denoir
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.88 #11 · Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread | |
carstenw wrote:
Why did you reduce the saturation? It looks like neither Zeiss nor Leica.
I think the Zeiss look is partly about contrast (Leica also has high micro-contrast, just lower overall contrast) and the dof transition, possibly including the edge effects that Brainiac was always bringing up. It works well to enhance photos, but if you don't want an enhanced photo, just what you saw, the Leica works better, IMO. The only aspect of reality that the Leica messes with is the foreground-background separation, which is stronger than in real life. It is quite a big change, actually, and maybe the reason why these window comments about Zeiss arise, but it has a subject-isolation effect stronger than the equivalent Zeiss, which includes more of the background in the image....Show more →
Carsten, what makes you think I wanted to emulate Zeiss? And clearly I did not want the Leica look or I would have left it as it is. The reason why I lowered the saturation is because I liked it better with lowered saturation. 
I agree with you on the strong foreground/background separation and less global contrast but not about the micro contrast. Although I have not shot any direct comparison shots my impression is that the 75 Cron has a much lower micro contrast compared to for instance the Zeiss 100 MP. I'll shoot some direct comparisons later and post them here.
charles.K wrote:
Luka, excellent shots! Despite the differences in perceived rendering, they are excellent shots. Looking as a third person, after the not seeing the original image, it is very difficult to make an assessement, as it is your vision, how you would like to see the images. Quite often, images that I initially shot, I passed by, but come back at a later date, and think OK, I like these. Carsten has some very valid points too
I feel you may be better suited to the ZM 85/2 lens, as this lens is really one of the best of the Zeiss lineup, and may match your perception and style....Show more →
Thanks Charles. The problem with the ZM 85/2, which I was very very tempted by (if nothing else then for the focal length) is that it's big and heavy. The 75 Cron is actually a tad too big for my liking. Apart from wanting to try a high end Leica, size was the primary reason why I ruled out the Zeiss.
sebboh wrote:
luka: i have to say i agree with you assessment of the leica (cron) look versus the zeiss look, but for people shots i think i like the leica look better (there will always be exceptions of course). i like the unprocessed version better too.
I have not shot any tightly cropped portraits with it yet, so I'll reserve my judgement there. I'm not happy about what I've seen of its rendering of skin color though - too much orange and too saturated. Having said that, I need to shoot more before I can say anything definitive.
I did my standard set of night shots yesterday night and I'm for the most part happy with the rendering and the colors.
First my standard car test shot. I've photographed this car with almost every lens I have so it has sort of become a standard benchmark. It is usually conveniently parked in the same place so I always end up photographing it. There is actually a much nicer old SAAB from the 60's and a Jaguar E-type in the neighborhood as well but where they park is much more random.
Comment: Not bad. Not much in the way of 3D pop but still a fairly competent rendering. FG/BG separation is good as are the OOF areas.
Ok, moving on:
Comment: Colors and details are excellent but very little depth in the image.
Comment: Solid rendering with a bit more depth.
Comment: I like the rendering here, very nice clarity. Almost Zeiss like
As always, the aperture in the EXIF for long exposures is always set to f/4, which is not correct. The first shot was at f/2 while the rest were at f/5.6-f/8.
|
