? Would it fit in the pocket?

Then that leaves the 50, keep the cron and get the 50 1.1 for the times when I want shallow DOF portraits. Or sell the cron get the 50lux and just stop bitching

I guess now I'm kinda talking out loud.

Thanks guys.. And more samples would be great, especially if anyone uses the 28/2 (either summicron or CV).

Oct 26, 2010 at 12:06 PM

kidtexas
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.71 #14 · Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread

The 28 Summicron is smaller than the 50 Summicron, about the same diameter (if I recall correctly) but shorter. It does have a big hood, but the lens itself is pretty small. It's my favorite lens, but I really like the focal length.

I've not used the 28 Ultron myself, but I've heard rumblings of it having focus shift which can be a real pain in the butt for a digital shooter. How true that is, I don't know. It looks like a good value for the money, though if you can handle a slower lens, the 28/3.5 is tiny and reasonably priced. Also maybe the Hexanon 28/2.8.

When I had the 50 Summicron, I decided I wanted a faster 50 and picked up a Nikkor 50/1.4 for real cheap. It was a lot of fun (still have it) but too old school for regular use for me. f/1.4 was too inconsistent as well; I wanted a different fast 50. I ended up selling the Summicron and some other SLR lenses to fund a used 50 ASPH and i haven't looked back since. Fantastic lens. I'd much rather have it than a 50 Summicron + 50/1.1. That's close to 2k right there (or more). It's bigger than the 50 Summicron, but not awkwardly large.

If 50 is your primary focal length, and you like the look of the ASPH and don't want more 'character' (i.e. pre-ASPH 50), I would highly recommend the lens. Possibly the only one you'd need.

I personally wouldn't put any of these lenses in my jeans pocket. Once the rear cap is on, it'd be too bulky for me. I'd rather put them in a small bag.

As for 90's, I have the 90 macro. f/4 is fast enough for me and I like that it collapses. I toyed with the idea of getting a 90/2, either APO or pre, but I can't really justify them. They are big lenses so I'd probably just leave them at home most of the time. Anyway, when I need the extra stops, 99.9% of the time I'm going to go for a 50/1.4. It's more hand holdable (worth about a stop in my book) and is also stop faster than f/2. But that's just me. I'd be much better off picking up a Canon 135/2 L for much cheaper.

Oct 26, 2010 at 12:42 PM

denoir
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.71 #15 · Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread

carstenw wrote:
I see his photos

I don't mean that he should stitch haphazardly, but simply set up, focus, and then one-two shots in quick succession. It only wouldn't work with motion.

It's not quite that simple. When I compose a shot I have typically multiple elements that need to be aligned to form the composition. A simple example would be a standard rule of thirds composition with one element being in the upper left third and the other being in the lower right third. One element may be out of focus. Even with such a simple composition it is difficult to know at what angle you should shoot to get the relations between the elements correct. When doing it optimally (tripod + live view) I usually have to move around the tripod quite a bit as well as adjusting height and the angle of the ball head a dozen times or so before I'm ready to take the shot. Typically I also shoot a couple of versions. The operation is way too complex and gradual to visualize beforehand. Also the change of angles and position of tripod makes it a 3D operation that can never be reproduced by a 2D crop from a stitched image.

Stitching with wide angles is never good because of perspective distortion. Unless you do a perfect nodal pan the parallax error will be atrocious. It's difficult enough with tele lenses (I've done some stitching with panos taken with a gigapan pro).

Of course, not all my shots are planned. The majority are actually snapshots where the composition is done quickly. Still, I like to have the choice of doing a careful composition available.

carstenw wrote:
I agree with your sentiment, btw, which is also why I like the Leica M lenses so much. They are not as flashy and punchy as the Zeiss alternatives, but have a very subtle, quality look, and very uniform characteristics and colours across the lineup. However, Luka is a Zeiss child

A couple more shots from yesterday and today:

To eliminate any doubt that the 35/2 is a thoroughbred Zeiss lens I offer this shot

Oct 26, 2010 at 01:04 PM

rsolti13
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.71 #16 · Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread

Luka - #2 and #3 are excellent!

Oct 26, 2010 at 01:19 PM

shaunmlavery
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.71 #17 · Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread

Denoir,

That 3rd one, whoa. Nice.

Here are a few that I scanned in a few days back...

M6 35 Cron ASPH

Oct 26, 2010 at 04:09 PM

carstenw
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.71 #18 · Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread

adamdewilde wrote:
Yeah, I'm more oldschool like that.. 28, 50, 90 would be my preference.

That is exactly what I have: 28 Cron, 50 Lux ASPH and 90AA. I want to get either 21 Elmarit ASPH or ZM21, but haven't decided yet. Then I am set. I currently also have a CV15, 35 Lux ASPH without (much) focus shift (chrome), and 75 Lux, but once I upgrade my M8u to an M9 chrome or M10, I will sell both and be done. The CV15 is too much of a hassle, needs CornerFix, and although it is quite okay, I find I don't use it.

For the 28, it is really a question of preference. The 28 Elmarit ASPH is very sharp and somewhat contrasty, more like a ZM in that respect, and the Cron has more of a traditional Leica rendering, but in the typical ASPH way, i.e. with minimal CA, distortion, etc.

The 50 I think (personally) is beyond question: the 50 Lux ASPH is awesome, the 50 Lux pre-ASPH merely great. The pre-ASPH has a little CA and slight veil wide open, more like a good copy of the 75 Lux. The 50 Lux ASPH is as near to perfection as I have seen in a 50, and it has a beautiful look.

The 90s are trickier. I love the 90AA, and find it has a little magic in it. The 75 Cron was too sterile for me. I have not tried the 90 Elmarit, it is supposed to be excellent, but at 90mm, I prefer a larger opening, since I need the light to compensate for the higher focal length and handshake. The pre-ASPH is a very similar compromise to the pre-ASPH 50, perhaps not quite as good as the 50.

If you like the (recent) traditional Leica rendering, then the 28 Elmarit pre-ASPH, 50 Lux pre-ASPH and 90 Cron pre-ASPH would be a tremendous set, and very affordable in comparison.

The Nokton 1.1 has failed to impress me. I was very interested until I saw the first results from it. The boke is very tricky to get smooth, there is no 3D, and a lack of contrast and punch. By all rights, if it were a truly great lens, everyone should have bought one, but it remains a specialty, a bit like the CV35 f/1.2. And it is big and heavy.

The 28 Cron would fit in a jeans pocket, if the jeans are loose. The 50 Lux ASPH would be a squeeze, and the 90AA would burst the seams. The 90AA is not a large lens, but it is a large M lens.

Oct 26, 2010 at 04:56 PM

carstenw
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.71 #19 · Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread

kidtexas wrote:
As for 90's, I have the 90 macro. f/4 is fast enough for me and I like that it collapses.

I had this one, thought it was the one for me, but was wrong. The boke is really nice, very smooth, and the lens is sharp, although not as sharp as the 90AA. For my latitude, f/4 is just too slow, and the M8 was not a camera which I could compensate with ISO for that, so I traded it 1:1 with a 90AA.

But that's just me. I'd be much better off picking up a Canon 135/2 L for much cheaper.

You could fit your entire M kit inside the 135L, including Leica M9 and three lenses

Okay, not the M9, but the three lenses. And the 135L has more CA than the three Leica lenses combined

The 135L is sharp, but to me it has no character. I think the 135L and some other famous L lenses are to Leica lenses what Luka thinks Leica lenses are to Zeiss lenses: boring boke, characterless. Go for the M!

Oct 26, 2010 at 05:00 PM

carstenw
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.71 #20 · Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread

denoir wrote:
It's not quite that simple. When I compose a shot I have typically multiple elements that need to be aligned to form the composition.

Well, if you don't want it to work, it won't work

I respect Leica lenses and I'm very impressed by the consistent technical perfection. As far as raw optical performance goes Leica glass is usually superior to Zeiss. However as far as personal preference goes, I really don't like Leica rendering style. It's difficult to describe in words but I find the rendering to be too 'thick, too 'syrupy'. It lacks the edge and the crispness of Zeiss rendering. The one exception is the noctilux whose rendering style I find just amazing.

That is a nice way of describing the difference, except that the Leica look doesn't lack edges, as much as they are lower contrast. That can be good, it can also be bad. Horses for courses.

I disagree about the Noctilux from what I have seen so far, unless you mean the 50/1. I find the new one a bit too neutral (and much too expensive). The old one has a neat, hard-to-tame look which can be very special. I would love to own one, but honestly, the 50 Lux ASPH is so good I am not sure when I would use the Noct.

Very nice demonstration of the 35 Biogon, by the way.

Oct 26, 2010 at 05:03 PM

1 2 3 … 70 71 72 … 2749 2750 end
FM Forums \| Leica & Alternative Gear \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 … 70 71 72 … 2749 2750 end