Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
p.974 #1Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
Welcome Philip - beautiful images!
Robert - I have the 1.4x magnifier and while it can help, I found it was much more useful to get a diopter correction eyepiece, if needed (which I did need). When the RF is properly calibrated, the double image 'pops' to form a clear one at the correct focus point, which is more noticeable if you have good eyesight, or use the correct eyepiece. For those with more complex eyesight correction requirements, there have been good reports about the Walter RX eyepiece, but I haven't yet tried this myself.
The problem I have with the 1.4x is that I end up spending more time fussing over focus. And because I tend to change lenses a lot, it's a hassle to go through the stages of removing the correction eyepiece from the camera, attaching the 1.4x magnifier, attaching the correction eyepiece to it, then reversing the process. In this respect, the EVF and live view capability of the M240, even if somewhat primitive compared to current live view cameras, does a much better job.
Therefore, my suggestion, based on my experience and discussions we've had here, is to find the right correction eyepiece and practice shooting with the 90, a lot. I also focus bracket slightly, when in doubt.
Adam, that's interesting about the 75AA vs. 90. While I haven't been a huge fan of 75mm just because I found it so similar to 50, I could see myself using it for weddings instead of a 50 and 90 because I tend to work relatively close to the subjects anyway. For many weddings I rarely shoot longer than 85mm. But for this, I'd probably want the 75 Lux. My statement about finding the 90AA relatively easy to focus was for a centrally placed subject. I've noticed that when wide open at near minimum distance, that focus & recompose can be a bit off with it, and that the lens may not be that great off center. Seems to be less of a problem at farther distances.
As for onion rings... I can provoke them from the 50 Lux ASPH too. It has to be a bright, distant pinpoint light source. Perhaps worth noting that the 85L is also an 'ASPH' lens. Looking at the Leica and Canon block diagrams for each lens, it looks like the aspherical element is similarly positioned. And Canon state it's a ground and polished one in this lens, rather than the more commonly found moulded type.
Maybe some day I'll compare it at f/2 against the 90, but offhand, the 90 appears better corrected against 'oof fringing' which I can see in the full rez in the 85L image above around the black text on the card. The 90 seems to do it too, but very, very slightly.
Here are some more 90AA test shots…
Robert - I have the 1.4x magnifier and while it can help, I found it was much more useful to get a diopter correction eyepiece, if needed (which I did need). When the RF is properly calibrated, the double image 'pops' to form a clear one at the correct focus point, which is more noticeable if you have good eyesight, or use the correct eyepiece. For those with more complex eyesight correction requirements, there have been good reports about the Walter RX eyepiece, but I haven't yet tried this myself.
The problem I have with the 1.4x is that I end up spending more time fussing over focus. And because I tend to change lenses a lot, it's a hassle to go through the stages of removing the correction eyepiece from the camera, attaching the 1.4x magnifier, attaching the correction eyepiece to it, then reversing the process. In this respect, the EVF and live view capability of the M240, even if somewhat primitive compared to current live view cameras, does a much better job.
Therefore, my suggestion, based on my experience and discussions we've had here, is to find the right correction eyepiece and practice shooting with the 90, a lot. I also focus bracket slightly, when in doubt.
Adam, that's interesting about the 75AA vs. 90. While I haven't been a huge fan of 75mm just because I found it so similar to 50, I could see myself using it for weddings instead of a 50 and 90 because I tend to work relatively close to the subjects anyway. For many weddings I rarely shoot longer than 85mm. But for this, I'd probably want the 75 Lux. My statement about finding the 90AA relatively easy to focus was for a centrally placed subject. I've noticed that when wide open at near minimum distance, that focus & recompose can be a bit off with it, and that the lens may not be that great off center. Seems to be less of a problem at farther distances.
As for onion rings... I can provoke them from the 50 Lux ASPH too. It has to be a bright, distant pinpoint light source. Perhaps worth noting that the 85L is also an 'ASPH' lens. Looking at the Leica and Canon block diagrams for each lens, it looks like the aspherical element is similarly positioned. And Canon state it's a ground and polished one in this lens, rather than the more commonly found moulded type.
Maybe some day I'll compare it at f/2 against the 90, but offhand, the 90 appears better corrected against 'oof fringing' which I can see in the full rez in the 85L image above around the black text on the card. The 90 seems to do it too, but very, very slightly.
Here are some more 90AA test shots…
Aug 22, 2014 at 03:35 PM
p.974 #2Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
rscheffler wrote:
Wow, that's still happening? I don't know what the situation is like in the UK, but you should contact some of the Leica dealers and tell them you're looking for a camera... How much are used ones selling for? Maybe you can get a demo instead for about the same price?
Nice one Gary!
Thanks Adam.
So far, with the 90AA I'm getting mixed results. Focus seems to be spot on in the 2m and closer range, but is front focusing at farther distances. Focusing on something ~20-100m away results in noticeably closer focus when near wide open. Depth of field masks...Show more →
That's really interesting Ron because I have a very similar experience with my 135APO's. Mine are spot on from just before 5m to infinity. But close in they front focus. All my other lenses , including my 90mm Summarit are right at all distances on two cameras (M9 and M240). In addition I currently have 2 135APO's (purchased a second during the 12 month wait to have the first fixed and have yet to sell it on) and they're remarkably similar. The repaired one is ever so slightly better with RF focus accuracy (and also has a MUCH'" lighter feel to focus) but essentially I've decided it's going to be impossiblt to get a 135 perfect from min to infinity and since most of my work is at mid to long distances I'm going to have to learn to be happy with what I have. I really do apprecieate the EVF more and more as time goes on.
But I must say I have this little ongoing frustration that my A$4K lens isn't perfect, even if there is a workaround.
Gordon
ricardovaste wrote
My god, I never thought buying a camera would be so tedious. I know they are highly sought after on the used market, but today someone offered me a used one for more than a new one. Like way more! Over a thousand more. Jesus!Nice one Gary!
Thanks Adam.
So far, with the 90AA I'm getting mixed results. Focus seems to be spot on in the 2m and closer range, but is front focusing at farther distances. Focusing on something ~20-100m away results in noticeably closer focus when near wide open. Depth of field masks...Show more →
That's really interesting Ron because I have a very similar experience with my 135APO's. Mine are spot on from just before 5m to infinity. But close in they front focus. All my other lenses , including my 90mm Summarit are right at all distances on two cameras (M9 and M240). In addition I currently have 2 135APO's (purchased a second during the 12 month wait to have the first fixed and have yet to sell it on) and they're remarkably similar. The repaired one is ever so slightly better with RF focus accuracy (and also has a MUCH'" lighter feel to focus) but essentially I've decided it's going to be impossiblt to get a 135 perfect from min to infinity and since most of my work is at mid to long distances I'm going to have to learn to be happy with what I have. I really do apprecieate the EVF more and more as time goes on.
But I must say I have this little ongoing frustration that my A$4K lens isn't perfect, even if there is a workaround.
Gordon
Aug 22, 2014 at 04:29 PM
p.974 #3Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
Trailhead 
L1018793 by unoh7, 50cron
Start with motorbike:
L1018813 by unoh7, 28cron
Follow the creek:
L1018838 by unoh7, on Flickr
Hold the Banister:
L1018861 by unoh7, zm18
Lets call this the Banister, as the valley swings like a staircase, counterclockwise, east to north, into high circs. We will see this peak from several angles
L1018882 by unoh7, zm18
Once many worked in the Boulder circs:
L1018904 by unoh7, zm18
The din of this stamp mill would have been heard at the trailhead:
L1018922 by unoh7, zm18
L1018933 by unoh7, zm18
L1018934 by unoh7, zm18
L1018942 by unoh7, zm18 f/11
just round the bend and 300 feet above main mine installation:
L1018957 by unoh7, zm18
Boulder Lake
Face the opposite way and see where we're going:
L1018970 by unoh7, zm18
Mid-way from the left edge to the tree in the middle, along the ridge = our destination. It's the divide. If we reach that point we can see many many mountains and some huge valleys Among our mission goals: test the 135/3.4 apo telyt.
L1019043 by unoh7, 28 cron
L1019032 by unoh7, 28 cron
L1019049 by unoh7, 28 cron
L1019021 by unoh7, 28 cron
Here we leave the motorbike and hike to the ridgeline mid-frame.
L1019015 by unoh7, 28cron
about 250 ft below the ridgeline:
L1019057 by unoh7, 28 cron f/3.4
note ladder
you thought we'd never get here:
L1019146 by unoh7, zm 18 f/8
the other side:
L1019134 by unoh7, CV 90
image by unoh7, iphone 5
The banister:
L1019116 by unoh7, 135 telyt
L1019124 by unoh7, 50 cron
ski mountain to the south:
L1019115 by unoh7, 135 telyt
Pioneer range to southeast, where we went on two hikes a few pages back. Very extreme weather.
L1019109 by unoh7, 135 telyt
While I made these shots it hailed an inch of rain in town, just under the ski mountain, second to last shot above (taken when storm had passed)
I think it happened about when i shot this. Town on other side of ridge:
L1018798 by unoh7, 50 cron
I did not get wet!
Just a few sporadic drops. Better lucky than good
L1018793 by unoh7, 50cron
Start with motorbike:
L1018813 by unoh7, 28cron
Follow the creek:
L1018838 by unoh7, on Flickr
Hold the Banister:
L1018861 by unoh7, zm18
Lets call this the Banister, as the valley swings like a staircase, counterclockwise, east to north, into high circs. We will see this peak from several angles
L1018882 by unoh7, zm18
Once many worked in the Boulder circs:
L1018904 by unoh7, zm18
The din of this stamp mill would have been heard at the trailhead:
L1018922 by unoh7, zm18
L1018933 by unoh7, zm18
L1018934 by unoh7, zm18
L1018942 by unoh7, zm18 f/11
just round the bend and 300 feet above main mine installation:
L1018957 by unoh7, zm18
Boulder Lake
Face the opposite way and see where we're going:
L1018970 by unoh7, zm18
Mid-way from the left edge to the tree in the middle, along the ridge = our destination. It's the divide. If we reach that point we can see many many mountains and some huge valleys
Among our mission goals: test the 135/3.4 apo telyt.L1019043 by unoh7, 28 cron
L1019032 by unoh7, 28 cron
L1019049 by unoh7, 28 cron
L1019021 by unoh7, 28 cron
Here we leave the motorbike and hike to the ridgeline mid-frame.
L1019015 by unoh7, 28cron
about 250 ft below the ridgeline:
L1019057 by unoh7, 28 cron f/3.4
note ladder
you thought we'd never get here:
L1019146 by unoh7, zm 18 f/8
the other side:
L1019134 by unoh7, CV 90
image by unoh7, iphone 5
The banister:
L1019116 by unoh7, 135 telyt
L1019124 by unoh7, 50 cron
ski mountain to the south:
L1019115 by unoh7, 135 telyt
Pioneer range to southeast, where we went on two hikes a few pages back. Very extreme weather.
L1019109 by unoh7, 135 telyt
While I made these shots it hailed an inch of rain in town, just under the ski mountain, second to last shot above (taken when storm had passed)
I think it happened about when i shot this. Town on other side of ridge:
L1018798 by unoh7, 50 cron
I did not get wet!
Just a few sporadic drops. Better lucky than good
Aug 22, 2014 at 04:47 PM
p.974 #4Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
Really nice set Charlie! I am curious what coding you used for the ZM18. I am so amazed at how sharp this lens is....
Aug 22, 2014 at 05:11 PM
p.974 #5Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
TY so much Gary
I did some research in the spring and finally was able to code my zm18 with a sharpie as 21/2.8 11134. After that I never looked back.
Check out the DOF at f/16 looking up through the window at the sky in the stamp mill. Yikes!
In LR i use the 18SEM correction for distortion, but I'm not sure that's the best or not: seems fine.
The lens is so sharp, like the 21 SEM, it can take all sorts of manipulation with the RAW and remain very crisp--as you know
Here the 21 SEM a few days ago:
L1018639 by unoh7, 21 SEM
Wide Open
I'd swear these are both sharper than my 50 cron.
Edited on Aug 22, 2014 at 08:20 PM · View previous versions
I did some research in the spring and finally was able to code my zm18 with a sharpie as 21/2.8 11134. After that I never looked back.
Check out the DOF at f/16 looking up through the window at the sky in the stamp mill. Yikes!
In LR i use the 18SEM correction for distortion, but I'm not sure that's the best or not: seems fine.
The lens is so sharp, like the 21 SEM, it can take all sorts of manipulation with the RAW and remain very crisp--as you know
Here the 21 SEM a few days ago:
L1018639 by unoh7, 21 SEM
Wide Open
I'd swear these are both sharper than my 50 cron.
Edited on Aug 22, 2014 at 08:20 PM · View previous versions
Aug 22, 2014 at 08:18 PM
p.974 #6Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
I bought a nice little 50 Summitar (1939) the other day off of Ebay. It is a lens I have wanted to try out for a while and am excited to give it a whirl. Just have to wait for the rain to stop. 
I disassembled it to fix a loose focus ring and a very (almost seized) aperture ring. It is all back together and works as new. Pretty funny how the smallest aperture is f/12.5.
Edited on Aug 22, 2014 at 08:48 PM · View previous versions
I disassembled it to fix a loose focus ring and a very (almost seized) aperture ring. It is all back together and works as new. Pretty funny how the smallest aperture is f/12.5.  |
||
 |
||
|
Edited on Aug 22, 2014 at 08:48 PM · View previous versions
Aug 22, 2014 at 08:20 PM
p.974 #7Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
This trip the 135 telyt finally decided to sing a bit
L1019136 by unoh7, 135 telyt
that little ultrapod---much lighter than the gorilla pods--- and a cable release, plus very calm wind in my location--best shots I've got from it yet.
Maybe someday we will have small EVF M field back, and a new exotic long prime. 250 or so. Ultralight.
I should live so long, right?
L1019136 by unoh7, 135 telyt
that little ultrapod---much lighter than the gorilla pods--- and a cable release, plus very calm wind in my location--best shots I've got from it yet.
Maybe someday we will have small EVF M field back, and a new exotic long prime. 250 or so. Ultralight.
I should live so long, right?
Aug 22, 2014 at 08:26 PM
p.974 #8Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
Gary Clennan wrote:
... excited to give it a whirl. Just have to wait for the rain to stop.
Very nice Gary, look forward to seeing some images. The rain better stop I was invited to shoot a car-rally on Sunday assuming the weather doesn't cancel the event.
... excited to give it a whirl. Just have to wait for the rain to stop.
Very nice Gary, look forward to seeing some images. The rain better stop I was invited to shoot a car-rally on Sunday assuming the weather doesn't cancel the event.
Aug 22, 2014 at 09:01 PM
p.974 #10Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
OOC jpg
M with AA90
M with AA90
© Yudhi 2013
Aug 22, 2014 at 10:37 PM
|
p.974 #11Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
Charlie - beautiful set! The sky is so dramatic and the landscape is amazing. Love the ghost town/mine too. Very cool to be able to find something like that. When would that mine have been operational and what were they mining? The ZM really does sing, and yes, I do think it and the SEM have more pop than the 50 Cron. Lots of the modern wides are showing fantastic micro contrast capability.
Gary, congrats on the lens and really like the bridge scene.
Yudhi - great colors. Do you like the 90AA better on the M or on your Sonys?
rscheffler wrote:
So far, with the 90AA I'm getting mixed results. Focus seems to be spot on in the 2m and closer range, but is front focusing at farther distances. Focusing on something ~20-100m away results in noticeably closer focus when near wide open. Depth of field masks this somewhat in my usual stopped down landscape uses. At the moment I'm not all that bothered by it because closer working distances for people photos is where I'd mostly want to have proper RF calibration. For landscape stuff, if it's critical, I can use live view or the EVF. If this was the...Show more →
flash wrote:
That's really interesting Ron because I have a very similar experience with my 135APO's. Mine are spot on from just before 5m to infinity. But close in they front focus. All my other lenses , including my 90mm Summarit are right at all distances on two cameras (M9 and M240). In addition I currently have 2 135APO's (purchased a second during the 12 month wait to have the first fixed and have yet to sell it on) and they're remarkably similar. The repaired one is ever so slightly better with RF focus accuracy (and also has a MUCH'" lighter feel...Show more →
I've come to the conclusion that the more expensive something is, and the more it veers to the handmade side of the equation, the less likely it is to be perfect. I think with the longer lenses, especially the 135, you're at the limits of the system - the rangefinder, precision of the cam, etc.
For example with my wobbly 50 Lux ASPH. Left to its own, focus as seen via the EVF was very glowy. When I pushed it back towards the lens/camera mount, suddenly the image sharpened up dramatically. And this movement was a fraction of a mm. The fact that one can even nail focus at f/1.4 or f/0.95 with a rangefinder at a moderate distance amazes me. And that the device was designed ~50-60 years ago...
Maybe in a number of years, once the population of EVF capable M bodies is in the majority, Leica could release a non-coupled version, of course at a lower price. It would also be interesting to see a non-coupled 200/4, and I'm still waiting on a 14/4...
A couple more from the test series...
With the 90AA.
Gary, congrats on the lens and really like the bridge scene.
Yudhi - great colors. Do you like the 90AA better on the M or on your Sonys?
rscheffler wrote:
So far, with the 90AA I'm getting mixed results. Focus seems to be spot on in the 2m and closer range, but is front focusing at farther distances. Focusing on something ~20-100m away results in noticeably closer focus when near wide open. Depth of field masks this somewhat in my usual stopped down landscape uses. At the moment I'm not all that bothered by it because closer working distances for people photos is where I'd mostly want to have proper RF calibration. For landscape stuff, if it's critical, I can use live view or the EVF. If this was the...Show more →
flash wrote:
That's really interesting Ron because I have a very similar experience with my 135APO's. Mine are spot on from just before 5m to infinity. But close in they front focus. All my other lenses , including my 90mm Summarit are right at all distances on two cameras (M9 and M240). In addition I currently have 2 135APO's (purchased a second during the 12 month wait to have the first fixed and have yet to sell it on) and they're remarkably similar. The repaired one is ever so slightly better with RF focus accuracy (and also has a MUCH'" lighter feel...Show more →
I've come to the conclusion that the more expensive something is, and the more it veers to the handmade side of the equation, the less likely it is to be perfect. I think with the longer lenses, especially the 135, you're at the limits of the system - the rangefinder, precision of the cam, etc.
For example with my wobbly 50 Lux ASPH. Left to its own, focus as seen via the EVF was very glowy. When I pushed it back towards the lens/camera mount, suddenly the image sharpened up dramatically. And this movement was a fraction of a mm. The fact that one can even nail focus at f/1.4 or f/0.95 with a rangefinder at a moderate distance amazes me. And that the device was designed ~50-60 years ago...
Maybe in a number of years, once the population of EVF capable M bodies is in the majority, Leica could release a non-coupled version, of course at a lower price. It would also be interesting to see a non-coupled 200/4, and I'm still waiting on a 14/4...
A couple more from the test series...
With the 90AA.
Aug 22, 2014 at 11:43 PM
p.974 #12Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
rscheffler hi... the colour on my M with AA90 is more beautiful, more contrast than my sony a7/R 
Aug 23, 2014 at 12:35 AM
p.974 #13Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
rscheffler wrote:
Welcome Philip - beautiful images!
Robert - I have the 1.4x magnifier and while it can help, I found it was much more useful to get a diopter correction eyepiece, if needed (which I did need). When the RF is properly calibrated, the double image 'pops' to form a clear one at the correct focus point, which is more noticeable if you have good eyesight, or use the correct eyepiece. For those with more complex eyesight correction requirements, there have been good reports about the Walter RX eyepiece, but I haven't yet tried this myself.
The problem I have with the...Show more →
I like ALL your 90APO shots!
I'm going to try and provoke onion ring bokeh with my lenses when I have a bit more time. And I'll look through some older photos to see if I can find it.
As for the 75APO, I think it's almost a necessity for weddings, I just find it hard to pair it with any 35mm lenses that Leica offers. So when images are together in a series, it makes it hard to enhance the images to make them look the same. Maybe 75APO / 28Cron is a good match? Leica seems to think so on there site, but I'm not sure if they had rendering/drawing style in mind when they made reference to them being the perfect two lens kit.
I've also noticed that going back to my Canon setup, the 85 is now just a slight bit to tight for me.. hahaha I've been brainwashed by Leica it seems.
Welcome Philip - beautiful images!
Robert - I have the 1.4x magnifier and while it can help, I found it was much more useful to get a diopter correction eyepiece, if needed (which I did need). When the RF is properly calibrated, the double image 'pops' to form a clear one at the correct focus point, which is more noticeable if you have good eyesight, or use the correct eyepiece. For those with more complex eyesight correction requirements, there have been good reports about the Walter RX eyepiece, but I haven't yet tried this myself.
The problem I have with the...Show more →
I like ALL your 90APO shots!
I'm going to try and provoke onion ring bokeh with my lenses when I have a bit more time. And I'll look through some older photos to see if I can find it.
As for the 75APO, I think it's almost a necessity for weddings, I just find it hard to pair it with any 35mm lenses that Leica offers. So when images are together in a series, it makes it hard to enhance the images to make them look the same. Maybe 75APO / 28Cron is a good match? Leica seems to think so on there site, but I'm not sure if they had rendering/drawing style in mind when they made reference to them being the perfect two lens kit.
I've also noticed that going back to my Canon setup, the 85 is now just a slight bit to tight for me.. hahaha I've been brainwashed by Leica it seems.
Aug 23, 2014 at 01:07 AM
p.974 #14Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
uhoh7 - Nice landscapes as always.
Gary - Nice shots, and cool little lens (need a chrom body now!)
Yudhi - Ridiculously nice colours OOC, considering you live in Indonesia (which probably has similar bad light, as Singapore).
As far as Leica pushing the EVF cameras.. I'd say that if they're going to remove the RF, they should just make all their M lenses in AF casings. So you get small AF M lenses that work with M-EVF cameras. Kinda what the T-system should have been.. A bit ridiculous actually... Leica has the lens designs, why not just make a AF-M camera rather then a T and have to redesign lenses?!
And it's not going to "cannibalise" their market. A lot of people just like RF focusing, and don't want anything else. I'm starting to become one of those people.. After my stint with Sony A99 and my return to Canon DSLR shooting I've come to realise RF is the way to go most of the time. So really an AF-M would work for rich ppl who don't want to hassle with MF, and older people who are finding it difficult to RF, and the rest of us could keep our RF gear
Gary - Nice shots, and cool little lens (need a chrom body now!)
Yudhi - Ridiculously nice colours OOC, considering you live in Indonesia (which probably has similar bad light, as Singapore).
As far as Leica pushing the EVF cameras.. I'd say that if they're going to remove the RF, they should just make all their M lenses in AF casings. So you get small AF M lenses that work with M-EVF cameras. Kinda what the T-system should have been.. A bit ridiculous actually... Leica has the lens designs, why not just make a AF-M camera rather then a T and have to redesign lenses?!
And it's not going to "cannibalise" their market. A lot of people just like RF focusing, and don't want anything else. I'm starting to become one of those people.. After my stint with Sony A99 and my return to Canon DSLR shooting I've come to realise RF is the way to go most of the time. So really an AF-M would work for rich ppl who don't want to hassle with MF, and older people who are finding it difficult to RF, and the rest of us could keep our RF gear
Aug 23, 2014 at 01:12 AM
p.974 #15Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
@uhoh7: some beautiful landscapes and light there! Can I ask you, with the ZM18 do you need to use any software to correct corner cast issues , or is it fine? Your images look really clean so I was just curious as to your process. I'm half interested in something wider, not massively so, but wide zeiss is appealing.
@gary: I saw an 85 summitar the other day, seemed interesting. I'm guessing very glowy though. I wonder if it would be worth a try?
P.s. It seems prices ARE jumping up on the 1st of September. So I have a week to pull my thumb out! Otherwise I fear the used market might jump a little too.
@gary: I saw an 85 summitar the other day, seemed interesting. I'm guessing very glowy though. I wonder if it would be worth a try?
P.s. It seems prices ARE jumping up on the 1st of September. So I have a week to pull my thumb out! Otherwise I fear the used market might jump a little too.
Aug 23, 2014 at 11:35 AM
p.974 #16Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
rscheffler wrote:
Charlie - beautiful set! The sky is so dramatic and the landscape is amazing. Love the ghost town/mine too. Very cool to be able to find something like that. When would that mine have been operational and what were they mining? .
L1018889 by unoh7, zm18
Mike Cothern:
"The quest for wealth buried inside the mountains at Boulder Basin dates back to 1879 with the filing of the first mining claim. In a report written by Victoria Mitchell that the Idaho Geological Survey published 15 years ago, the total recorded production for the mines in Boulder Basin between 1884 and 1949 amounted to nearly 8,000 tons of ore and several hundred tons of old tailings. The processing of this raw material yielded 610 ounces of gold, 111,620 ounces of silver, 48,094 pounds of copper and 1.3 million pounds of lead. Between 1884 and 1894, one estimate put production value at $1 million for a block of claims known as the Golden Glow group.
The wealth didn’t come without difficulty, however. The survey report notes that the area was characterized by “complex and divided ownership” and marked by complications brought on by litigation and bankruptcy.
In one instance, a partnership formed in the 1930s between J.A. Schultz and a Canadian firm ended in futility and rancor. Schultz, who at the time leased several claims, wrote that besides the foreign entity breaking Idaho business and mining laws, it “refused to give men a bathhouse or change house, kept powder in where the men eat, refused to pipe water for drinking.” Amidst other assertions, “approximately 10 diamond drill holes were put down, all shallow holes, all missed vein except one, due to their engineers rotten figuring. All told, a waste of money.”
L1018899 by unoh7, zm18
L1018915 by unoh7, zm8
L1018926 by unoh7, zm18
@ricardovaste:
when the lens is coded or set to be a 21 pre-asph, well that's what it looks like I have not used cornerfix or anything like that. I do correct for distortion in LR with a SEM 18 profile, but this has no effect on color cast---I don't think.
L1018911 by unoh7, zm18
Charlie - beautiful set! The sky is so dramatic and the landscape is amazing. Love the ghost town/mine too. Very cool to be able to find something like that. When would that mine have been operational and what were they mining? .
L1018889 by unoh7, zm18
Mike Cothern:
"The quest for wealth buried inside the mountains at Boulder Basin dates back to 1879 with the filing of the first mining claim. In a report written by Victoria Mitchell that the Idaho Geological Survey published 15 years ago, the total recorded production for the mines in Boulder Basin between 1884 and 1949 amounted to nearly 8,000 tons of ore and several hundred tons of old tailings. The processing of this raw material yielded 610 ounces of gold, 111,620 ounces of silver, 48,094 pounds of copper and 1.3 million pounds of lead. Between 1884 and 1894, one estimate put production value at $1 million for a block of claims known as the Golden Glow group.
The wealth didn’t come without difficulty, however. The survey report notes that the area was characterized by “complex and divided ownership” and marked by complications brought on by litigation and bankruptcy.
In one instance, a partnership formed in the 1930s between J.A. Schultz and a Canadian firm ended in futility and rancor. Schultz, who at the time leased several claims, wrote that besides the foreign entity breaking Idaho business and mining laws, it “refused to give men a bathhouse or change house, kept powder in where the men eat, refused to pipe water for drinking.” Amidst other assertions, “approximately 10 diamond drill holes were put down, all shallow holes, all missed vein except one, due to their engineers rotten figuring. All told, a waste of money.”
L1018899 by unoh7, zm18
L1018915 by unoh7, zm8
L1018926 by unoh7, zm18
@ricardovaste:
when the lens is coded or set to be a 21 pre-asph, well that's what it looks like
I have not used cornerfix or anything like that. I do correct for distortion in LR with a SEM 18 profile, but this has no effect on color cast---I don't think.L1018911 by unoh7, zm18
Aug 23, 2014 at 12:05 PM
p.974 #17Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
ricardovaste wrote:
@uhoh7: some beautiful landscapes and light there! Can I ask you, with the ZM18 do you need to use any software to correct corner cast issues , or is it fine? Your images look really clean so I was just curious as to your process. I'm half interested in something wider, not massively so, but wide zeiss is appealing.
@gary: I saw an 85 summitar the other day, seemed interesting. I'm guessing very glowy though. I wonder if it would be worth a try?
P.s. It seems prices ARE jumping up on the 1st of September. So I have a week...Show more →
Keep in mind that Charlie shoots with the M9. It will behave slightly differently from the M240, which can still exhibit some color shifts with certain wide angle lenses. But coding it as the 21/2.8 11134 will probably work well on the M240 too. It seems that particular code works really well for most problematic UWA non-Leica lenses.
As for pricing... if the cameras are sitting on dealers' shelves, that means they've bought them at the current net price and it may be possible to negotiate the existing deals at a slightly later time. Of course, no guarantees. The price jump might also be calculated to close the gap with the M-P and play on the thinking that another $700, or 10%, isn't quite the deal breaker that $1000 or ~15% is. It could affect short term used prices, but longterm, it won't be a significant factor. I suspect used M240s at fair market valuations will hold fairly steady until the next camera is announced, based on how the M9 trended on the used market.
Charlie - thanks for digging that up! These too really pop with great contrast and color! Love the location.
Adam - thanks for the kind words! I haven't tried the 75APO so can't comment on it. What I've noticed over the span of ~6 modern Leica lenses in my possession, plus a few others I've tried, is that there doesn't seem to be an obvious effort at tight consistency across the system regarding color variations and wide open, or wider aperture, character. That said, I do think the Lux lenses have similar wide open look, with slight mellowing due to SA. I'm quite curious to see how the 28 Lux performs.
I also see slight color variation with my Canon collection. For example, the 70-200/4 IS tends to be magenta tint biased.
With the Zeiss-Opton Sonnar 50/1.5 while I was out testing the 90AA:
@uhoh7: some beautiful landscapes and light there! Can I ask you, with the ZM18 do you need to use any software to correct corner cast issues , or is it fine? Your images look really clean so I was just curious as to your process. I'm half interested in something wider, not massively so, but wide zeiss is appealing.
@gary: I saw an 85 summitar the other day, seemed interesting. I'm guessing very glowy though. I wonder if it would be worth a try?
P.s. It seems prices ARE jumping up on the 1st of September. So I have a week...Show more →
Keep in mind that Charlie shoots with the M9. It will behave slightly differently from the M240, which can still exhibit some color shifts with certain wide angle lenses. But coding it as the 21/2.8 11134 will probably work well on the M240 too. It seems that particular code works really well for most problematic UWA non-Leica lenses.
As for pricing... if the cameras are sitting on dealers' shelves, that means they've bought them at the current net price and it may be possible to negotiate the existing deals at a slightly later time. Of course, no guarantees. The price jump might also be calculated to close the gap with the M-P and play on the thinking that another $700, or 10%, isn't quite the deal breaker that $1000 or ~15% is. It could affect short term used prices, but longterm, it won't be a significant factor. I suspect used M240s at fair market valuations will hold fairly steady until the next camera is announced, based on how the M9 trended on the used market.
Charlie - thanks for digging that up! These too really pop with great contrast and color! Love the location.
Adam - thanks for the kind words! I haven't tried the 75APO so can't comment on it. What I've noticed over the span of ~6 modern Leica lenses in my possession, plus a few others I've tried, is that there doesn't seem to be an obvious effort at tight consistency across the system regarding color variations and wide open, or wider aperture, character. That said, I do think the Lux lenses have similar wide open look, with slight mellowing due to SA. I'm quite curious to see how the 28 Lux performs.
I also see slight color variation with my Canon collection. For example, the 70-200/4 IS tends to be magenta tint biased.
With the Zeiss-Opton Sonnar 50/1.5 while I was out testing the 90AA:
Aug 23, 2014 at 03:43 PM
p.974 #18Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
Very nice Ron! I always have loved the output from that Zeiss Sonnar...
A few quick test shots tonight with the old Summitar. I am happy to say I am quite surprised at the performance (given it was built in 1939). It is certainly no lux but it does real well for less than a few hundred. All WO (at MFD) except the last two which were at f/12.5.
50 Summitar
50 Summitar
50 Summitar
50 Summitar
50 Summitar
Edited on Aug 23, 2014 at 08:10 PM · View previous versions
A few quick test shots tonight with the old Summitar. I am happy to say I am quite surprised at the performance (given it was built in 1939). It is certainly no lux but it does real well for less than a few hundred. All WO (at MFD) except the last two which were at f/12.5.
 |
||
 |
||
 |
50 Summitar
|
||
 |
||
|
50 Summitar
|
||
 |
||
|
50 Summitar
|
||
 |
||
|
50 Summitar
|
||
 |
||
|
50 Summitar
Edited on Aug 23, 2014 at 08:10 PM · View previous versions
Aug 23, 2014 at 07:34 PM
p.974 #20Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
Thanks Allen. Not too bad but I consider it more a "character" lens than anything. It is quite low contrast - probably due to the fact it is uncoated (contrary to the Ebay listing). However, I will enjoy it and hopefully post a few swirly bokeh pics soon. I think it will be a real good B&W lens.... Could it also be possible that this lens has a more coarse grain pattern than others? I know I am not really describing it properly but the files seem a bit more grainy with this lens compared to my more modern lenses. And yes, I did check my ISO.
I think it will be a real good B&W lens.... Could it also be possible that this lens has a more coarse grain pattern than others? I know I am not really describing it properly but the files seem a bit more grainy with this lens compared to my more modern lenses. And yes, I did check my ISO. Aug 23, 2014 at 08:02 PM