35 Lux vs cron

[lct]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Sorry i did not notice the name of your camera. You know a rangefinder is not a measure instrument so when doing tests better check that the RF and the lens are perfectly matched, which is not always the case by far. Hence my question about EVFs which are the only way to do fair lens comparos as far as M lenses are concerned in my most humble opinion. I have two EVFs and use both 35/1.4 FLE & 35/2 asph lenses. All i can say is both lenses are sharp at all apertures and i find the 35/1.4 FLE a bit sharper at f/2 especially on edges and corners. FWIW.

[Advertisement]

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

[Frase]

Not really as there's no EVF on M9. Focus was as good as my eyesight allows. But sharpness for both lenses are about the same at f5.6 at the centre of the frame, which is where the focus was.

I would have expected the Summicron to be a bit better at the edges.

[af25]

I would have expected the Summicron to be a bit better at the edges.

 

I'd say the Summicron is a fine lens and the Summilux is insanely good. But lens test is boring and we should be out taking real photos instead.

[Frase]

I'd say the Summicron is a fine lens and the Summilux is insanely good. But lens test is boring and we should be out taking real photos instead.

I'm out taking pictures plenty actually its my job, a lot of the time I find taking 'real pictures' boring

This is what my version 4 Summicron looks like.

Full frame, centre, bottom right all f2.

16fbpicSummicronF2full_01 by f4saregreat!, on Flickr

16fbpicSummicronF2centre_02 by f4saregreat!, on Flickr

16fbpicSummicronF2rightB_03 by f4saregreat!, on Flickr

[Frase]

Bit off topic, Nikon 35mm 1.8fx afs@1.8 centre and bottom right.

Not bad for a £400 lens v £2000 Summicron or £3500 Summilux.

fbpicNikon35mmcentre_02 by f4saregreat!, on Flickr

fbpicNikon35mmrightB_03 by f4saregreat!, on Flickr

[lct]

All modern lenses are sharp in the centre more or less. Edges and corners are another story.

[af25]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm out taking pictures plenty actually its my job, a lot of the time I find taking 'real pictures' boring

This is what my version 4 Summicron looks like.

Full frame, centre, bottom right all f2.

 

 

Thanks for sharing. Now I'm motivated to do another test of the Summicron ASPH with a flat subject. I hope I can do it next weekend and share with everyone.

[Paulus]

Thanks for sharing. Now I'm motivated to do another test of the Summicron ASPH with a flat subject. I hope I can do it next weekend and share with everyone.

Is there something wrong in trusting the testers, who did these test before, like Erwin Puts? Do you have experience in testing and do you know where you can make mistakes. It's one thing to test your lens for yourself, I do it all the time, but IMHO it's another thing to publish thiis without a propper standard, which I not know, because I am not a tester, but some testers know quite well, namely:  Erwin Puts.

[Frase]

Is there something wrong in trusting the testers, who did these test before, like Erwin Puts? Do you have experience in testing and do you know where you can make mistakes. It's one thing to test your lens for yourself, I do it all the time, but IMHO it's another thing to publish thiis without a propper standard, which I not know, because I am not a tester, but some testers know quite well, namely:  Erwin Puts.

I enjoy testing my own lenses, sometimes it's good to know if a particular lens is a good example. I also think with a rangefinder camera without live view it's good every now and then to make sure your lenses are working well with the rangefinder.

This is also a forum about m lenses so I would expect there is a lot of comparing different lenses.

[Paulus]

I enjoy testing my own lenses, sometimes it's good to know if a particular lens is a good example. I also think with a rangefinder camera without live view it's good every now and then to make sure your lenses are working well with the rangefinder.

This is also a forum about m lenses so I would expect there is a lot of comparing different lenses.

The thing is, do you know what you are testing. If you test the lens on your camera, are you testing the camera rangefinder or are you testing the lens?

The thing is, if you not know what you are measuring, what are you measuring?

I know one thing. Making a non-biased lens test is too difficult for me. Of course I can say how I like this lens, but that's not a test IMHO, just an opinion.

[NB23]

Ah come on. Testing lenses is not a science and it is extremely easy to do.

[Frase]

The thing is, do you know what you are testing. If you test the lens on your camera, are you testing the camera rangefinder or are you testing the lens?

The thing is, if you not know what you are measuring, what are you measuring?

I know one thing. Making a non-biased lens test in to difficult for me. Of course I can say how I like this lens, but that's not a test IMHO, just an opinion.

I'm testing them against previous experience with other lenses and lenses I have already. Its not life and death....

[Paulus]

Ah come on. Testing lenses is not a science and it is extremely easy to do.

I'm sorry. I always thought it was. I thought testing a lens is something else than compairing a lens. I thought you had to make a scientific aproach. Setting standards etc. so that what you know what is really there and what you just imagine to be there. How can you see and measure the difference of the lenses when they are so close to each other? 

 

When it's not a science, what is it then? Just fun? So all the lenstesters at Leica just don't keep themselves busy with sience? How can they know how to improve something, if they don't exactly scientifically test their tools?

 

Or are there different kinds of testing?

[jdlaing]

I'm sorry. I always thought it was. I thought testing a lens is something else than compairing a lens. I thought you had to make a scientific aproach. Setting standards etc. so that what you know what is really there and what you just imagine to be there. How can you see and measure the difference of the lenses when they are so close to each other? 

 

When it's not a science, what is it then? Just fun? So all the lenstesters at Leica just don't keep themselves busy with sience? How can they know how to improve something, if they don't exactly scientifically test their tools?

 

Or are there different kinds of testing?

There is the Leica method and then there is the brick wall test. You pick which one is best.

[Frase]

I'm sorry. I always thought it was. I thought testing a lens is something else than compairing a lens. I thought you had to make a scientific aproach. Setting standards etc. so that what you know what is really there and what you just imagine to be there. How can you see and measure the difference of the lenses when they are so close to each other? 

 

When it's not a science, what is it then? Just fun? So all the lenstesters at Leica just don't keep themselves busy with sience? How can they know how to improve something, if they don't exactly scientifically test their tools?

 

Or are there different kinds of testing?

So when buying a new lens and you start shooting with it and it seems to be under/over exposing, not very sharp, flaring etc you wouldn't spend 10 minutes shooting a few controlled shots, just trust those scientist at Leica/Nikon/Canon they must know better because every lens that comes out of the factory is 100% perfect and there has never been any quality control issues. 

And what about buying secondhand not interested if the lens hasn't been abused?

[Paulus]

So when buying a new lens and you start shooting with it and it seems to be under/over exposing, not very sharp, flaring etc you wouldn't spend 10 minutes shooting a few controlled shots, just trust those scientist at Leica/Nikon/Canon they must know better because every lens that comes out of the factory is 100% perfect and there has never been any quality control issues. 

And what about buying secondhand not interested if the lens hasn't been abused?

You are right on this. I have met numbers of lenses that were not well. 5 times a 75 apo summicron which was not shap at infinity , two times a 35 summicron asph which could not focus at infinity, one time a 35 summicron asph titanisiert which titan finish fell off.

 

But that was not " testing " the lens on it's merits. Just noticing that something went wrong. It doesn't say anything about the original product, just about this individual lens and it flaws. I cannot see the diffence between the Elmarit-M 90mm and the 90 mm summicron asph on 3,5 or 4,0. This is to0 difficult for me.I need real testers to do this.  I can see the difference between 2,8 an d 2, 0 but that's not testing IMHO, but just seeing.

[af25]

You are right on this. I have met numbers of lenses that were not well. 5 times a 75 apo summicron which was not shap at infinity , two times a 35 summicron asph which could not focus at infinity, one time a 35 summicron asph titanisiert which titan finish fell off.

 

But that was not " testing " the lens on it's merits. Just noticing that something went wrong. It doesn't say anything about the original product, just about this individual lens and it flaws. I cannot see the diffence between the Elmarit-M 90mm and the 90 mm summicron asph on 3,5 or 4,0. This is to0 difficult for me.I need real testers to do this.  I can see the difference between 2,8 an d 2, 0 but that's not testing IMHO, but just seeing.

 

You can interpret other people's 'tests' however you want and I think that's totally fine. This being the internet, everyone should be able to draw their own conclusion. When I'm in the market for a lens, I look at review by 'experts' and I also look at other people's 'tests'. If you could only trust expert reviews then I don't know what's the point of having a discussion forum like this.

[michaelwj]

 If you could only trust expert reviews then I don't know what's the point of having a discussion forum like this.

 

We could still argue about the 'experts' results 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[TRIago]

The thing is, do you know what you are testing. If you test the lens on your camera, are you testing the camera rangefinder or are you testing the lens?

The thing is, if you not know what you are measuring, what are you measuring?

I know one thing. Making a non-biased lens test in to difficult for me. Of course I can say how I like this lens, but that's not a test IMHO, just an opinion.

Use Live View, then.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[adli]

If you really want to know how a certain lens performs, buy Erwin Puts' compendium or subscribe to Sean Reid.