depth of field

[Michael Geschlecht]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Oh yes

 

Hello Jaap,

 

If you did read my entire Post, then why did you write what you did as being reflective of that Post? Your response does not appear to be reflective of the content of my Post, as far as I can read.

 

Could you explain please?

 

Best Regards,

 

Michael

Edited March 8, 2018 by Michael Geschlecht

[Advertisement]

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

[roofus]

I doubt that Peter Karbe would make such a ridiculous implication; and I agree that whatever Mr. Karbe had to say, he meant what you said he did, or close very close to that at least (I suspect it was more 'they are able to be used at full aperture with very little image degradation' because that's what I expect a lens designer and engineer to say).... why would one ever hesitate to use a lens wide open if the circumstances of the photograph required it?

 

It's the implication asserted by responses in this thread that I find ridiculous. Just because a lens performs well wide open does not mean that one must use it at wide open settings, or that those settings are best for all uses...!

 

I really don't need to have Leica's chief lens designer tell me that Leica lenses are so good at all. After all, I bought Leica lenses on the basis of my knowledge that they are excellent performers across the full range of apertures, which I learned through long experience with the brand. So what's the point of paying for a video whereby the chief lens designer tells me what I'm already aware of? And why would such a promotional/marketing-oriented piece be locked behind a subscription fee in the first place? I find that ridiculous as well.

 

There's very little that Leica or any other manufacturer has to say that is of adequate substance and information value to be worth paying for. Unless you are looking to buy something they make, and they choose to promote exclusivity of their products by making it cost you money to find out about them ...?? Absurd.

 

Your willingness to comment on a video you haven't, seen is entertaining at least!

[lx1713]

I looked at the video again and I would urge all of you who subscribe to the Luminous Landscape to do the same (I have no connection with the site!)

 

Peter Karbe (the head lens guy at Leica . . I can't remember his precise title) said Leica lenses are designed to be used wide open and they perform best wide open. He did not distinguish between M, R, S, SL lenses!

 

The implication was you should only stop them down: in bright light, to increase the depth of field, or to influence bokeh.

 

 

I'm venturing to read between the lines of Karbe's statement but I've not seen this particular video. It's just consistent from other readings.

 

I think he's saying Leica's philosophy differs from their competitors in that they are designed to be used wide open and they are the best, compared to other brands, wide open. This philosophy differentiates Leica lenses from other brands. It's different from saying other brands are not as good or stopping down means quality is less. That there is no low end, low quality, poor image performing lens from Leica.

 

This, I think, bears out in practice for many Leica users. That they have been designed as such and delivered to users as such.

 

Personally, I don't really need to accommodate for possible IQ issues when I pick an aperture to use. Hope that's helpful.

Edited March 13, 2018 by lx1713

[scott kirkpatrick]

There's very little that Leica or any other manufacturer has to say that is of adequate substance and information value to be worth paying for. Unless you are looking to buy something they make, and they choose to promote exclusivity of their products by making it cost you money to find out about them ...?? Absurd.

 

OOF!  Sorry to pick on Godfrey (several others are sounding just as fussy), but the reference was to Kevin Raber's collection of about eight interviews with Leica product managers.  They are free to view as long as they are linked on the current main page, and $1 per month for the subscription (that's about Patreon level).  I was disappointed with the interviews, which were interesting at times, but lacking largely because the interviewer kept gushing and showing how little he actually knows or cares about the product line.  The questions were softballs.  So if I should decide not to spend $1 a month for LL, it would be because of low overlap between my interests and the things (like shooting from cruise liners in Antarctica) that LL people spend their time on.  I thought the Leica managers were actually trying to talk about some subjects of interest.

 

And while the Leica product managers do in general practice market-speak, Karbe is a distinct exception.

Edited March 13, 2018 by scott kirkpatrick

[Jared]

I, like many, suspect that Karen meant there was no need to avoid using Leica lenses wide open since none of their current lineup has poor performance under those circumstances. That’s the only interpretation that makes sense.

 

A little testing of one’s own—just enough to learn how a new lens performs—will confirm this. I think I only own one lens that is actually at it’s best with respect to resolution and contrast wide open, and that’s because it’s a slow enough lens to be essentially at the diffraction limit for the format when used wide open. My 11-23 TL at the long end is best at f/4.5. All the rest of the Leica glass I have owned over the years—all of it—improves somewhat when stopped down a little.

 

That being said, all the modern aspheres work just fine wide open, and I wouldn’t hesitate to use almost any aperture the situation called for.

 

Honestly, I’m not sure where the disagreement lies. Does someone else have different experiences? Anyone whose lens is demonstrably better optically (even if a small amount better) at maximum aperture? I can’t think of one other than the aforementioned zoom. Karbe isn’t the messiah, after all, he’s an optical engineer trying to explain his design philosophy with the added challenge of speaking in a second language. Surely our direct experience trumps his literal statements?

[roofus]

I, like many, suspect that Karen meant there was no need to avoid using Leica lenses wide open since none of their current lineup has poor performance under those circumstances. That’s the only interpretation that makes sense.

 

A little testing of one’s own—just enough to learn how a new lens performs—will confirm this. I think I only own one lens that is actually at it’s best with respect to resolution and contrast wide open, and that’s because it’s a slow enough lens to be essentially at the diffraction limit for the format when used wide open. My 11-23 TL at the long end is best at f/4.5. All the rest of the Leica glass I have owned over the years—all of it—improves somewhat when stopped down a little.

 

That being said, all the modern aspheres work just fine wide open, and I wouldn’t hesitate to use almost any aperture the situation called for.

 

Honestly, I’m not sure where the disagreement lies. Does someone else have different experiences? Anyone whose lens is demonstrably better optically (even if a small amount better) at maximum aperture? I can’t think of one other than the aforementioned zoom. Karbe isn’t the messiah, after all, he’s an optical engineer trying to explain his design philosophy with the added challenge of speaking in a second language. Surely our direct experience trumps his literal statements?

 

No No No! He did not say that at all!!!!! He did not imply that!!!!

 

I give up!  . . . . . I am sorry I even mentioned it!

 

I am amazed at how willing people are to offer an opinion without even viewing the video where the comments were made!!!!!

 

I am returning to "Lurking."

 

Posting is too stressful . . . .