Jorge Torralba wrote:
this all started as a how well do these two lenses perform. It wasn't a one lens is better than the other quest. In the end, what i really should have done is post both images without detailing what lens was used. and ask the community which they preferred. Not which was better. Because in my opinion one is not better than the other as far as optical performance goes. I am really going to date my self here. But this is not like a nikon 400mm vs Spiratone 400mm sided by side. In that case the difference would be obvious.
When it comes to optics ... "better" is often a situation for "better at what". Which, really is a difference, since you could have inverse perspectives. Better are rendering saturated colors vs. better at rendering natural colors ... e.g. Kodachrome vs. Ektachrome. Better at being high contrast vs. better at rendering low contrast. Better at rendering blue / green vs. better at rendering warm tones ... e.g. Fujichrome / Velvia vs. Kodachrome.
Some folks think "punchy" color is better. Others think "natural" is better. Some think warm is better, others think cool is better. ... so, yeah ... "better" can be tricky. Different, not necessarily "better".
Pg. 18 speaks about color diff's in different Leica lenses. It's a bit dated, and doesn't include non-Leica, but you get the gist. Somewhat in line historically with Philip's point about glass choice influence color, I reckon ... quite a while before Karbe's 2023 comment.
Jorge Torralba wrote:
this all started as a how well do these two lenses perform. It wasn't a one lens is better than the other quest. In the end, what i really should have done is post both images without detailing what lens was used. and ask the community which they preferred. Not which was better. Because in my opinion one is not better than the other as far as optical performance goes. I am really going to date my self here. But this is not like a nikon 400mm vs Spiratone 400mm sided by side. In that case the difference would be obvious.
When it comes to optics ... "better" is often a situation for "better at what". Which, really is a difference, since you could have inverse perspectives. Better are rendering saturated colors vs. better at rendering natural colors ... e.g. Kodachrome vs. Ektachrome. Better at being high contrast vs. better at rendering low contrast. Better at rendering blue / green vs. better at rendering warm tones ... e.g. Fujichrome / Velvia vs. Kodachrome.
Some folks think "punchy" color is better. Others think "natural" is better. Some think warm is better, others think cool is better. ... so, yeah ... "better" can be tricky. Different, not necessarily "better".
Pg. 18 speaks about color diff's in different Leica lenses. It's a bit dated, and doesn't include non-Leica, but you get the gist (in line with Philips point about glass choice influence color, I reckon).
Mar 01, 2026 at 03:10 PM
Previous versions of RustyBug's message #16995817 « Leica 50 summilux, close focus vs nokton 1.0 »
