DFV Posted January 4, 2010 Share #1 Posted January 4, 2010 Advertisement (gone after registration) ... my Summilux (latest Aspherical model) 50mm and my new M9. I don't know if there is something wrong with the lens but I get very different results with the Lux 50 and f1,4 than at f5,6. While f5,6 looks great and sharp edge to edge the results at f1,4 or f16 are simply unusable. Especially at f1,4! I know that this is to be expected yet I have never seen such difference on any of my other M cameras. I tested my 21mm, 90mm and Tri-Elmar with the M9 and I have had no problems at fully open or closed apertures. All performed only slightly less well at full aperture, which is expected. I have not noticed this before with my M8.2 yet I believe that this was due to the cropping factor. Bellow are the three different 1:1 shots. I selected the low left corner. As you can see the f1,4 shot is really barely usable. Even if you see the picture at a small size you can clearly se that the edges and corners are not sharp or out of focus even if the subject is on the same plane. Now these are 1:1 shots of the center of the same pictures. As you can see the center does better yet with a considerable difference in sharpness. My 90mm Summicron was virtually the same at all f-stops. Has anybody had similar problems? Should I send the lens back for testing? If it is a problem of the Summilux I wonder if it is worth downgrading to the Summicron and have better results at f2 even if it means loosing an f-stop. Thanks to all... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 4, 2010 Posted January 4, 2010 Hi DFV, Take a look here Having problems with.... I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jaapv Posted January 4, 2010 Share #2 Posted January 4, 2010 I have the Summilux as well in I cannot say I have any complaints at all at 1.4. Rather the opposite, it is brilliant. Are you sure there is no focussing error? I would like to see test shots in more controlled circumstances. f16, that is different, you are well into diffraction degradation there. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DFV Posted January 4, 2010 Author Share #3 Posted January 4, 2010 I have the Summilux as well in I cannot say I have any complaints at all at 1.4. Rather the opposite, it is brilliant. Are you sure there is no focussing error? I would like to see test shots in more controlled circumstances.f16, that is different, you are well into diffraction degradation there. The shots where made one after the other. The focusing set to infinity since the subject was about 80 meters away. The only way to make it more controlled would have been to put it on a tripod. The speed of the f16 shot was made at 1/40 sec which is a bit slow even if holding my breath and leaning against a wall. I will re-shoot once I have more light to get it at at least 1/125 to get any doubts out of the way... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 4, 2010 Share #4 Posted January 4, 2010 80 meters is certainly not infinity! For a 50 mm lens infinity is beyond 500 meters at least. You simply misfocussed. Diffraction is not shutter speed related. It is caused by the light "bending" at the diaphragm blades at apertures smaller that f 5.6. And yes, a tripod is essential to test a lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carlmuck Posted January 4, 2010 Share #5 Posted January 4, 2010 ... my Summilux (latest Aspherical model) 50mm and my new M9. I don't know if there is something wrong with the lens but I get very different results with the Lux 50 and f1,4 than at f5,6. While f5,6 looks great and sharp edge to edge the results at f1,4 or f16 are simply unusable. Especially at f1,4! I know that this is to be expected yet I have never seen such difference on any of my other M cameras. I tested my 21mm, 90mm and Tri-Elmar with the M9 and I have had no problems at fully open or closed apertures. All performed only slightly less well at full aperture, which is expected. I have not noticed this before with my M8.2 yet I believe that this was due to the cropping factor. Bellow are the three different 1:1 shots. I selected the low left corner. As you can see the f1,4 shot is really barely usable. Even if you see the picture at a small size you can clearly se that the edges and corners are not sharp or out of focus even if the subject is on the same plane. Now these are 1:1 shots of the center of the same pictures. As you can see the center does better yet with a considerable difference in sharpness. My 90mm Summicron was virtually the same at all f-stops. Has anybody had similar problems? Should I send the lens back for testing? If it is a problem of the Summilux I wonder if it is worth downgrading to the Summicron and have better results at f2 even if it means loosing an f-stop. Thanks to all... It's pretty hard to help diagnose a problem looking only 6/100ths of the image... The "lower left" "problem" is most certainly due to 1) vignetting and 2) the portion of the image being beyond the DOF at the focused distance (jaap's point about "focusing issue"). Even though the ASPH corrects for lots of things, it still vignettes heavily at f/1.4 (~20% (2 stops) illumination loss between center and corner). The DOF at f/1.4 is narrow, at infinity it is calculated as 56m-infinity, so a slight focusing error (the object is closer than 56m when set to infinity) will be seen at 1.4 that won't at 5.6 (DOF at infinity is 14m-infinity). What was your distance to subject in these photos? (quick calculation based on the bricks in the image I'd guess you're at ~20m, close enough to be within the f/5.6 DOF and beyond the f/1.4). c. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DFV Posted January 4, 2010 Author Share #6 Posted January 4, 2010 80 meters is certainly not infinity! For a 50 mm lens infinity is beyond 500 meters at least. You simply misfocussed. Diffraction is not shutter speed related. It is caused by the light "bending" at the diaphragm blades at apertures smaller that f 5.6. And yes, a tripod is essential to test a lens. Sorry, I meant to say that I was properly focused and did not change the focusing between shots. Just like with the other lenses. I focused once before the test shots and only changed the aperture. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DFV Posted January 4, 2010 Author Share #7 Posted January 4, 2010 Advertisement (gone after registration) What was your distance to subject in these photos? (quick calculation based on the bricks in the image I'd guess you're at ~20m, close enough to be within the f/5.6 DOF and beyond the f/1.4). c. I am about 80 meters away from the subject in order to avoid that focusing problem as you mentioned. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carlmuck Posted January 4, 2010 Share #8 Posted January 4, 2010 What was your distance to subject in these photos? (quick calculation based on the bricks in the image I'd guess you're at ~20m, close enough to be within the f/5.6 DOF and beyond the f/1.4). c. Oops, I used COS instead of SIN..., calculate distance to be ~76m (assuming average brick length of 25cm). Focus issue remains... c. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 4, 2010 Share #9 Posted January 4, 2010 I am about 80 meters away from the subject in order to avoid that focusing problem as you mentioned. As I said, you don't avoid the focussing problem by taking just 80 meters as infinity... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
el.nino Posted January 4, 2010 Share #10 Posted January 4, 2010 As I said, you don't avoid the focussing problem by taking just 80 meters as infinity... But the Rangefinder will tell you it's infinity at about 80 Meters. So i don't think there is any focus-error. I think the images are ok for 1.4 - especially in the corners. have a look at the MTF-graphs here on the last page: http://en.leica-camera.com/assets/file/download.php?filename=file_1769.pdf The vertical axis (0-100%) is the resolution (simplified - actually it's the contrast of a specific resolution - 5, 10, 20 and 40 lpm) while the horizontal axis describes the distance from the center. you can see how bad the resolution becomes in the corners while wide open (f1.4) and how much it improves at f5.6. pretty much the same as your examples. p.s. the "bad" f16 shots are normal as well. that's when diffraction (?) comes into the game. f4 to f5.6 is the sweet-spot of this lens (and most 1.4-lenses). p.p.s. don't forget we are looking at 18MP-100%-views. that's a HUGE resolution. watch it at 50% and it will look much better. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
telewatt Posted January 4, 2010 Share #11 Posted January 4, 2010 The shots where made one after the other. The focusing set to infinity since the subject was about 80 meters away. The only way to make it more controlled would have been to put it on a tripod. The speed of the f16 shot was made at 1/40 sec which is a bit slow even if holding my breath and leaning against a wall. I will re-shoot once I have more light to get it at at least 1/125 to get any doubts out of the way... ....this kind of a "test" is not the way to get clear results... regards, Jan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 4, 2010 Share #12 Posted January 4, 2010 But the Rangefinder will tell you it's infinity at about 80 Meters. . Actually it doesn't. I find that at such distances it tells me to back off the focus ring just a fraction. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
el.nino Posted January 4, 2010 Share #13 Posted January 4, 2010 Actually it doesn't. I find that at such distances it tells me to back off the focus ring just a fraction. but just a "fraction" and by the way: depth of field is no more narrow at these distances with a 50mm lens. regardless what f-stop one is using. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dpattinson Posted January 4, 2010 Share #14 Posted January 4, 2010 You could try focus bracketing the f1.4 shot, pull it just slightly back from infinity and see if you get sharper results. I definitely get sharper results at infinity than your sample with my 50lux asph - when the subject is very far away (more like 1km). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DFV Posted January 4, 2010 Author Share #15 Posted January 4, 2010 But the Rangefinder will tell you it's infinity at about 80 Meters.So i don't think there is any focus-error. I think the images are ok for 1.4 - especially in the corners. have a look at the MTF-graphs here on the last page: http://en.leica-camera.com/assets/file/download.php?filename=file_1769.pdf The vertical axis (0-100%) is the resolution (simplified - actually it's the contrast of a specific resolution - 5, 10, 20 and 40 lpm) while the horizontal axis describes the distance from the center. you can see how bad the resolution becomes in the corners while wide open (f1.4) and how much it improves at f5.6. pretty much the same as your examples. p.s. the "bad" f16 shots are normal as well. that's when diffraction (?) comes into the game. f4 to f5.6 is the sweet-spot of this lens (and most 1.4-lenses). p.p.s. don't forget we are looking at 18MP-100%-views. that's a HUGE resolution. watch it at 50% and it will look much better. Yes, actually just looked at this data before reading your reply. And it certainly looks like this is normal at f1.4. I guess that the change from the M8.2 to the M9 could be what caused me to be worried. Since these areas are cut out of the M8.2 I have had no great concerns with this issue. Being the problem identified. I have another question for all of you. Would it be better to downgrade to the Summicron with the M9? The numbers to that respect look quite striking when comparing the resolution. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dpattinson Posted January 4, 2010 Share #16 Posted January 4, 2010 Yes, actually just looked at this data before reading your reply. And it certainly looks like this is normal at f1.4. I guess that the change from the M8.2 to the M9 could be what caused me to be worried. Since these areas are cut out of the M8.2 I have had no great concerns with this issue. Being the problem identified. I have another question for all of you. Would it be better to downgrade to the Summicron with the M9? The numbers to that respect look quite striking when comparing the resolution. IHMO the centre should still be better than it is in your sample - so I suspect it's at least partly just a focus issue. Trading to the summicron might make sense if you intend to take a lot of photos of brick walls at 80m and then enlarge them to the side of a bus Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 4, 2010 Share #17 Posted January 4, 2010 I don't think so. This is a recent shot with the Summilux asph 50. No way could you get that bokeh with the Summicron. And I cannot say that there is obtrusive vignetting. The only thing you cannot see are the corners. I'll look for a shot at home, later Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/108622-having-problems-with/?do=findComment&comment=1174041'>More sharing options...
DFV Posted January 4, 2010 Author Share #18 Posted January 4, 2010 IHMO the centre should still be better than it is in your sample - so I suspect it's at least partly just a focus issue. Trading to the summicron might make sense if you intend to take a lot of photos of brick walls at 80m and then enlarge them to the side of a bus Well, in this case I am more concerned about the resolution of the edges more than bricks... In any case, looking at the tech data of both lenses The Summicron 50 is sharper than the Summilux or so this is how I am interpreting the graphs. Oddly this seems to be the opposite when comparing both 35mm, Summilux and Summicron. Can anybody confirm this? I am not sure if I am interpreting this properly. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
el.nino Posted January 4, 2010 Share #19 Posted January 4, 2010 Well, in this case I am more concerned about the resolution of the edges more than bricks... In any case, looking at the tech data of both lenses The Summicron 50 is sharper than the Summilux or so this is how I am interpreting the graphs. Oddly this seems to be the opposite when comparing both 35mm, Summilux and Summicron. Can anybody confirm this? I am not sure if I am interpreting this properly. Actually the 50 Lux is slightly better at f2 than the summicron. you could read erwin puts lens test: Summilux1.4/50 asph i think he said that too. i got both, the lux (asph) and the cron and for daylight i prefer the cron. it's so small and light. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shootist Posted January 4, 2010 Share #20 Posted January 4, 2010 The shots where made one after the other. The focusing set to infinity since the subject was about 80 meters away. So you really didn't focus on the subject. That is the problem as stated by Jaapv. Do some controlled tests with closer subject and focus the lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.