chris_tribble Posted June 18, 2010 Share #41 Posted June 18, 2010 Advertisement (gone after registration) Maurizio - speaking of history - and not withing to rain on Jono's parade (I really appreciated the effort he'd put into the review + his choice of images - greetings to Casper the dog...), it's really worth remembering how good some of the earlier Leica Summicrons are. Much as I'd love the new offering, for the moment I'm staying with my pre-aspherical V.4 Summicron 35. So compact and light but such a good lens. OOF rendering does what I need and it's tack sharp. Example taken this morning on a walk around our local fields in Cheshire - the barley really was that green - and it was at f2 - the blue spot guestimate wasn't quite accurate... 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/123937-the-m9-with-the-new-35-summilux/?do=findComment&comment=1355237'>More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted June 18, 2010 Posted June 18, 2010 Hi chris_tribble, Take a look here The M9 with the new 35 Summilux. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Mauribix Posted June 18, 2010 Share #42 Posted June 18, 2010 Maurizio - speaking of history - and not withing to rain on Jono's parade (I really appreciated the effort he'd put into the review + his choice of images - greetings to Casper the dog...), it's really worth remembering how good some of the earlier Leica Summicrons are. Much as I'd love the new offering, for the moment I'm staying with my pre-aspherical V.4 Summicron 35. So compact and light but such a good lens. OOF rendering does what I need and it's tack sharp. Example taken this morning on a walk around our local fields in Cheshire - the barley really was that green - and it was at f2 - the blue spot guestimate wasn't quite accurate... Chris you're right, I've got that same lens and here you seem to paint with it. Really nice "drawing". Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonoslack Posted June 18, 2010 Author Share #43 Posted June 18, 2010 Maurizio - speaking of history - and not withing to rain on Jono's parade SNIP, it's really worth remembering how good some of the earlier Leica Summicrons are. HI Chris Exactly - still, I've certainly seen 'nervous' bokeh from your lovely 'Cron (actually, not yours specifically, but that lens) - it's usually with vegetation in very high contrast conditions when it's only partly out of focus - I wonder if it isn't something that's impossible to get over - in longer focal lengths you throw things right out of focus. But I agree that most immediate pre-asph lenses do very well. I think that in your scene the new lens would have done well too. Certainly you aren't raining on my parade, without a hundred lenses, a hundred scenarios, a hundred lighting situations one isn't going to get anywhere near a universally valid comparison. . . . . which is what always amuses me about lens tests with one standard view and lighting. The very best I was hoping for was to give people a 'feel' for what the lens might be like. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted June 18, 2010 Share #44 Posted June 18, 2010 The Leica was from the outset a great camera for catching life on the run, spontaneously. Oskar Barnack himself used it that way. But the quality limitations inherent in the small format (grain, sharpness) meant that very many dedicated Leica photographers also used medium format cameras, as we would now call them. (But remember that during the 1930's the Rolleiflex was also regarded as a 'miniature camera'. The first time Eugene Smith was fired from Life, it was for using one of these substandard 'miniature cameras' on the job.) I too used medium format cameras as long as I could fit a wet darkroom into my life. My last one was the wonderful Mamiya Six. The digital Leica M has moved out of the circumscribed role of yore: I can now use the M9 to do things I could not do with my M4-P, because, in the days of film, that took 120 film to do. No excuses are needed anymore. So, why not use those new opportunities that are given unto us? That of course means that we take pictures we would not have taken before with 35mm cameras. I take that as a welcome expansion of my capacity -- not as a lapse into heresy. I am, I know that, somewhat disposed toward unorthodoxy in the first place (as some people know who have read my postings). There are really too many 'don'ts' around, and too many of them are in fact the wrong don'ts. Let's see what we can do, and then evaluate the results fairly. A nice landscape is a nice landscape, even though it was not made on a glass plate in a view camera. The old man from the Age of Glass Plates Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bo_Lorentzen Posted June 18, 2010 Share #45 Posted June 18, 2010 Lars - you are preaching heresy.....! The core idea that a good picture would be good even if it was found to have been captured with a pin hole camera is simply unconscionable. . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viv Posted June 18, 2010 Share #46 Posted June 18, 2010 I'll pass on this lens. I'll take a Zeiss 35 mm f./2 Biogon for one-quarter of the price. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicashot Posted June 18, 2010 Share #47 Posted June 18, 2010 Advertisement (gone after registration) Wow - I seem to have caused a controversy - how refreshing.For those who stick up for me - thank you! Kristian (and Andy as well). first of all, the 'plants and pets' and 'could have been taken with any camera' are terribly cliched jibes - surely you can do better than that . . . . but then, perhaps you like your jibes to be traditional too? First a little self defence. The book is nothing to do with the lens test - I made the book for myself, as a record of time spent testing the M9. It was suggested that some others would like it, so I made it public and added the exposure and lens information - every book sold also contributes to a charity - none of it comes to me, and if you wish, you can look at all the pages online for nothing. Some people have looked at it, some people have bought it, and from those I've only had nice comments (thank you!). More about the content a bit later. As far as the 'plants and pets'. I've had the 35 'lux for a little over a week, unfortunately,during that time I haven't been to any gritty third world countries . Still I was aware that others would like to get some kind of a handle on the characteristics of the lens, so I tried to present that - mostly with wide open shots to give some idea of how the lens draws, and, Andy, if you aren't interested in the bokeh - fine - others certainly are. I live out in the country, amongst animals and plants, graveyards and church concerts - so that is what I had available to shoot. Of course I understand that beyond the documentary aspects this isn't traditional M photography, but I was hoping that it would give people some idea of how the lens performs, and perhaps be a little more interesting than the kind of test shots you get on some sites. Right - defence over. as far as 'traditional M photography' is concerned. Sorry - I take issue with your point of view. One of the real joys of digital M photography is that the possibilities have really expanded - whether photographs of rural scenes/landscapes/plants are worthwhile is perhaps questionable (I ask this question often). However, the M9 makes an excellent landscape camera: GetDpi landscape thread, it's also fine for travel (which is actually what my book mostly relates to, and anyway, I thought that WAS a traditional M use). I feel quite evangelical about this - it's very sad to feel limited with subject matter using a camera which is actually very versatile. erm . . . did you really meant that about financial value? Doesn't sound like the spirit of M photography to me. The 'it could have been taken with any camera' remark I also take issue with - characteristics of leica lenses shine whatever the subject may be, and the small lightweight camera and lenses makes it a travel kit second to none (the smallest full frame camera). Finally - back to the content of the book - out of several hundred pictures I counted 4 pictures which include pets (mine or others) and 8 if you include horses and chickens as pets; the whole last section is dedicated to People. The rest either relate to travel / landscape / wedding / people, two of which certainly ought to fit into your criteria Kristian. There isn't any gritty realism . . . . I consciously don't do gritty realism, I try to celebrate the world around us, the people the places and the things, and in my opinion the M9 helps me to do this, partly because it doesn't get between me and the subject, and partly because of the wonderful quality of the optics. Other cameras are not the same. Whether the subjects are worthwhile, or my realisation successful is obviously up for discussion (and don't imagine that you are more critical than I am). Very well put and I cannot argue with that, especially if its for charity. I have been going through some rough times lately and have been using the net as my release and for that I apologize. I am sorry Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicashot Posted June 18, 2010 Share #48 Posted June 18, 2010 Kristian, I'm glad you edited your former post. I found it a bit harsh too.BTW "war scene" is a typical photojournalistic theme, that's why it was part of the equation... but I must disagree when you say that it was my assumption to your talking, I guess it's safe to read carefully before getting excited. It was just a bit of irony. Apologizes if I offended you. No worries, i apologize for my harshness too. No need to apologize on your part but thank you for the sentiment. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonoslack Posted June 18, 2010 Author Share #49 Posted June 18, 2010 Very well put and I cannot argue with that, especially if its for charity. I have been going through some rough times lately and have been using the net as my release and for that I apologize. I am sorry Hi Kristian Thank you for that graceful message. I think we all have our moments ( you should have seen the answer I didn't post last night, written after a few glasses of wine ) Perhaps the net is a good place to let off steam? Anyway, I hope that times become less rough. I'm not sure that you needed to apologise, perhaps I should be apologizing for pets and plants! But it was gratefully received Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicashot Posted June 18, 2010 Share #50 Posted June 18, 2010 You know what I need more pets and plants in my life...which is probably why I can't relate to it. Good on you for donating the proceeds to charity, something I strongly believe it. All the best with it! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonoslack Posted June 18, 2010 Author Share #51 Posted June 18, 2010 Hi Jono this thread made me look at your book again I think I will buy it. I envy your pet shots; I have two black cats and I have never been able to get even one decent shot of them... I stick to my dogs now- at least they dont have black velvet fur....Seriously, I think subject matter echoes the photographer, not the camera. That it looks better with some brands is another thing. Hi Jaap Thank you - if you do buy it, I hope you enjoy it! As for the subject matter reflecting the photographer, I guess mine would make me seem very humdrum! Two black cats are better than one black cat and one white . We should have thought of this before we got the new dog! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonoslack Posted June 18, 2010 Author Share #52 Posted June 18, 2010 You know what I need more pets and plants in my life...which is probably why I can't relate to it. Good on you for donating the proceeds to charity, something I strongly believe it. All the best with it! Well, maybe you do, maybe you don't, just one piece of advice from Jaap and I - don't get a black pet AND a white pet: It's such an exposure nightmare! (I can do better than this, but I'm sticking to the new lens). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicashot Posted June 18, 2010 Share #53 Posted June 18, 2010 Well, maybe you do, maybe you don't, just one piece of advice from Jaap and I - don't get a black pet AND a white pet: It's such an exposure nightmare! (I can do better than this, but I'm sticking to the new lens). Guys a little 'manual' exposure would solve any color issues in exposure. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonoslack Posted June 18, 2010 Author Share #54 Posted June 18, 2010 Guys a little 'manual' exposure would solve any color issues in exposure. Manual exposure? Is that an option? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicashot Posted June 18, 2010 Share #55 Posted June 18, 2010 Manual exposure? Is that an option? sure is boss ;-) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
biglouis Posted June 18, 2010 Share #56 Posted June 18, 2010 I'll pass on this lens. I'll take a Zeiss 35 mm f./2 Biogon for one-quarter of the price. I don't know how you can say that. The samples are hardly a test of the lens. I would be intrigued to know if the focus in the cat shot was on the nose or the eyes. LouisB Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonoslack Posted June 18, 2010 Author Share #57 Posted June 18, 2010 I don't know how you can say that. The samples are hardly a test of the lens. I would be intrigued to know if the focus in the cat shot was on the nose or the eyes. LouisB Nose. Bloody thing kept moving. Plants are easier Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pklein Posted June 19, 2010 Share #58 Posted June 19, 2010 Jono: Thanks for giving us a peek into the rendering of the new 35 Summilux Asph. If you're interested in comparing it with the first version, I can help. These are M8 shots, but the lens is the lens. I think the old and new lenses draw very similarly, and the main difference has to do with the floating element and focus shift compensation, not the overall "look." This gallery is of the 90th birthday party of a good friend's mother, all with the first version 35/1.4 ASPH, all indoor shots with available light, mostly wide open or at f/2: Rosa's 90th Birthday And this gallery is from Yellowstone National Park. I mostly used the 35 Lux Asph on this trip. My 35 Cron IV, which I prefer for outdoor daylight use, was at DAG getting adjusted. The little camera icon above each photo will display the EXIF--the 28 and 35mm lenses are coded, and "0mm" means the shot was either with a 50 or a 90. Yellowstone "First Cut" The focus shift on the first version is real, so I tend to shoot mostly wide open, at f/2, or at f/8. But the shift can be compensated for fairly easily--you just focus on the closest thing you want in focus at the middle stops--e.g. on a person's nose rather than their eyes. I would love to not have to worry about that, but the price of the new lens is such that I'll probably just muddle along with the old one. --Peter Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
neli Posted June 19, 2010 Share #59 Posted June 19, 2010 Nose. Bloody thing kept moving. Plants are easier not if you use velcro Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
biglouis Posted June 19, 2010 Share #60 Posted June 19, 2010 Nose. Bloody thing kept moving. Plants are easier OK, well at least this means the new lens doesn't appear to have focus shift or back/front focus type issues. It probably does but perhaps it is better controlled. As per the existing (old?) version the lens the sharpness is a thing of beauty, imho. LouisB Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.