Ken Rockwell on Summilux 24/1.4

[cidereye]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Like him or not, Ken Rockwell is the best in the business for getting people that hate him to direct traffic to his web site. I personally like some of his photography and appreciate that he still shots film. Remember no one is putting a gun to your head to go to his site and he gives out information anyone can access for nothing. Say what you want he has an opinion and puts it out for the world to judge. Perhaps it's worth what you pay for, but you got to give him credit, he gets the traffic rolling in. And like he say's he is doing it for fun. I mean, even if you hate the guy, you got to admit, it's is entertaining either way. And come to think about it, Iv never seen him on a forum posting directing people to his site. Other people do it for him. Oddly enough usually people with unkind remarks come to think about it.

And personally I dislike people talking smack about somebody over the net on a public forum. It's weak and I don't see why moderators put up with it. It's crosses the line into a personal attack. And I was under the impression personal attacks not allowed on these types of forums. Perhaps Im wrong. It cross the line of civility and I expect more in the Lecia Forum. You know If people have a specific difference of opinion and/or a specific point where they think Mr Rockwell is off base than Im all ears and would be genuinely enthusiastic to hear them answered on a point by point bases. But to say someone is poor photographer from what they see on his free content web site is rude.

I think what really gets people goat is Ken Rockwell success and his access to a seemly endless supply of the latest and greatest gear much of it Leica. I got to say I found my way to the Lecia forum from a post about the lecia M9 from Ken Rockwell on the Nikon cafe several months ago. And since that time I acquired three M bodies and five M lenses. And have inspired several of my friends to give Leica M a serious look.

You know it just occurred to me that Ken Rockwell is fellow Lecia M shooter and dosnt that mean he is one of us? Below is self portrait to put a face to these words and ll post one of shots taken with my Leica's. That way if the shit gets piled on to me because of this post you know what I look like and have a sample of some of my work. And as you can see Im dressed for it.

 

 

 

 

Gregory

 

Good, common sense post Gregory!

 

There's so much hate in such a small planet as it is. Love him or hate him, agree with him or disagree with him, Ken Rockwell is probably the greatest voice on the internet on the subject of photography period!

 

Disagree? Name *one*, just one other person who get's the sheer amount of people talking about photography like Ken does. Now if that's not good for photography and FILM then I think far too many are missing the point. Keep it up Ken, it's voices like yours we need!

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[batmobile]

what a storm in a teacup! Below are some Leica lenses that are not asph pin sharp at wider apertures and are CULT lenses because of their look:

 

35 lux pre asph

50 lux pre asph

50 1 Noct

75 lux

 

.. and I would be amazed if the 24 lux does not beat them all on centre wide open.

 

Since when was sharpness everything? The 24 lux is the only 24mm M lens faster than F2.8 and has two stops on that.

 

I have recently bought the 24 1.4 because I desperately wanted the 24-35 spacing and needed speeeeed. I will buy the new 35 lux too meaning I have two lenses that will do 95% of what I need and down to f1.4. Great.

 

If you shoot need to shoot landscapes at f1.4 and infinity please put up your hand.... I have a 21 2.8 ZM and also love that lens, but when you are two stops short of the light you need you walk home with no images that you can use. I would rather have images which show a slightly inferior performance under the microscope than none at all! I lost a good number of unrepeatable shots not long ago due to not having the speed. It was then I decided to get the 24 lux no matter whether it is perfect or not. I was only worried about having one correctly set up.

 

I understand Noah's view on the FL with the M9 as you need a finder. I use mine with a 0.58 body and use the whole finder and will see how it works. Before the 0.58 I shot 28 and 35 mostly, like Noah.

 

When tested I found the lens very sharp up close wide open, but taking a couple of stops to bring the corners up to a very high level at infinity in the corners. How many times were you pumping out wide angle frames at f2.8 on your Elmarits at inifinity with critical fine detail needing to be recorded in the extreme corners? How many times have you needed pin sharp corners at wider than 2.8 on a 24mm lens close up!?!?!?!

 

Up close (min focus to a few metres) it is amazingly sharp IMO wide open and at f2 it is seriously sharp not appearing to improve much beyond 2.8 with my sample.

 

It might not suit you, but it will take frames at 24mm and f1.4-f2 if you need it to. Nothing else will on a M. If F2 and 28mm works better for you and you need a Ken article to point out that a 28 Cron would be better for outdoor daylight landscapes, then words escape me! For Landscapes outside, I'd not bother with either of these and get a 24/25/28 2.8 and buy a holiday with the change.

[Nikkor AIS]

Thanks Don. I agree, getting people to talk about photography and especially film is a step in the right direction.

 

 

 

Gregory

Edited April 5, 2010 by Nikkor AIS

[Audiocide]

I think it's funny that people get so up set about what he writes. Like it or not Ken Rockwell has done plenty to promote Lecia to non lecia folks.

 

This is true. His reviews were a big influence on my first Leica purchase.

 

I think those who are bothered by his views are taking themselves too seriously. Contrary to popular belief, Leica products are not designed and built by immortal beings of ultimate perfection.

 

Some lenses are going to be sharper than others, and some will be improved in future revisions. This is inevitable.

[markowich]

basically KR is not far off this time. images taken with the 24mm LUX at f1.4 have a charm but there seems to be slight veil of 'non-acuity' in them. also there is vignetting which goes away at f4 (no surprise on a lens like this) and significant (in my view) distorsion of moustache type. the bottom line is: buy it if you need f1.4 on a 24mm lens, don't buy it otherwise.

i just got the new nikon 24mm f1.4 AF lens and i do like it somewhat better on the D3x than i like the 24mm LUX on the M9. its distorsion is simpler to remove and it is just as sharp. much less expensive, too.

peter

[jaapv]

basically KR is not far off this time. images taken with the 24mm LUX at f1.4 have a charm but there seems to be slight veil of 'non-acuity' in them.

peter

???????? Not if you use it for what it is designed for...

 

 

Edited April 5, 2010 by jaapv

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

what a storm in a teacup! Below are some Leica lenses that are not asph pin sharp at wider apertures and are CULT lenses because of their look:

 

35 lux pre asph

50 lux pre asph

50 1 Noct

75 lux

 

.. and I would be amazed if the 24 lux does not beat them all on centre wide open.

 

Since when was sharpness everything? The 24 lux is the only 24mm M lens faster than F2.8 and has two stops on that.

 

I have recently bought the 24 1.4 because I desperately wanted the 24-35 spacing and needed speeeeed. I will buy the new 35 lux too meaning I have two lenses that will do 95% of what I need and down to f1.4. Great.

 

If you shoot need to shoot landscapes at f1.4 and infinity please put up your hand.... I have a 21 2.8 ZM and also love that lens, but when you are two stops short of the light you need you walk home with no images that you can use. I would rather have images which show a slightly inferior performance under the microscope than none at all! I lost a good number of unrepeatable shots not long ago due to not having the speed. It was then I decided to get the 24 lux no matter whether it is perfect or not. I was only worried about having one correctly set up.

 

I understand Noah's view on the FL with the M9 as you need a finder. I use mine with a 0.58 body and use the whole finder and will see how it works. Before the 0.58 I shot 28 and 35 mostly, like Noah.

 

When tested I found the lens very sharp up close wide open, but taking a couple of stops to bring the corners up to a very high level at infinity in the corners. How many times were you pumping out wide angle frames at f2.8 on your Elmarits at inifinity with critical fine detail needing to be recorded in the extreme corners? How many times have you needed pin sharp corners at wider than 2.8 on a 24mm lens close up!?!?!?!

 

Up close (min focus to a few metres) it is amazingly sharp IMO wide open and at f2 it is seriously sharp not appearing to improve much beyond 2.8 with my sample.

 

It might not suit you, but it will take frames at 24mm and f1.4-f2 if you need it to. Nothing else will on a M. If F2 and 28mm works better for you and you need a Ken article to point out that a 28 Cron would be better for outdoor daylight landscapes, then words escape me! For Landscapes outside, I'd not bother with either of these and get a 24/25/28 2.8 and buy a holiday with the change.

You are right - it is a very strange shot indeed that needs a pin-sharp horizon @ 1.4.

[markowich]

???????? Not if you use it for what it is designed for...

 

 

 

this is precisely what i mean. reduced micro-contrast. just put the image through a fourier analyser, measuring frequencies in small image parts. anyway, it has a charme.

peter

[Shade]

I think some of Ken's reviews are actually funny in a way. And it was his site that and Michael Reichmann's as well as Steve Huff's that actually got me getting into a Leica.

 

So those who doesn't like him, can just not visit his site I guess.

 

Back to topic: I just tried the 24 lux on my dealer, it's fantastic, but I wont go about saying about sharpness and all. But I find the 21 lux a bit more interesting and gives an extra reach for the wide end.

[markowich]

ps: and all kinds of color fringing.

[batmobile]

Do you carry a fourier analyser with you when visiting galleries? Does it have wheels? LOL

 

Come on. If you had to run it through some software to tell you something it can hardly have been staring you in the face. I did not find the images at 1.4 as crisp as those stopped down but they looked pretty sharp to me and also very pleasing.

 

Keep going on about how the lens is gentle and somehow subtly soft wide open and you will create another legend...

 

 

this is precisely what i mean. reduced micro-contrast. just put the image through a fourier analyser, measuring frequencies in small image parts. anyway, it has a charme.

peter

[jaapv]

ps: and all kinds of color fringing.

Like all highly corrected wide aperture lenses on any sensor - the sharper the lens, the more fringing..Live with it and learn to correct in PP

[marcusperkins]

I think it is a pretty fair review. Saying Ken Rockwell is ... and Ken Rockwell is that... dosnt change the nasty pincusion of the Lecia 24 1.4. He admits his website is for fun. I think it's funny that people get so up set about what he writes. Like it or not Ken Rockwell has done plenty to promote Lecia to non lecia folks. I found his review of the Lecia M7 to be excellent

I also like his review of some of the classic Nikkor AIS glass..

 

Gregory

 

I agree with Nikkor AIS. People may not like KR's style, or what he has to say, but there is often a very good point being made (often humourously) , and in my opinion a point often missed (or perhaps underplayed) by other reviewers.

 

When I have read KR's reviews (for a bit of fun) on equipment I already own and use for my work, I find them to be a rather accurate representation of my own experiences, even if there are some mistakes.

 

On balance, the main thrust of his opinions (certainly on the equipment I am familiar with) are reliable.

[jaapv]

this is precisely what i mean. reduced micro-contrast. just put the image through a fourier analyser, measuring frequencies in small image parts. anyway, it has a charme.

peter

Ah-yes exactly what I do with all photographs I see.

[batmobile]

The distortion does look bad for architecture but I would use a biogon for that. In fact I don't shoot architecture at all, so scrub that If I did I would probably use a 21 4.5 ZM or 24 3.8 asph.

 

I can only assume that Leica was prepared to compromise on the distortion for other gains like being smaller than the 21 lux. its front element is smaller and the lens is narrower and this might be due to the desire to control VF occlusion on the M8.

[pgk]

I can only assume that Leica was prepared to compromise on the distortion for other gains like being smaller than the 21 lux. its front element is smaller and the lens is narrower and this might be due to the desire to control VF occlusion on the M8.

Looks like there are trade-offs in lens design just like many other things in life. The distortion data for the 35 Summicron and Summilux show similar, increased distortion on the faster lens. Size and weight of course matters on an M and then there is the performance wide open which is inevitably a set of compromises. Reviewers seem to concentrate purely on 'absolute' optical performance, often without actually determining what parameters the designers were working to and what uses the lens is aimed at IMHO.

[redbaron]

WTF is a fourier analyser?

[pgk]

WTF is a fourier analyser?

Try Google - but don't expect to be much wiser:D.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[redbaron]

I did and I'm not!

 

I wonder how some of the great icons in photo history would score on this fourier analyser.

[marcusperkins]

WTF is a fourier analyser?

 

That's a great question - I bet even Ken Rockwell doesn't know... But if he did, I'd love to read his review of one. It would be both entertaining and informative!