Mark Pedley Posted October 2, 2013 Share #41 Posted October 2, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) Very similar sample, again there is no such thing as 'No Processing' a RAW file... true. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted October 2, 2013 Posted October 2, 2013 Hi Mark Pedley, Take a look here Is this an Asph trait?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Paul J Posted October 2, 2013 Share #42 Posted October 2, 2013 No. IMHO I agree that this lens does have a tendency for double lines in OOF but so does many lenses. I'm pretty sure we are talking about the hillside 'bleeding' into the sky area... I have a feeling this is a result from the double image bokeh. You can see the effect happening in the foliage on the hill also which is completely separate from the sky. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erik Gunst Lund Posted October 2, 2013 Share #43 Posted October 2, 2013 Same/similar effect to the original post? Not sure either, but am interested to understand the exact root cause (lens characteristics) of that thick yellow band. The sensor sites are clipping at different R G and B values. The converter is left to make an educated guess at a value. Very different to film! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CalArts 99 Posted October 2, 2013 Share #44 Posted October 2, 2013 The 35mm FLE can be a tricky lens sometimes. I don't use digital Leica anymore but still use film Leica. Here's an example of the OOF of the 35mm FLE on film and with the OOF area in even and shaded lighting (the Guadalupe Farm Worker's Free Clinic.) It was taken wide open at the 1.4 aperture. Note that the OOF might look 'nervous' (depending on one's definition.) With any brighter specular highlights this subjective nervousness can be more apparent. And yes, double lines can appear in the OOF area with the 35mm FLE more often than with other lenses. Note the strength of this lens however in the spots where there are circular highlights in the OOF area. They are perfect circles and not elliptical like in many other lenses. That's a characteristic I notice with the 35mm FLE. Look at the upper far right side of the porch roof in this pic. On the far right, where the dark roof meets the white background of the clinic's walls, there is the same 'double-line' that the OP has experienced (although much more dramatically in their image where their mid-tone against the highlight is more obvious.) It's not so apparent in this image, but it's there. I can't make it happen so much on film, but when I had my M9 it happened in areas like the OP is experiencing. I think it's a nice lens on film, but feel it's eccentricities may appear more often with digital. To me, it looks a lot more 'digital' combined with a sensor than with film (where it seems more 'organic.') I think it's a good lens but one does have to understand the way it renders in particular light and with specific backgrounds, and use it according to one's own needs and desires. It does have extremely high resolution and in good light (not mid-day crap light) it can make things 'pop' (as Leica users like to say ) All Leica lenses seem have their certain eccentricities and this one is no exception. (p.s., this forum needs to allow for large file size postings; it's kind of hard to see things with these limited 'thumbnails.') 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/213921-is-this-an-asph-trait/?do=findComment&comment=2433289'>More sharing options...
MarkP Posted October 2, 2013 Share #45 Posted October 2, 2013 (p.s., this forum needs to allow for large file size postings; it's kind of hard to see things with these limited 'thumbnails.') Agreed! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erik Gunst Lund Posted October 2, 2013 Share #46 Posted October 2, 2013 Very nice film sample of the bokeh, thanks! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul J Posted October 2, 2013 Share #47 Posted October 2, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) Nisen Bokeh throughout here. It's the lens damn it! 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/213921-is-this-an-asph-trait/?do=findComment&comment=2433293'>More sharing options...
Stealth3kpl Posted October 2, 2013 Author Share #48 Posted October 2, 2013 OK, I think this is the link: https://www.dropbox.com/s/fnl76baa3zeoyus/L1000284.DNG Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
k-hawinkler Posted October 2, 2013 Share #49 Posted October 2, 2013 Thanks. The DNG file looks overexposed a bit. I wonder what other inferences can be drawn from that image? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erik Gunst Lund Posted October 2, 2013 Share #50 Posted October 2, 2013 OK, I think this is the link:https://www.dropbox.com/s/fnl76baa3zeoyus/L1000284.DNG File has been deleted....? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erik Gunst Lund Posted October 2, 2013 Share #51 Posted October 2, 2013 Nisen Bokeh throughout here. It's the lens damn it! Nissen Bokeh yes Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stealth3kpl Posted October 2, 2013 Author Share #52 Posted October 2, 2013 I didn't realise I had to leave it in the folder on my laptop! I've popped it back in and it's syncing so should show up soon. IT'S BACK! Pete Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stealth3kpl Posted October 2, 2013 Author Share #53 Posted October 2, 2013 Thanks.The DNG file looks overexposed a bit. I wonder what other inferences can be drawn from that image? I tend to overexpose slightly knowing I can bring the highlights back in post. Under exposing brings more noise. That might be old thinking now though? Pete Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
k-hawinkler Posted October 2, 2013 Share #54 Posted October 2, 2013 I tend to overexpose slightly knowing I can bring the highlights back in post. Under exposing brings more noise. That might be old thinking now though?Pete Thanks. Well, that depends on the camera. Which camera did you use? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erik Gunst Lund Posted October 2, 2013 Share #55 Posted October 2, 2013 The sky is washed out so the image is overexposed, blown highlights, on a digital camera it often results in problems in the zone from blown to not blown. IMHO not the lens but the sensor, and photographer I prefer to underexpose.... for the same reason Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CalArts 99 Posted October 2, 2013 Share #56 Posted October 2, 2013 Photography is the "writing of light" (literally.) In the digital age, this notion tends to get tossed out the window with the assumption that all can be corrected with software. In this case you're asking for magic that doesn't exist. You can mediate a certain degree of it but the sensor still has limits (as does film which itself is a RAW file.) Using film has taught us all this but we tend to still get lazy. You can correct the chromatic issues in your .dng file but then when you force the highlight recovery, you just exacerbate the issue. There's no free lunch here. Yes, the 35mm FLE does have its characteristics in respect to double line OOF and sometimes nervous OFF depending on lighting conditions. But in the meantime, make light your friend and not your enemy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CalArts 99 Posted October 2, 2013 Share #57 Posted October 2, 2013 I prefer to underexpose.... for the same reason When preserving highlights, yes. And of course within certain parameters. Again there's no free lunch and one has to conform to the DR of the film or sensor. Otherwise, it's going to always be a compromise. fwiw, here's a basic primer on what to do with similar constraints that the OP encountered with his scene: How to Boost the Dynamic Range of an Underexposed Portrait in Lightroom 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stealth3kpl Posted October 2, 2013 Author Share #58 Posted October 2, 2013 Thanks. Well, that depends on the camera. Which camera did you use? This is the M9. I have to admit I tend to sunny 16 for my subject. Checking for clipping constantly turned me off digital and took me back to film. I guess I'll need to pay more attention to the histogram. Any joy correcting this file anyone? Perhaps it's not possible? Is this blue line at the hill/sky interface a combination of blown highlights and lens character, or purely irrecoverable highlights? Pete Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JHellow Posted October 2, 2013 Share #59 Posted October 2, 2013 I have three aspherical M lenses and some non-aspherical but apochromatic R lenses that I use with my M. The OOF areas of the 35 Summilux FLE are unique among these lenses in that it is busy. Even the 24MM ASPH Elmarit is not as busy as the 35 FLE. From my perspective it is a unique character of that lens that I use and select for certain subjects and settings. The 35 FLE also has a unique ability to isolate a subject and provide a 3 dimensional pop that is not present in my other lenses, including the 50mm Apo. JHellow Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
k-hawinkler Posted October 2, 2013 Share #60 Posted October 2, 2013 This is the M9. I have to admit I tend to sunny 16 for my subject. Checking for clipping constantly turned me off digital and took me back to film. I guess I'll need to pay more attention to the histogram. Any joy correcting this file anyone? Perhaps it's not possible? Is this blue line at the hill/sky interface a combination of blown highlights and lens character, or purely irrecoverable highlights? Pete Hi Pete, The M9 recovers shadows exceedingly well, but can't recover blown highlights/areas. In my experience the blown areas in your image cannot be recovered. I have been there, done it, got the T shirt. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.