Mauribix Posted February 15, 2010 Share #1 Posted February 15, 2010 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hello guys, apart from a small flickr group, I can't find samples of that lens (wide open) with the M9... Gents, will you be so kind to post some pictures or links about that? ciao Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 15, 2010 Posted February 15, 2010 Hi Mauribix, Take a look here Elmar-M 24 f/3.8 on M9 samples?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
scottwallick Posted February 15, 2010 Share #2 Posted February 15, 2010 Probably not the answer you're looking for, but I have a number of shots of this combo on Flickr. Flickr: scottwallick's stuff tagged with elmarm24mmf38 A couple 'wide open' (as wide open as a f/3.8 lens can get, I suppose): 20100116-L1002065-M9-ISO 1000-24 mm.jpg on Flickr - Photo Sharing! 20100116-L1002006-M9-ISO 160-24 mm.jpg on Flickr - Photo Sharing! Enjoy. scott Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted February 15, 2010 Share #3 Posted February 15, 2010 Looking at them it seems to me it has a bit more three-dimensional geometrical distortion (egg-shaped heads in the corners) than the Summilux. Anybody out there who has both lenses and is willing to compare? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted February 15, 2010 Share #4 Posted February 15, 2010 Looking at them it seems to me it has a bit more three-dimensional geometrical distortion (egg-shaped heads in the corners) than the Summilux. Anybody out there who has both lenses and is willing to compare? If it makes the heads more egg-shaped in the corners, then the reason cannot be that it has MORE linear distortion than the Summilux, because it is exactly the rectilinearity of the lens -- in other words, its low level of distortion -- that gives rise to the problem. A fisheye lens does not show it! So the cause must be LESS linear distortion. And a check of Leica's own published technical specs confirms this: Elmar c. 1% barrel distortion Summilux c. 2.2 % barrel distortion. Q.E.D. How much distortion you are willing to allow in a wide angle lens is clearly a personal matter. It cannot be resolved objectively because it is a matter of balancing one inconvenience -- eggheads -- against another -- curvature of straight lines. The old man from the Age of the Central Perspective Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted February 15, 2010 Share #5 Posted February 15, 2010 That is what I meant, Lars. I am glad the theory fits the facts for once. Thanks for the figures. I seem to remember, however, that it is not that straightforward with three-dimensional objects. I must try to find it. I suppose it is hidden somewhere in Erwin's book. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted February 15, 2010 Share #6 Posted February 15, 2010 Jaap: I don't think Erwin gets into it - but it is basically the same reason why Mercator maps of the world make Greenland look bigger than the U.S. or Antarctica look bigger than Russia, Canada, China and the US combined (just inside out). A rendering of a 3-D world that keeps lines straight necessarily has to distort something else (size or shape) to compensate. Mercator projection - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoppyman Posted February 15, 2010 Share #7 Posted February 15, 2010 Advertisement (gone after registration) These both essentially uncropped (Same location). Morning light photo - Geoff Hopkinson photos at pbase.com This second not wide open but maybe a good illustration if you have any concerns about distortion (or red edge syndrome) 24.jpg photo - Geoff Hopkinson photos at pbase.com Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Hart Posted February 15, 2010 Share #8 Posted February 15, 2010 I bought this lens a couple of months ago, and I'm delighted with it. I can only detect the very slightest amount of loss of detail in the far corners wide open. I think this must rank as one of Leica's best in terms of price/quality. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted February 15, 2010 Share #9 Posted February 15, 2010 Jaap: I don't think Erwin gets into it - but it is basically the same reason why Mercator maps of the world make Greenland look bigger than the U.S. or Antarctica look bigger than Russia, Canada, China and the US combined (just inside out). A rendering of a 3-D world that keeps lines straight necessarily has to distort something else (size or shape) to compensate. Mercator projection - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Yes but Mercator maps are two-dimensional. I learnt all about map projections in highschool;). Heads are three-dimensional, giving one more freedom for distortion - or correction thereof. <racking my brain now where I read up on this years ago...> Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted February 16, 2010 Share #10 Posted February 16, 2010 Japp - and photographs are NOT two-dimensional? My analogy was map = photograph. The more of the world you try to include in each, the more each must distort things to get them to fit in a flat rectangle. or from the other side of the analogy - head = globe. Both 3-dimensional, both must be distorted the more one tries to include everything. If you want to reproduce the world without distortion - you take a small piece of it at a time. A portrait lens for heads, a small-scale map for straight-line navigation: http://www.adirondacknorthway.net/maps/lake_george_topo_map.jpg Paul - is that an M9 shot? Seems to avoid the red-edge problem, if so. (as does Hoppy's) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mauribix Posted February 16, 2010 Author Share #11 Posted February 16, 2010 Paul - is that an M9 shot? Seems to avoid the red-edge problem, if so. (as does Hoppy's) Exactly what I was thinking about! BTW, Paul, thank you for posting. May you please post a sample showing an object @ the closest focus distance as to see (FWIW) how it renders the OOF area and get an idea of its finger prints? (Thank you Scott for posting your links, those were the only pictures I could find on Flickr before this thread! thank you). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonoslack Posted February 16, 2010 Share #12 Posted February 16, 2010 I bought this lens a couple of months ago, and I'm delighted with it. I can only detect the very slightest amount of loss of detail in the far corners wide open. I think this must rank as one of Leica's best in terms of price/quality. Lovely picture Paul. I think these small, slow, cheaper leica lenses are incredible value - every one I see pictures from seems to be a winner. As for the red edge - I understood it not to be an issue with this lens (as with most other lenses). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scottwallick Posted February 16, 2010 Share #13 Posted February 16, 2010 (Thank you Scott for posting your links, those were the only pictures I could find on Flickr before this thread! thank you). Small world, I guess. The Elmar 24 is a fine lens. I haven't experienced any red corner issues so far. (All my shots on Flickr are it on the M9.) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Hart Posted February 16, 2010 Share #14 Posted February 16, 2010 I took this one deliberately to see what the 24 Elmar's OOF rendering is like. It seems un-fussy and unobtrusive to me, but it's a very subjective thing: I took this in my study, only to illustrate the very even, clear rendering of this lens wide open: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mauribix Posted February 16, 2010 Author Share #15 Posted February 16, 2010 Small world, I guess. indeed! @Paul: Thank you mate, these pictures are really showing the beauty of the lens. The OOF rendering is pleasant, usually foliage is easy found disturbing with most lenses (sometimes generating "double" rings effect), in this case, as I suspected, the lens draws it softly and smooth. I like it. Thank you man. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
insomnia Posted February 16, 2012 Share #16 Posted February 16, 2012 Thanks for sharing your pictures! I'm (highly) considering the Elmar as well (second lens to my 50 Summilux ASPH), are there any full size (M9) samples out there? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
microview Posted February 16, 2012 Share #17 Posted February 16, 2012 I took this one deliberately to see what the 24 Elmar's OOF rendering is like. It seems un-fussy and unobtrusive to me, but it's a very subjective thing: I took this in my study, only to illustrate the very even, clear rendering of this lens wide open: What's the open score on the piano? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gpwhite Posted February 19, 2012 Share #18 Posted February 19, 2012 Paul, I really enjoyed your 24 Elmar shots... particularly of the leaves + snowy path. Can you comment on how you feel the 24 Elmar renders depth, relative to other WA (such as 21 SX, 28 SM, 35 SX)? I ask because my lenses in parentheses seem to render a bit differently on my M9 than when I used my M8. I would love to have a 24 that renders depth with my M9 as well as my 1995 vintage 35 SX does. thx! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
photolandscape Posted February 19, 2012 Share #19 Posted February 19, 2012 Hello guys, apart from a small flickr group, I can't find samples of that lens (wide open) with the M9...Gents, will you be so kind to post some pictures or links about that? ciao Mauribix, I am traveling most of this week, but I bought the 24 Elmar 18 months ago and have used it extensively on my M9 ever since. I just used in Cuba for 10 days, and got wonderful results. I wish I could send you a few--I will try later this week. It does quite well at any aperture. If you can live with the f3.8 aspect, it is a great lens and a real value compared to its speedier brothers and sisters. The FW that Leica put out about nine months ago to better handle the Italian flag/red edge issue made a tremendous difference on my M9's, so just in case you don't have the updated FW, you'll definitely want to download it. Good luck, SP Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
photolandscape Posted February 19, 2012 Share #20 Posted February 19, 2012 Lovely picture Paul.I think these small, slow, cheaper leica lenses are incredible value - every one I see pictures from seems to be a winner. As for the red edge - I understood it not to be an issue with this lens (as with most other lenses). Jono, you are correct. The major FW revision from about nine months ago did a wonderful job of correcting red edges on the 24mm Elmar, among others. I haven't seen a trace of red edging using my 24mm Elmar since the new FW was rolled out. It's a terrific 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.