lct Posted January 18, 2011 Share #21 Posted January 18, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) To me, good bokeh means no OoF sharpness, especially no sharp edges to bright areas, and no doubled lines. The rest is purely subjective IMHO. Good: - Elmarit-M 21/2.8 asph, Skopar 21/4 - Summicron-M 28/2 - Summilux-M 35/1.4 pre-asph, Summicron-R 35/2, Summicron-M 35/2 pre-asph v4, Nokton 35/1.4 SC - Summicron-C 40/2 - Summicron-R 50/2, Elmar-M 50/2.8, Summilux-M 50/1.4 pre-asph, Summicron-M 50/2 with tab - Macro-Elmarit-R 60/2.8 - Summicron-R 90/2 pre-apo, Elmar 90/4, 'Thin' Tele-Elmarit-M 90/2.8 - Elmarit-R and M 135/2.8, Elmar 135/4 - Apo-Telyt-R 180/3.4 - Apo-Telyt-R 280/4, Telyt 280/4.8 Fair: - Elmarit-M 28/2.8 asph, M-Rokkor 28/2.8 - Summilux-M 50/1.4 asph - Summicron-M 75/2 Poor: None that i own. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 18, 2011 Posted January 18, 2011 Hi lct, Take a look here Your best and worst lens (OOF discussion only). I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
UliWer Posted January 18, 2011 Share #22 Posted January 18, 2011 ... Well, I bought that lens two times. The first time I regretted selling my "old" 35lux ASPH in less than two months. I use to know my "old" lux as I know my pockets. Never had too much trouble with focus shift problems, even though I knew it was there. Then I sold my new 35luxASPH FLE, and used different 35s, looking for the best one, since it's my primary lens. Then I found once again a new 35luxASPH FLE at my dealer's store, I bought it again, kept it 15days, and regretted selling my "old" 35 twice. That's the way it goes. Now I own a 35cron ASPH and a 35lux ASPH (old)... I sell the cron, not the lux. ... First of all: never sell a Leica lens. As so many people complain about the oof rendering or the "bokeh" of the new 35 Summilux FLE i'd like to see the results in direct comparison to the precedessing lens. Unfortunately you only see one or the other - never one next to the other. Even if I complained a lot about focus shift of the the first 35 Summilux asph., I won't part with it, and after learning more about this "problem" I like it more than before. So I won't go for the new one - and will miss the chance to make up my own mind about the new one. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rcoles Posted January 18, 2011 Share #23 Posted January 18, 2011 All of my lens are great, it is me that I have to worry about, but I enjoy my 35 the most. (35/f2 ASPH, 50/f2 Current and, 90/f2.8) Bob Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacarape Posted January 18, 2011 Share #24 Posted January 18, 2011 I mentioned the 135/2.8, as nobody else has I'll post a photo. Shot wide open on a tripod/k64. It seems that the 75 Lux has really started to blossom price wise, a ver. 2 just sold for almost $3100. I think below that will start to be a rare price. The hummingbird pic is on a 135/2.8, dog is on the 35/1.4 ASPH. (Not the FLE) I think the key to keep my 35 ASPHs bouquet minty is to avoid highlights in the OOF areas. It seems to get double vision on verticals such as grass. 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/141968-your-best-and-worst-lens-oof-discussion-only/?do=findComment&comment=1562484'>More sharing options...
Mauribix Posted January 18, 2011 Author Share #25 Posted January 18, 2011 First of all: never sell a Leica lens. You're right As so many people complain about the oof rendering or the "bokeh" of the new 35 Summilux FLE i'd like to see the results in direct comparison to the precedessing lens. Unfortunately you only see one or the other - never one next to the other. I didn't know so many complained about the OOF rendering of the newest 35lux. I never made direct comparison, probably I should. Anyway, sometimes you got that feeling without any test. I was so happy when I first bought the new luxASPH, then, as soon as the first shots were done, I immediately had that "bad" feeling. As I said, I got unexpected behavior from a lens I was supposed to know as my pockets. I had "distracting" OOF rendering with the new lens, my girlfriend had that feeling too (and she's not a photographer), and it happened really quite often. Anyway, it's somehow good to know that many complained for that same reason. This is done with the new 35lux ASPH FLE 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! My feeling is that most of the times, the OOF area rendered is way "too" readable with "doubled" lines in the background. This is a crop of the previous shot Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! My feeling is that most of the times, the OOF area rendered is way "too" readable with "doubled" lines in the background. This is a crop of the previous shot ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/141968-your-best-and-worst-lens-oof-discussion-only/?do=findComment&comment=1562485'>More sharing options...
Guest nafpie Posted January 18, 2011 Share #26 Posted January 18, 2011 TOP5: 1-Summicron 35 asph. 2-<not-a-Leica-lens> 3-<not-a-Leica-lens> 4-Summilux 50 asph. 5-<not-a-Leica-lens> WORST5: 1-<not-a-Leica-lens> 2-<not-a-Leica-lens> 3-<not-a-Leica-lens> 4-<not-a-Leica-lens> 5-<not-a-Leica-lens> Stefan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
01af Posted January 18, 2011 Share #27 Posted January 18, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) Maybe someone took one or more photos with pleasing/unpleasing details and lights out of focus—she or he might cherish/blame the lens. So true. In particular, I'd say everyone who includes the Summilux-M 50 mm Asph into his top-five list obviously has never seen really fine bokeh. Some even don't know what the term bokeh actually means. The Summilux-M 50 mm Asph has fairly good bokeh—better than most 1:1.4 lenses and definitely good enough for most intents and purposes—yet nothing to get excited about. There are several lenses which offer nicer bokeh than that. Lists like this are useful only when people disclose which lenses they are familiar with and which they are not. For example, I compared the Summarit-M 50 mm 1:2.5, which is my current favourite with regard to bokeh, to the Summilux-M 50 mm Asph, the Noctilux-M 50 mm Asph, the Apo-Summicron-M 75 mm Asph, the Summilux-M 75 mm, and a few non-Leica lenses—but not to the current Summicron-M 50 mm, the Elmar-M 50 mm, or any older (non-current) 50 mm Leica lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted January 18, 2011 Share #28 Posted January 18, 2011 Top 5 Summicron-M 35/2 Asph Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest nafpie Posted January 19, 2011 Share #29 Posted January 19, 2011 I'd say everyone who includes the Summilux-M 50 mm Asph into his top-five list obviously has never seen really fine bokeh. At 1.4 the bokeh is wonderful. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
yanidel Posted January 19, 2011 Share #30 Posted January 19, 2011 This thread proves further that OOF rendering is purely subjective. Whether it looks good or bad will depend much more on the background type and distance to subject than on the lens itself. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted January 19, 2011 Share #31 Posted January 19, 2011 Very hot summer night in Chicago on the fire escape where we sought a breeze. Version II of 35mm Summilux @1.4. . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nikkor AIS Posted January 19, 2011 Share #32 Posted January 19, 2011 50 1.0 Noctilux on Leica MP XP2 1/60 @ F1.0 50 1.0 Noctilux on Leica M7 Great thread. For me I just like the OOF of my 50 1.0 Noctilux more than almost any other lens I have ever used. I also really love the 28 1.9 ASPH on Leica M . It's very nice. Gregory Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NZDavid Posted January 19, 2011 Share #33 Posted January 19, 2011 Here's my previous post, with lots more pictures: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/customer-forum/148386-best-bokeh.html?highlight=best+for+bokeh I like the 50 'cron rigid. The 90 T/E (thin) is also pleasing. Best and worst would have to be the redoubtable 2/50 Summar. Depends if you like octagonal specular reflections (is that the term?). Other subjects, flowers, etc, render perfectly. Non Leica, the Olympus Zuiko 1.8/50 is very sharp, but IMO the OOF could be better. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted January 19, 2011 Share #34 Posted January 19, 2011 The fact that some lenses show up both on the 'best' lists of some people, and on the 'worst' lists of other people, underlines to me the complete uselessness of this discussion. As soon as you try to be specific, you discover that there is no common ground. This is my last posting on this thread. The old man from the Age of Hypo (not Hype) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
D&A Posted January 19, 2011 Share #35 Posted January 19, 2011 Maurizio Wrote --->>>"TOP5: 1-Summarit-M 50 2.5 (always great, that's the real King of bokeh to me, great from f2.5 to f8) 2-Summilux-M 35 ASPHERICAL (1st version with two ASPH elements great from 1.4 to 8!) 3-Summilux-M 75 (simply magical with from f1.4 to f8) 4-Noctilux-M f/1.0 (when it's ok, then it awesome, but only @f1) 5-Summilux 21 ASPH (simply magical">>> Hi Maurizio, I was just curious, does your 35mm Lux asph ( 1st version with two ASPH elements ) display any kind of meaningful focus shift? Rarely if ever has anyone who owns this lens mentions it. I presume it does as it's basic optica design is similar to the recently discontinuted 35mm Lux asph Ver I (with the one asph element but no floating element). I agree and also as you have shown previously, the current floating element 35mm Lux asph can develope nervous OOF areas with certain subjects/lighting. I've seen this a number of times. This of cours has to be balanced against those fast shooting situations where the focus shift of Ver I cannot be estimated quickly enough and some key shots were mis-focused. For slow deliberate shooting, it was fine. So it's a tradeoff, for better or worse. Dave (D&A) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mauribix Posted January 19, 2011 Author Share #36 Posted January 19, 2011 Lars, As for the usefulness of this thread, plaese back to my first post. I know this may be just a waste of time. Nothing more, no science here or pixel-peeping affaire. I just wanted to discover the most loved and "hated" lens under an OOF rendering POV. that's it. See that the Nocti is in my top5 as well as my worst5! Back to some older posts, I remember you to love the Zeiss18. Was that under an OOF rendering POV too? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mauribix Posted January 19, 2011 Author Share #37 Posted January 19, 2011 Hi Maurizio, I was just curious, does your 35mm Lux asph ( 1st version with two ASPH elements ) display any kind of meaningful focus shift? Rarely if ever has anyone who owns this lens mentions it. I presume it does as it's basic optica design is similar to the recently discontinuted 35mm Lux asph Ver I (with the one asph element but no floating element). I agree and also as you have shown previously, the current floating element 35mm Lux asph can develope nervous OOF areas with certain subjects/lighting. I've seen this a number of times. This of cours has to be balanced against those fast shooting situations where the focus shift of Ver I cannot be estimated quickly enough and some key shots were mis-focused. For slow deliberate shooting, it was fine. So it's a tradeoff, for better or worse. Dave (D&A) Ciao Dave, Well that's a good question. I should have some "tests" on that lens (the aspherical), and I remember no noticeable focus shift if any. I remember playin' with the m9 on a tripod just to check an eventual focus shift since nobody ever mentioned it, as I recall. I have to look for them in my backups, and I'll surely post them here. My guess, maybe just due to my headake, is that both the focus shift issue of the ver.II (the first asph) and the nervous OOF rendering of version III (actual 11663) is due to the modifications from the "original" lens design. As for the 11663, we could have expected a complete new designed optic IMHO. I see the FLE introduction something like a "quick and dirt" fix. I won't believe a better design is not possible after let's say... Almost 30years? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NB23 Posted January 19, 2011 Share #38 Posted January 19, 2011 I have a hard time with easy statements as "this lens is good" and "this lens is not good" in this digital era. People are judging their lenses on scanned negatives and on a few digital shots. The problem with digital is that the users degrade the images with all kinds of programs, therefore totally killing any lens' rendition except for the boke (without that silly Japanese H. If there's no H in Karateh, then there's no H in Boke). And Boke is way over rated. Why? Well, people tend to follow in groups. One defines good Boke and everybody follows, liking this "Good BokeH" and disliking that "Bad Bad, Very Bad BokeH". And about that Noctilux. Let's talk about it for a minute. I own that lens and I use it for anything. In the Studio at f11, outside at f4, inside or at night at f1.0. And all I can say is that I can't differentiate it from a 50 lux pre-asph once it's passed f1.4. Simply, the Noctilux is good at all f-stops and it's not as mystique as many want to make-believe. And Depth of field being the same for all 50mm lenses, the Noctilux simply becomes a lux pre-asph from f1.4 and on. I am not easy on judging lenses and wanting to sound like a pro online. As a matter of fact, I don't care at all. I simply know what I know and I know it well. I am done with shooting 250 kodachrome rolls in this past year. I am in a 6 month Darkroom printing marathon, printing exclusively on 11x14 Baryta with my Focomat IIc and extremely rate Focotar 100mm for my Xpans and using the Focotar-2 50mm for my 35mm photography. All I can say is that if one is to judge his lenses, it has to be done by looking at prints. The involvement, the sweat that goes through it, and the eye that one develops from judgint negatives, and then prints, with a 5x loupe and then a 20x loupe... It takes time, but after a few months, one can start to tell which lens was used by simply looking at prints. The corner sharpness, the distortion, the falloff, the contrast, the gentle tonality, the grays, the Blacks and the whites and how steep the gradation goes, the details... It all comes together in a single print and it simply jumps out at the expert viewer. And I mean EXPERT. Go ask the Pro printers that used to make a living out of printing. As them about their work involving films that a Canon shooter used to give them Versus a Leica shooter Versus a Nikon shooter Versus a Minolta shooter and so on. Those were extremely interesting conversations. The printers knew right away which set of filters were needed for this photographer even before testing just because of the equipment used. No, judging lenses on a screen and where images have been altered by this and that profile and this and that gamma gamut and you name it is just not the same and, will never be, as a trained eye in a darkroom or on slides viewed 40X and printed on Ciba to be judged. Nowadays, lenses are traded on a daily basis. All the photography "Experts" buy and sell lenses by the day, judging them from a few files, writing their experiences on different forums, get praise and many thanks from their online (un)friends and carry on with their (un)expert "reviews". I've shot so many images with my Noctilux at all f-stops that if I started posting all the shots, people wouldn't believe the images were done with that lens. There's that internet misconception about it that people just carry on spreading around and it's just not representative. "Magical wide open" and "soft until f2.8" and "its fingerprint" blablabla. Seriously judging a lens, all its facets and behavior, should take no less then 6 months of intensive shooting. Something that simply doesn't happen in this digital era. And if it does, the said photographers simply don't see a point in sharing their findings on internet forums where they'll mostly be taken down by the more popular users from the country club. A lens simply cannot be judged in a lightroom window. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NB23 Posted January 19, 2011 Share #39 Posted January 19, 2011 The fact that some lenses show up both on the 'best' lists of some people, and on the 'worst' lists of other people, underlines to me the complete uselessness of this discussion. As soon as you try to be specific, you discover that there is no common ground. This is my last posting on this thread. The old man from the Age of Hypo (not Hype) People simply (and ridiculously) tend to praise what they own as being the best there is. Like when one asks "Which 50mm is best", the answers include pathetic answers such as canon 50 1.8, lux pre-ashp, lux asph, summarit, planar, "why don't you try a 40mm Voigtlander", "Best bang for the buck" and so on. People simply recommend what they own, even if it's junk and they try to pass it as the Best 50mm lens, regardless of what the best really is. If they don't own it, they won't recommend it. That is the internet: The worst communication tool ever for those who don't use their critical minds to separate the logical from the bull. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted January 19, 2011 Share #40 Posted January 19, 2011 Some (most?) of us have been using many lenses during many years and we know how they behave fortunately. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.