Jump to content

Additional information on the new 28/2,8 ASPH?


rosuna

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 48
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

The information on the new 28/2,8 ASPH is very scarce.

Leica has not yet published MTF graphs or lens diagrams, distorison measures... The only information is a picture of the lens.

Many people would like to have more information before ordering a copy...

 

May I answer your question with another one? Are you already taking photographs or still testing?

 

Would you only buy a lens if you have seen the MTF charts? Interesting if this is the case.

 

While MTF charts are without doubt a good overview about hoe a lens should perform, for me always the real life test is much more important and with the following characteristics (not necessarily in the order of importance):

 

1) how handy is the lens

2) how good can it be operated under average conditions

3) how does it perform at different lighting conditions

4) how good is the overall sharpness and contrast

5) how good is vignetting

 

I actually do give nothing on MTF graphs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to get as much information as possible, from Leica or independent testers...

The Leica website does not say much about it but according to Leica practice this new 28/2.8 should be as good as the 28/2 from f/2.8 on.

As much as i would hesitate to purchase the M8 for different reasons, I would buy this little gem in a heartbeat if i were on the market for a 28mm lens.

coeur.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites

While MTF can't tell you about flare resistance, the data sheets Leica provide CAN tell you about macro and micro contrast (sharpness and overall contrast) , field curvature, astigmatism, light fall off and distortion. All very usefull if you know what you are looking for. I'm very curious about the 16-21 in comparison to fixed focal performance. If they get the distortion licked that lens may actually be a "value" in Leica terms.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The information on the new 28/2,8 ASPH is very scarce.

Leica has not yet published MTF graphs or lens diagrams, distorison measures... The only information is a picture of the lens.

Many people would like to have more information before ordering a copy...

 

When was the last time a Leica M-objective did not live up to expectations?

Link to post
Share on other sites

When was the last time a Leica M-objective did not live up to expectations?

 

Very good point!!! Flare resistance was not so great with the 28 Elmarit with the 49mm filter size. I eventually traded mine off, then never got another 28 after getting the 35/1.4 asph!!! The size of the lens and FOV on the M8 of the new 28 makes it interesting, looking for reports on the M8 when it becomes available.

 

However, I would be more keen on a fast 24mm. Maybe once a lot of M8s get sold Leica will reconsider developing lenses with less covering power (ala Nikon DX) - this might enable a small and fast 24 - Lux, hopefully!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Weight: 180g

Length: 30mm

Length with hood: 46mm

Largest diameter: 52mm

Filter: E39

Number of lenses / group: 8 / 6

ASPH surfaces: 1

Working Range: 0.7m to infinity

 

 

I am sure it will be a lovely lens, and I intend buying one. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I suppose this lens will be good.

I would like to know how it performs, compared to other lenses.

I think I will buy it, but I am also considering the possibility of a 28/2 ASPH or 35/2 ASPH.

Fingerprint, distortion, resolution and contrast are important to me.

It is strange that Leica does not offer more complete information.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Leica website does not say much about it but according to Leica practice this new 28/2.8 should be as good as the 28/2 from f/2.8 on.

As much as i would hesitate to purchase the M8 for different reasons, I would buy this little gem in a heartbeat if i were on the market for a 28mm lens.

coeur.gif

 

LCT,

 

A friend has been using this lens but I haven't seen the pictures yet on film. The size would be great for my use, but I doubt the fingerprint will be the same. I would expect to see differences more like those between the 35/1.4 ASPH and 35/2 ASPH. The fingerprint of the 1.4 is superior to my eye, but I can't deal with the size for my "normal" lens. As a full-frame 28, I can live with my 28/2 because I use a Leica brightline v/f with it a lot anyway. Possibly this fingerprint difference will be less important on digital sensors. (My friend will still buy the 28/2 for the extra stop when he has the cash.)

 

As the 28/2 is no larger than the last 28/2.8, that was quite an achievement, but this new lens uses the hood of the 35/2 ASPH and that would be lovely because it hardly blocks any of the camera v/f. Still, I really doubt the "look" of this lens will be the same at f2.8 or f4 in low light as the 28/2. The 28/2 is just "magical". I'm sure the 28/2.8 will be very good, but expect it to be more like the 35/2.

 

I'd love to be proven wrong, but I doubt I am. There are always compromises with size in optical formulas and you can't often have it both ways.

Link to post
Share on other sites

William L., ..you never know, the newer 28/2.8 asph may have a better fingerprint than the old Summicron asph design. :)

 

In any case, with ony a mass of 180g to accelerate, you should be able to grab that image which you could have just missed with the heavier Summicron lens.

 

Cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites

...Possibly this fingerprint difference will be less important on digital sensors...

Hi William, believe me or not but it's not the case at all, at least on the R-D1.

It may be due to the fact that there is no grain to hide fine details i don't know but the character of the lenses is quite visible through this c****y camera (sic. K.P.).

;)

Now will the new 28/2.8 be really as good as the 28/2?

I agree with you that it will be difficult indeed but remember the last 28/2.8 of same size as the 28/2 was excellent as well and it was not aspheric though.

Pity that y own two 28 yet otherwise i would have been tempted by this little gem for sure.

Link to post
Share on other sites

William, aren't you just a little bit tempted by the M8? Go on, you can tell us, you have on one order, don't you?

 

Mark,

 

Even if I had the cash, which I don't, I have no personal need for an M8. I'm no pro and I can't even use my M's that much when I'm not travelling. I really prefer the look of modern films to most forms of digital capture. This has nothing to do with resolution but everything to do with the capture of the light. Were I unable to get reasonable ($$$) processing and superior high-res scans, I'm not sure what I'd do. I do not enjoy the digital workflow and don't believe it has a lot to do with "photography".

 

The M8 is a real M for pros with a complete digital workflow. It has to make a bit more shutter noise and the crop is necessary at this stage, but unfortunate. Pros with time constraints will enjoy using it if they enjoy M's because it keeps the "M" way of seeing. People who enjoy DSLR's should not bother. You will like the relative performance at 320, 650 and 1,000 ISO. The final firmware ought to be very good and different than Canon. I suspect you will be satisfied with the color rendition and resolution.

 

My friend used one for three weeks and will buy one for work. He will continue to use his film Leicas for travel and personal work where there is no time constraint and when he does not need an ISO over 400.

 

Just had lunch and spent the afternoon with a pro who has not used film for work since 2000. He's burned out on digital capture and sits in an office full of workstations and printers. We are both agreed that digital capture has caused a "dumbing down" of imagery generally. For his personal work, he uses M's. Brought an MP3, MP .72 and several lenses and grabbed some Velvia of my car. You might see some detail shots here later. :)

 

"Horses for courses" as they say in your lovely patch... (Wish I were there now...:( ) Are you a full-time pro yourself? Where are you in Gloucestershire?

Link to post
Share on other sites

William L., ..you never know, the newer 28/2.8 asph may have a better fingerprint than the old Summicron asph design. :)

 

In any case, with ony a mass of 180g to accelerate, you should be able to grab that image which you could have just missed with the heavier Summicron lens.

 

Cheers

 

William B,

 

The size is lovely but I very much doubt I'm wrong. AND..., with Leica, you tend to get what you pay for. I'm sure it will satisfy many, but don't expect it to be a 28/2. I also doubt it can perform as well at 2.8 as the 28/2 can. Watch this space...

 

As for grabbing shots, the main advantage would be the view of the 28mm frame on my MP .58..., but I'd probably miss the shot anyway. :) A Street-Shooter I am NOT!

Link to post
Share on other sites

MI do not enjoy the digital workflow and don't believe it has a lot to do with "photography".

 

Fair enough on the first point - if you personally don't want to go down the digital route that ok, but I think you are totally wrong on the second. I thought we'd got beyond the point of saying "digital isn't photography". In most of the areas that I think you feel are important - colour fidelity, grain, detail - state of the art digital is far better than scanned film.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi William, believe me or not but it's not the case at all, at least on the R-D1.

It may be due to the fact that there is no grain to hide fine details i don't know but the character of the lenses is quite visible through this c****y camera (sic. K.P.).

;)

Now will the new 28/2.8 be really as good as the 28/2?

I agree with you that it will be difficult indeed but remember the last 28/2.8 of same size as the 28/2 was excellent as well and it was not aspheric though.

Pity that y own two 28 yet otherwise i would have been tempted by this little gem for sure.

 

Interesting. You get that same "soft touch" of the light with the RD-1? The resolution and contrast will be easier to duplicate or "better". At least that was the case with the 35/2 vs. the 35/1.4 current ASPH's. I still wish my 35/2 had the fingerprint of the 28/2.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fair enough on the first point - if you personally don't want to go down the digital route that ok, but I think you are totally wrong on the second. I thought we'd got beyond the point of saying "digital isn't photography". In most of the areas that I think you feel are important - colour fidelity, grain, detail - state of the art digital is far better than scanned film.

 

And here we must agree to disagree. We will never agree on what is "better". HDTV is not my idea of better and the Kodak sensors still do not respond to light in the same way Kodak films can. And there is still a difference in color depth too. Of course you can manufacture something similar to what I get from an Agfa commercial processor in PS, but all I have to do is nail the exposure (and pay my $$$). That I do regularly, which is the reason I've used Leicas for 35 years. I have no clients to satisfy with MF type of detail and a flatter image. The scans I get require minimal PSE and print well to 11"x14". More I don't need and the grain of 100 & 400 UC and 100 & 400 Portras don't bother me or those who view my prints. Needless to say, I don't want to scan my own film either. A $100+K Agfa machine with a Rodenstock lens creates files which amaze quite a few pros on the Forum who've edited the full files. I use computers 10 -12 hours/day in my office. More familiarity I don't need! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...