drstefanlenz Posted April 19, 2007 Share #1 Posted April 19, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) hello, im am often reading about the performance of the m8 and want to post some of my little testings this is the full image with the 35mm asph. lens at aperture 1,4 now parts of the picture first the center, ap 1,4, like above: the edge at 1,4: the edge with ap. 5,6: this is why i got the m8. regards s.lenz Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted April 19, 2007 Posted April 19, 2007 Hi drstefanlenz, Take a look here M8 with lens 35 asph, testing ap.1,4. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
wattsy Posted April 19, 2007 Share #2 Posted April 19, 2007 A bit oversharpened for my taste. I can also see quite a few unattractive artifacts. Is this an in-camera JPEG or did you convert from a DNG? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
drstefanlenz Posted April 19, 2007 Author Share #3 Posted April 19, 2007 A bit oversharpened for my taste. I can also see quite a few unattractive artifacts. Is this an in-camera JPEG or did you convert from a DNG? done with c1. the artifacts you cannot see on the dng, but i suppose it was useful to convert it into jpg in order to show it here and is not the issue now. for me i like this sharpening (a bit more th average with c1), since it are buildings and a little test of performance. anything positive to say?? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lepremier Posted April 19, 2007 Share #4 Posted April 19, 2007 Trying to get my hands on this lens for a couple of months now but apparently Leica seem to have a material problem with the "glass" I'm told and deliveries dates are out of sight....but the price is still going up...suspicious!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
drstefanlenz Posted April 19, 2007 Author Share #5 Posted April 19, 2007 Trying to get my hands on this lens for a couple of months now but apparently Leica seem to have a material problem with the "glass" I'm told and deliveries dates are out of sight....but the price is still going up...suspicious!! on the used market (ebay etc,) you can get one. what do you mean with "suspicious"? i had mine 1997, i guess, one of the first. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_choy58 Posted April 19, 2007 Share #6 Posted April 19, 2007 Try turning down the noise suppression in C1. There should be less artifacts. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
j. borger Posted April 19, 2007 Share #7 Posted April 19, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) Sorry if i do not get it ...... but what are you trying to proof or test here Stefan..... Not exactly a scene to test a lens at 1.4 if you ask me. You still know where you focussed at? And assuming it was not at the corners of the scene .. what would looking at a corner-crop tell me with a shot at 1.4? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Pariz Posted April 19, 2007 Share #8 Posted April 19, 2007 Stefan is obviously very excited how M8 delivers wonderfully sharp images, from edge to edge, sharp enough even very close to edges. So the artichectutal shot, like this, is maybe the best way to prove reliability and uniqueness of an M8 camera. - Tom Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
xrogers Posted April 19, 2007 Share #9 Posted April 19, 2007 That is great performance wide open, Stefan. The 35 Summilux ASPH is beautiful lens whose flaws are far outweighed by its virtues. --clyde Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
drstefanlenz Posted April 19, 2007 Author Share #10 Posted April 19, 2007 thanx guys, as i see some get it. all this talking bad about the m8 from the beginning i observed, had mine in december. i even had the focus device wrong and had more than 300 pics taken unsharp at 1.4, i realized somethings was wrong but waited till after xmas to contact leica. they fixed it, took maybe 3 weeks. after all i am glad that i did not follow the few hesitations i felt due to this discussion about malfunctions etc about the m8 in 2006. together with my nikon slr i guess i have all i need. and yes this pics were just taken for testing how sharp it is after the adjustment of leica. this pics here finally satisfied me, together with a few taken at close distance, also with a siemensstern. of course the most of them over 2000 other ones i have taken are more beautiful than this one Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carcam Posted April 19, 2007 Share #11 Posted April 19, 2007 Thanks Stefan for posting this image. It is a nice picture that highlights the benefits of shootint at 1.4. It looks much better than I would have thought. Very nice picture and example of the lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuckcars Posted April 20, 2007 Share #12 Posted April 20, 2007 Hi, Stefan: Processing with Capture One in the sharpening phase try setting the Noise Supression slider to LOW. Set the banding supression to OFF. I know it is illogical, however, that seems to be the way C1 works best. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
drstefanlenz Posted April 20, 2007 Author Share #13 Posted April 20, 2007 Hi, Stefan: Processing with Capture One in the sharpening phase try setting the Noise Supression slider to LOW. Set the banding supression to OFF. I know it is illogical, however, that seems to be the way C1 works best. thanx, i will definitely try this. for printing etc i use tif anyway. too bad c1 does not convert into raw (trademark problems??). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pfogle Posted April 20, 2007 Share #14 Posted April 20, 2007 thanx, i will definitely try this. for printing etc i use tif anyway. too bad c1 does not convert into raw (trademark problems??). Stefan... I think there's some confusion here. The artifacts people are referring to are sharpening artifacts, not compression artifacts, so they will show up the same in tif. Converting into RAW does not make sense, as you can't view a RAW file, it has to be converted into another, viewable format first - the RAW file is just digital data from the chip. You can't print it or view it. By the way - I can see that the lens is amazingly sharp wide open - far better than any lens I own! Also, the sharpening you are using may well be appropriate for printing, even if it looks a bit heavy at 100% on the screen. So makes no sense to criticize sharpening unless it's in context, IMO. thanks Phil Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted April 20, 2007 Share #15 Posted April 20, 2007 Sharpening for the web ain't easy.. I convert in C1 with the default settings for sharpening, noise surpression low banding surpression off, in photoshop, if it is a keeper luminance sharpening to taste or otherwise USM to taste, save for print, then resize using bicubic or bicubic sharper according to subject and resharpen at radius 0.4, 0, 50%-150%, and save. I like it that way and don't get too many artifacts. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Roberts Posted April 20, 2007 Share #16 Posted April 20, 2007 Sharpening for the web ain't easy.. I convert in C1 with the default settings for sharpening, noise surpression low banding surpression off, in photoshop, if it is a keeper luminance sharpening to taste or otherwise USM to taste, save for print, then resize using bicubic or bicubic sharper according to subject and resharpen at radius 0.4, 0, 50%-150%, and save. I like it that way and don't get too many artifacts. I leave the C1 sharpening at defaults if I'm going to sharpen for print in PS; otherwise I actually turn it up. There's no such thing as too sharp in print, as long as the noise is acceptible and you don't obviously have terrible artifacts. For the web, sharpening is best left alone until you resize the image for posting. If you sharpen first, then re-size later, you're not getting sharpening artifacts so much as interpolation errors (and then JPEG compression makes it worse). So if you have a nicely sharp image saved from C1 (I usually output a 16bpp TIFF, which some would say is overkill, but it's better for colour since many raw converters aren't as good as photoshop in resampling images), go into PS, throw away 8 bits (now that the colour is in the ballpark) then rezise with "bicubic sharper" which is better for image reduction. Then apply USM to taste (or some other contrast adjustment) @ 100% of the image size. Finally, save for web. You shouldn't see any artifacts then. Oh--and yes--the 35 ASPH is spectacular wide open, edge to edge. On my copy, it's also fabulous stopped down Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.