lct Posted June 10, 2018 Share #41 Posted June 10, 2018 Advertisement (gone after registration) I think the important question is whether the “effect” is reproducible all the time for a given lens+settings. Jaap’s comment above seem to suggest that it is not always and shows up only on a certain angle. Is it so? Flare depends on angle of view for sure but i don't see how a lens like the ZM 50/1.5 could make disappear reflections caused by the sensor. I'm no techie at all though. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted June 10, 2018 Posted June 10, 2018 Hi lct, Take a look here Is there much difference between using native versus M lenses on the CL?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jaapv Posted June 10, 2018 Share #42 Posted June 10, 2018 I would suppose that the configuration of the last lens element is decisive. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott kirkpatrick Posted June 11, 2018 Share #43 Posted June 11, 2018 (edited) OK, With the sun in the center of open sky, this "day for night" shot gives me a few blobs on the M10 with the same 24/2.8-asph @ f/16, but nothing like the pattern of blobs from the CL's sensor: L8002905 by scott kirkpatrick, on Flickr post processing; exposure down 0.5, highlights suppressed 40%, shadows lifted 40% in COne. Enough. מספיק No mas! Edited June 11, 2018 by scott kirkpatrick Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott kirkpatrick Posted June 11, 2018 Share #44 Posted June 11, 2018 (edited) ...... but previous Leica's are not mirrorless ...... Actually, all but the S line of current Leicas ARE mirrorless... Edited June 11, 2018 by scott kirkpatrick Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted June 11, 2018 Share #45 Posted June 11, 2018 OK, With the sun in the center of open sky, this "day for night" shot gives me a few blobs on the M10 with the same 24/2.8-asph @ f/16, but nothing like the pattern of blobs from the CL's sensor: L8002905 by scott kirkpatrick, on Flickr post processing; exposure down 0.5, highlights suppressed 40%, shadows lifted 40% in COne. Enough. מספיק No mas! Lower right hand corner? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott kirkpatrick Posted June 11, 2018 Share #46 Posted June 11, 2018 Lower right hand corner? There's some diaphragm rays from the sunstar, which are erratic, suggesting that the aperture ring consists of curved segments. There's a real streak heading up and left along one of those rays, and an image of the sun reflected back in the middle right side of the image. And finally some bright spots of light through the foliage in the lower right corner. I think the last are real. That tree is not very thick. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted June 11, 2018 Share #47 Posted June 11, 2018 Advertisement (gone after registration) I don't do much of this shooting, but here is one using the 18-56 with B+W 007 filter on the CL. I can't find much to complain of. (Except that the forum software somehow destroyed microcontrast.) 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! Quote 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/285403-is-there-much-difference-between-using-native-versus-m-lenses-on-the-cl/?do=findComment&comment=3535529'>More sharing options...
jaapv Posted June 11, 2018 Share #48 Posted June 11, 2018 And here we have one that shows sunstars on reflections (albeit just behind the plane of focus) Again 18-56, 007 filter 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! Quote 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/285403-is-there-much-difference-between-using-native-versus-m-lenses-on-the-cl/?do=findComment&comment=3535539'>More sharing options...
lct Posted June 11, 2018 Share #49 Posted June 11, 2018 Not bright enough i suspect. Problems seem to come from strong light sources at around f/16. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted June 11, 2018 Share #50 Posted June 11, 2018 Well, f16 is something I wouldn't use at all, especially on smaller format sensors. It gives all kinds of nasties. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted June 11, 2018 Share #51 Posted June 11, 2018 Scott's pics above were shot at f/16 reason why i did my tests at f/16 as well but other comparos can be made at other apertures i guess. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
danielfrimley Posted June 11, 2018 Share #52 Posted June 11, 2018 Well, f16 is something I wouldn't use at all, especially on smaller format sensors. It gives all kinds of nasties. That's interesting. Bit off topic so do move if you think appropriate but I wonder if the full range on the TL lenses is useable without performance issues? - I only have the 23mm Summicron TL and as I use it more I find most of the shots I'm happiest with are taken between f4 and f11 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted June 11, 2018 Share #53 Posted June 11, 2018 On APS-C f 16 is sure to run into diffraction problems - personally I even avoid f 11 on the CL. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott kirkpatrick Posted June 11, 2018 Share #54 Posted June 11, 2018 In good light, I leave everything set for f/5.6, go to f/8 for a little more depth of field, and switch to working from widest aperture or maybe 2.0 with some stop-down for extra depth of field in weak light. And I don't point my camera at the sun if I can help it. So it took some effort to make the CL misbehave, and a serious effort to get anything like that from the M's. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmahto Posted June 13, 2018 Share #55 Posted June 13, 2018 On APS-C f 16 is sure to run into diffraction problems - personally I even avoid f 11 on the CL. I use smaller aperture with Sun in the frame to get good sunstar. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmahto Posted June 13, 2018 Share #56 Posted June 13, 2018 (edited) OK, With the sun in the center of open sky, this "day for night" shot gives me a few blobs on the M10 with the same 24/2.8-asph @ f/16, but nothing like the pattern of blobs from the CL's sensor: L8002905 by scott kirkpatrick, on Flickr post processing; exposure down 0.5, highlights suppressed 40%, shadows lifted 40% in COne. Enough. מספיק No mas! No real issue here on M10. Lifting shadows with Sunstar in the picture does reveal many artifacts that are usually hidden in the darker areas. My understanding is that for CL (I don't have one, I am just reading this thread) the flare artifacts (regularly spaced circles) were visible without lifting shadows. It was illustrated in post #11. I will add that I do have enough experience on Sony APS-C sensor with M lenses and I haven't seen anything like this. If these flare artifacts are easy to be provoked then I will cross out CL from my future list. Edited June 13, 2018 by jmahto Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mctuomey Posted June 13, 2018 Share #57 Posted June 13, 2018 (edited) Don't take this as trolling because it's not meant to be. Is it just me or has this thread (which I've just read front to back) managed to exemplify that saying about the two kinds of photo gearheads: those who figure out what gear can do for them and those who figure out what it can't. What's been demonstrated? That torture-testing different lenses on a CL produces flare in certain cases. Sheesh, I can make my Lux 50 flare like fireworks on multiple bodies. So what? Anybody able to offer samples of CL photos under reasonable conditions taken with M v TL lenses that demonstrate how they might render differently? Edited June 13, 2018 by mctuomey 4 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott kirkpatrick Posted June 14, 2018 Share #58 Posted June 14, 2018 I agree that the thread got off-topic, driven by the feeling that "someone is WRONG on the Internet!!," as a New Yorker cartoon once captured the situation. What some didn't seem to grasp is that the flare pattern on the CL, seen with several different lenses, was not just due to internal reflections inside a lens, but included a rectangular pattern of red blobs created by a back reflection off the sensor, not seen from the sensors of other cameras. Back to the topic of M vs CL lenses on the CL. My current example is the occasionally magical M 24/2.8-asph, which I have been using instead of the perfectly competent CL 23. Here's what it can do (has been posted in the image thread previously): C1050701 by scott kirkpatrick, on Flickr 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mctuomey Posted June 14, 2018 Share #59 Posted June 14, 2018 (edited) I agree that the thread got off-topic, driven by the feeling that "someone is WRONG on the Internet!!," as a New Yorker cartoon once captured the situation. What some didn't seem to grasp is that the flare pattern on the CL, seen with several different lenses, was not just due to internal reflections inside a lens, but included a rectangular pattern of red blobs created by a back reflection off the sensor, not seen from the sensors of other cameras. Thanks, I get it. Valuable to know if one is going to be shooting the CL directly into the sun wanting "creative" flare that the sensor reflection spoils. Edited June 14, 2018 by mctuomey 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.