M10 plus Noctilux like having a brick around your neck

[jlindstrom]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Referring to some earlier posts in this thread speculating on differences between same, indicated, aperture values of Noctilux and APO. There was, based on comparing how image backgrounds look, speculation that the values don’t hold true - either nocti has larger f-stop than indicated or APO smaller.

Perhaps the indicated values hold true and there’s another factor in play. The lens rentals test shows differencies in focal length between the lenses. This will also have affect on the look of the lens.

Noctilux is said to be actually 52.5mm and the APO is measured at 51.5mm. This difference should account for something, right?

[otto.f]

Yes, but not that much I guess. The difference in blur in the background in the photo’s with the seagull was at least half an aperture stop to my mind. A millimeter difference in focal length seems a bit too little for that. 

[jlindstrom]

4 hours ago, otto.f said:

Yes, but not that much I guess. The difference in blur in the background in the photo’s with the seagull was at least half an aperture stop to my mind. A millimeter difference in focal length seems a bit too little for that. 

So perhaps it's a F-stop vs. T-stop thing. They both share the same calculated F-stop value,  but in reality transmit light differently causing difference in T-stop and thus in real photos as well.

[Chaemono]

vor 1 Stunde schrieb jlindstrom:

They both share the same calculated F-stop value, but in reality transmit light differently ...

You mean theoretical F-stop value and the difference in light transmission is a reflection of small variances in the exact aperture other than what’s indicated on the ring resulting in different T-stop? The only flaws with this argument are 1.) either they don’t share the same ‘calculated’ F-stop value because the ring is inaccurate to begin with which is what Otto is saying and 2.) the aperture ring could be quite accurate and the T-stop still differ. How much light at the end hits the sensor irrespective of how much entered the lens does not affect background blur, it only affects exposure AFAIK.

[otto.f]

3 hours ago, Chaemono said:

You mean theoretical F-stop value and the difference in light transmission is a reflection of small variances in the exact aperture other than what’s indicated on the ring resulting in different T-stop? The only flaws with this argument are 1.) either they don’t share the same ‘calculated’ F-stop value because the ring is inaccurate to begin with which is what Otto is saying and 2.) the aperture ring could be quite accurate and the T-stop still differ. How much light at the end hits the sensor irrespective of how much entered the lens does not affect background blur, it only affects exposure AFAIK.

I couldn’t have said it that clear

[jaapv]

11 hours ago, jlindstrom said:

Referring to some earlier posts in this thread speculating on differences between same, indicated, aperture values of Noctilux and APO. There was, based on comparing how image backgrounds look, speculation that the values don’t hold true - either nocti has larger f-stop than indicated or APO smaller.

Perhaps the indicated values hold true and there’s another factor in play. The lens rentals test shows differencies in focal length between the lenses. This will also have affect on the look of the lens.

Noctilux is said to be actually 52.5mm and the APO is measured at 51.5mm. This difference should account for something, right?

The transition of DOF is part of the calculation of the optical formula of the lens. Leica pays much attention to that aspect of lens design. However, if the "look"of the OOF areas is different, the impression of DOF -which is, after all, a subjective phenomenon- will vary between lenses as well. As it will with subject contrast and subject matter. A "busy" high-contrast photograph will appear to have less DOF than one with a few big, low-contrast shapes. To visualize this, imagine light grey objects in a fog. DOF will seem to be near-infinite.

[Guest]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

7 hours ago, jaapv said:

The transition of DOF is part of the calculation of the optical formula of the lens. Leica pays much attention to that aspect of lens design. However, if the "look"of the OOF areas is different, the impression of DOF -which is, after all, a subjective phenomenon- will vary between lenses as well. As it will with subject contrast and subject matter. A "busy" high-contrast photograph will appear to have less DOF than one with a few big, low-contrast shapes. To visualize this, imagine light grey objects in a fog. DOF will seem to be near-infinite.

If you shoot wide open none of that applies............you get what you get wide open.

[jaapv]

On the contrary - when you shoot wide open the out of focus rendering is the most important part of the image. At f 8.0 it doesn't matter.

[Guest]

20 minutes ago, jaapv said:

On the contrary - when you shoot wide open the out of focus rendering is the most important part of the image. At f 8.0 it doesn't matter.

My point is when you are using a Noctilux wide open you are going to get what you get.............once you start adjusting the aperture it is you who is defining what the background is going to be like............wide open you have no control over it. I have had two 0.95 Noctiluxs and they both rendered differently 

Neil

[Guest]

3 hours ago, NW67 said:

My point is when you are using a Noctilux wide open you are going to get what you get.............once you start adjusting the aperture it is you who is defining what the background is going to be like............wide open you have no control over it. I have had two 0.95 Noctiluxs and they both rendered differently 

Neil

A picture tells a thousand sentences

My mates Cock

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!

And my mates Dog............ both shot wide open

Neil

 

[jaapv]

5 hours ago, NW67 said:

My point is when you are using a Noctilux wide open you are going to get what you get.............once you start adjusting the aperture it is you who is defining what the background is going to be like............wide open you have no control over it. I have had two 0.95 Noctiluxs and they both rendered differently 

Neil

That is a quite unlikely, Neil. The lens design is the same --> the rendering is the same. To determine whether there is a difference between  two lenses you can only do a controlled experiment. The same subject in the same light with the same camera.

Those two shots tell us nothing, they are chalk and cheese. Taken at different distances, completely different OOF areas, nothing is the same.

[Gelatino]

14 minutes ago, jaapv said:

, nothing is the same.

Error: both animals belong to Neil's mate.

[otto.f]

2 hours ago, NW67 said:

My mates Cock

This image has been cropped, no?

[Guest]

1 hour ago, jaapv said:

That is a quite unlikely, Neil. The lens design is the same --> the rendering is the same. To determine whether there is a difference between  two lenses you can only do a controlled experiment. The same subject in the same light with the same camera.

Those two shots tell us nothing, they are chalk and cheese. Taken at different distances, completely different OOF areas, nothing is the same.

Without a doubt my two Noctiluxs were different. The two examples I showed are shot wide open. On the same camera using the same lens. I sold my first Noctilux about 5 years ago. 

[Guest]

45 minutes ago, Gelatino said:

Error: both animals belong to Neil's mate.

Exactly 

[Guest]

44 minutes ago, otto.f said:

This image has been cropped, no?

Circumsized ..............yes cropped. I’m good at what I do but getting really close to a cock that is in the middle of a song isn’t advisable 

[otto.f]

24 minutes ago, NW67 said:

Circumsized ..............yes cropped. I’m good at what I do but getting really close to a cock that is in the middle of a song isn’t advisable 

Your Noctilux protects you for that 😊, its smallest object field being 60x80cm. I presumed this was not a dino-cock

[jaapv]

1 hour ago, NW67 said:

Without a doubt my two Noctiluxs were different. The two examples I showed are shot wide open. On the same camera using the same lens. I sold my first Noctilux about 5 years ago. 

Sorry Neil, I don’t believe you without objective proof. I’m sure various photos look different, but I’m equally sure that the lens was not the cause. When lenses are produced they are always checked against a reference lens. Any lens not complying is rejected. 

[jaapv]

1 hour ago, NW67 said:

Circumsized ..............yes cropped. I’m good at what I do but getting really close to a cock that is in the middle of a song isn’t advisable 

Which changed the effective focal length equivalent and with that the DOF and OOF rendering. 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[otto.f]

2 hours ago, jaapv said:

Which changed the effective focal length equivalent and with that the DOF and OOF rendering. 

Exactly