lct Posted July 25, 2016 Share #41 Posted July 25, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) Only thing old farts find incredible is young farts teaching them what is incredible or not 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted July 25, 2016 Posted July 25, 2016 Hi lct, Take a look here 35 Lux vs cron. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
pico Posted July 25, 2016 Share #42 Posted July 25, 2016 Oh crap. I just learned a new trick. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paulus Posted July 25, 2016 Share #43 Posted July 25, 2016 Sorry but I'd like to be a bit mean. You say the photographers are simply irrelevant and the lens is really great/incredible and made this phantastic exhibition possible. Isn't this extremely naiv ? Imagine looking back to what you wrote after several years (in the future) .... You will probably also agree: "how foolish", must have been reading mainly marketing stuff. Time for a walk and get some fresh oxigen to the cells. Do not get angry, just forget it. It is not important. But understand that time and experience changes many opinions. So for "old farts" INCREDIBLE lenses are just cold coffee. (while remarkable photographers are not) No, i'm not naive in this IMHO. Just watch the exhibition and you will know what I mean. IMHO you cannot judge this, if you have not seen the pictures in live print on these enlargements. But maybe the remark was not understandable, so maybe it was naiv of me to think you would, or could. Of course the photographer was the one who invented the pictures, but this lens made it possible to see such a detail. It's not marketing stuff. It's just a great lens of an extreme good quality for the purpose. btw. How old do you have to be , to be an old fart? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
michaelwj Posted July 25, 2016 Share #44 Posted July 25, 2016 You are right. I am afraid. Afraid of the newbie experts and their superlative terms that mean absolutely nothing. Terms such as microcontrast, macro-contrast, a lens' footprint, a lens' fingerprint, bokeh, dry bokeh and so on. Hilarious. Discussion about lenses scares you. Don't go out at night, it's dark. My 5 year old finds that scary. I never knew lenses had so many limbs, or do they have fingers on their feet? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
steppenw0lf Posted July 25, 2016 Share #45 Posted July 25, 2016 Sorry Paulus, but this is the typical stupid answer. I did not say anything against the exhibition, so simply stop this nonsense. I simply said it is naiv to applaud the lens and forget the people taking the pictures. That's all. And I do not expect an answer, but rather that you look back in 5 years and maybe then you will understand. Or maybe not, I do not care. Stop this nonsense. Bye. Adieu! This is not a fruitful discussion. So I stop it . Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
michaelwj Posted July 25, 2016 Share #46 Posted July 25, 2016 You are right. I am afraid. Afraid of the newbie experts and their superlative terms that mean absolutely nothing. Terms such as microcontrast, macro-contrast, a lens' footprint, a lens' fingerprint, bokeh, dry bokeh and so on. Just in case you care; Macro and micro contrast: I prefer global and local contrast, pretty obvious IMHO Footprint would be its size Bokeh would be the quality of the out of focus areas Dry Bokeh I have never heard before but I assume is bokeh that hasn't been drinking Fingerprint is the overall effect of all the above (except footprint) plus other aberrations on the image. Talking about superlative, lucky we're not wine tasting Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
michaelwj Posted July 25, 2016 Share #47 Posted July 25, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) Now what was this thread about??? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted July 25, 2016 Share #48 Posted July 25, 2016 Was about tolerance and sense of humor. Both qualities shared by old and young farts here needless to say 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paulus Posted July 26, 2016 Share #49 Posted July 26, 2016 Sorry Paulus, but this is the typical stupid answer. I did not say anything against the exhibition, so simply stop this nonsense. I simply said it is naiv to applaud the lens and forget the people taking the pictures. That's all. And I do not expect an answer, but rather that you look back in 5 years and maybe then you will understand. Or maybe not, I do not care. Stop this nonsense. Bye. Adieu! This is not a fruitful discussion. So I stop it . I agree with you, that this is not a fruitful discussion. To much " typical stupid" and " naive " it also does sound a little angry and patronizing to me. So let's agree to disagree and stop it. So lets go back to the OP question: I think the 35mm summicron asph is a remarkable good lens. It's versitile, perfect for landscapes, small, great for portaits without any distortion. The design is 20 years old now,but still good enough for me. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NB23 Posted July 26, 2016 Share #50 Posted July 26, 2016 Just in case you care; Macro and micro contrast: I prefer global and local contrast, pretty obvious IMHO Footprint would be its size Bokeh would be the quality of the out of focus areas Dry Bokeh I have never heard before but I assume is bokeh that hasn't been drinking Fingerprint is the overall effect of all the above (except footprint) plus other aberrations on the image. Talking about superlative, lucky we're not wine tasting Wine, another scam. About macro and micro contrast, think about it: there is no macro contrast without micro contrast. No micro contrast without macro contrast. One cannot go without the other. It's contrast, period. Anything else than simple contrast is total and absolute Bs. Ok ok, I wanna be cool. I am now creating a new term: VECTORIAL CONTRAST. That is a shade better than macro and micro together. Shazam! VECTORIAL CONTRAST! 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NB23 Posted July 26, 2016 Share #51 Posted July 26, 2016 Just in case you care; Macro and micro contrast: I prefer global and local contrast, pretty obvious IMHO Footprint would be its size Bokeh would be the quality of the out of focus areas Dry Bokeh I have never heard before but I assume is bokeh that hasn't been drinking Fingerprint is the overall effect of all the above (except footprint) plus other aberrations on the image. Talking about superlative, lucky we're not wine tasting Are you serious or satirical? I've never read a funnier post. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted July 26, 2016 Share #52 Posted July 26, 2016 (edited) Bit of distortion is easy to correct in PP. Only issue with 35/2 asph is CA imho. For better results there i prefer the ZM 35/2.8 but it is slower with more vignetting and is even more contrasty. Matter of tastes as usual. I can just say that among my seven 35mm M lenses (Leica 35/1.4 FLE, 35/1.4 pre-asph, 35/2 asph, 35/2 v4, 35/2.5, 35/2.8 & ZM 35/2.8), i choose the 35/2 asph when i travel light generally. FWIW. Edited July 26, 2016 by lct 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
michaelwj Posted July 26, 2016 Share #53 Posted July 26, 2016 Are you serious or satirical? I've never read a funnier post. I'm not sure anymore? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
michaelwj Posted July 26, 2016 Share #54 Posted July 26, 2016 Wine, another scam. About macro and micro contrast, think about it: there is no macro contrast without micro contrast. No micro contrast without macro contrast. One cannot go without the other. It's contrast, period. Anything else than simple contrast is total and absolute Bs. Ok ok, I wanna be cool. I am now creating a new term: VECTORIAL CONTRAST. That is a shade better than macro and micro together. Shazam! VECTORIAL CONTRAST! Nice! I hear those Voigtlander lenses have pretty good Vectorial contrast. You can see it in the strong diagonals, especially with the color-skopar range Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
su25 Posted July 26, 2016 Share #55 Posted July 26, 2016 .... About macro and micro ...... When Leica, Nikon, etc. cannot agree on the terminology, who are we to question ? I mean their macro and micro lenses. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
asr3510 Posted July 26, 2016 Author Share #56 Posted July 26, 2016 When i started this thread i wasnt expecting so much back and forth. But just picked my new 35mm summicron today. but havent had a chance to take it out shooting yet. I decided on the cron because im taking a chance that leica will come out with a new M at photokina and im assuming it will have better high ISO performance than the current M240. Thought id save a few dollars and some weight with the cron and be prepared when hopefully the new M comes out. Thnak you every one for your input 4 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
newnew Posted July 26, 2016 Share #57 Posted July 26, 2016 To the OP : please rate the conversation in this total thread in its usefulness in making your choice (scale 1-5 1 is bad 5 is good). If you rate, we expect that you will be rewarded with better thread conversations in the future which will be more helpful for you to buy your next Leica lenses !!! 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
af25 Posted July 31, 2016 Share #58 Posted July 31, 2016 Hi Everyone. I happen to have the 35 Summicron ASPH (not the latest updated 2016 version) and the Summilux FLE with me and I've done a quick comparison on my tumblr: http://jhky.tumblr.com/post/148226778472/quick-comparison-between-right-35-summilux-asph. I'm showing a few on-screen enlargements at F2 for your reference. I think the result is pretty obvious. Left is Summilux and all shots took on M9, ISO160 mounted on tripod. Focus point is at the centre of the frame and subject distance is about 5 meters. You'll see the whole picture, enlargement of the lower left corner and the centre of the frame there. I've comparisons up to F8 and I'll probably post them online later today. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted July 31, 2016 Share #59 Posted July 31, 2016 Welcome to the forum ☺ Not sure which is which but the pics on the right look out of focus. Did you use an EVF? 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
af25 Posted July 31, 2016 Share #60 Posted July 31, 2016 Welcome to the forum ☺ Not sure which is which but the pics on the right look out of focus. Did you use an EVF? Not really as there's no EVF on M9. Focus was as good as my eyesight allows. But sharpness for both lenses are about the same at f5.6 at the centre of the frame, which is where the focus was. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.