ZHNL Posted January 22, 2020 Share #81 Posted January 22, 2020 Advertisement (gone after registration) 1 hour ago, NRKstudio said: I just can’t believe how poorly ranked DXOMark measured the 35 Cron SL. Worse than the 35/1.8 Z and even poorer than the Zeiss/Sony 35/1.4 FE. This is crazy. Worse even than the $350 Sony 28/2 FE. The Sony’s were tested on a 42mp a7r2 sensor while the 35 SL tested on a 47mp S1r sensor. The 35 Z tested on the Z7 45+ mp. https://www.dxomark.com/leica-apo-summicron-sl-35mm-f2-asph-lens-review/ Maybe it need to be tested on SL2? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 22, 2020 Posted January 22, 2020 Hi ZHNL, Take a look here Nikkor Z 35/1.8 S vs. APO 35 Summicron-SL. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Agent M10 Posted January 22, 2020 Share #82 Posted January 22, 2020 5 minutes ago, ZHNL said: Maybe it need to be tested on SL2? Maybe the unique contrast design that Leica has incorporated in the primes has something to do with it? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 22, 2020 Share #83 Posted January 22, 2020 1 hour ago, Leicaiste said: Sorry but in my opinion the ergonomics of the EOS R is terrible. No joystick, the BBF at the wrong place etc. Everybody's different. It works for me and I have shot about 60,000 pictures with the EOS R in the meanwhile. FWIW, I don't use back button focusing and I did initially miss the joystick. Now that I have gotten used to moving the focus point around with the thumb though I actually find it a more convenient way of working. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaemono Posted January 22, 2020 Author Share #84 Posted January 22, 2020 vor 3 Stunden schrieb NRKstudio: I just can’t believe how poorly ranked DXOMark measured the 35 Cron SL. Worse than the 35/1.8 Z and even poorer than the Zeiss/Sony 35/1.4 FE. This is crazy. Worse even than the $350 Sony 28/2 FE. The Sony’s were tested on a 42mp a7r2 sensor while the 35 SL tested on a 47mp S1r sensor. The 35 Z tested on the Z7 45+ mp. https://www.dxomark.com/leica-apo-summicron-sl-35mm-f2-asph-lens-review/ DxOMark: “A built-in profile that instructs RAW files in supported processing software to make additional adjustments to handle distortion.” This is a blatant lie. There is no built-in profile to handle distortion. DxOMark: “When the profile isn’t supported, it’s possible that the distortion may be noticeable...” They are too dumb to remove the opcodes. Leica needs to spend more on advertising on the DxOMark sites to get better scores, I think. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZHNL Posted January 22, 2020 Share #85 Posted January 22, 2020 1 hour ago, Chaemono said: DxOMark: “A built-in profile that instructs RAW files in supported processing software to make additional adjustments to handle distortion.” This is a blatant lie. There is no built-in profile to handle distortion. DxOMark: “When the profile isn’t supported, it’s possible that the distortion may be noticeable...” They are too dumb to remove the opcodes. Leica needs to spend more on advertising on the DxOMark sites to get better scores, I think. The problem was obviously not education but sharpness and CA. I don’t trust their test but I think it could because of different sensor stack thickness make the sharpness suffer. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NRKstudio Posted January 22, 2020 Share #86 Posted January 22, 2020 1 hour ago, Chaemono said: DxOMark: “A built-in profile that instructs RAW files in supported processing software to make additional adjustments to handle distortion.” This is a blatant lie. There is no built-in profile to handle distortion. DxOMark: “When the profile isn’t supported, it’s possible that the distortion may be noticeable...” They are too dumb to remove the opcodes. Leica needs to spend more on advertising on the DxOMark sites to get better scores, I think. Their sharpness “profiles” measurements trend similar to Leica’s published MTF’s in that diffraction causes resolution losses from f4 onwards. This lends some credence to DXO’s findings, but this is crazy that Dxo with the s1r can’t get good imatest results. Has anyone read any 3rd party mtf tests on the 35 SL? Or imatest results anywhere else? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NRKstudio Posted January 22, 2020 Share #87 Posted January 22, 2020 Advertisement (gone after registration) the only l-mount imatest results I’ve seen are pcmag.com’s results for the 75 SL APO and the Panasonic 50/1.4 S Pro. The leica is much higher resolving wide open. I always felt the 75 SL was nearly unmatched tho even at f4, but both lenses are pretty close. https://www.pcmag.com/reviews/panasonic-lumix-s-pro-50mm-f14 https://www.pcmag.com/reviews/leica-apo-summicron-sl-75mm-f2-asph Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leicaiste Posted January 22, 2020 Share #88 Posted January 22, 2020 6 hours ago, SlowDriver said: Everybody's different. It works for me and I have shot about 60,000 pictures with the EOS R in the meanwhile. FWIW, I don't use back button focusing and I did initially miss the joystick. Now that I have gotten used to moving the focus point around with the thumb though I actually find it a more convenient way of working. Yes, everybody’s different. I tuned off the back screen because the focus point was always going to end on the border of the screen/viewfinder. Like I turned off the pad and also auto review which was in the way of taking the next picture. Hope the EOS R II will go back to 5D Mk IV ergonomics. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivar B Posted January 22, 2020 Share #89 Posted January 22, 2020 15 hours ago, NRKstudio said: I just can’t believe how poorly ranked DXOMark measured the 35 Cron SL. Worse than the 35/1.8 Z and even poorer than the Zeiss/Sony 35/1.4 FE. This is crazy. Worse even than the $350 Sony 28/2 FE. The Sony’s were tested on a 42mp a7r2 sensor while the 35 SL tested on a 47mp S1r sensor. The 35 Z tested on the Z7 45+ mp. https://www.dxomark.com/leica-apo-summicron-sl-35mm-f2-asph-lens-review/ Can DXOmark have received a lens which is substandard somehow? Hard to believe that a Sigma Art 35mm at about 15 % of the Leica price tag should be superior. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaemono Posted January 22, 2020 Author Share #90 Posted January 22, 2020 vor einer Stunde schrieb Ivar B: Can DXOmark have received a lens which is substandard somehow? Hard to believe that a Sigma Art 35mm at about 15 % of the Leica price tag should be superior. Yes, a special edition of the 35 Summicron-SL with distortion correction by opcodes. 🤣 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkinVan Posted January 22, 2020 Share #91 Posted January 22, 2020 On 12/29/2019 at 1:27 AM, Chaemono said: I'll take the 35 Summicron-SL over any other 35 mm lens on the SL2. The last three in the gallery here: https://www.smugmug.com/gallery/n-7qQZzW/ are with this lens wide open. Amazing pictures! Thanks. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tailwagger Posted January 22, 2020 Share #92 Posted January 22, 2020 (edited) This whole thing DXO thing makes me laugh. A lot. 🤔OTOH, perhaps its an opportunity. I'd be over the moon to take anyone's lightly used SL-35 off their hands to elevate their game and alleviate their sorrow by trading them a brand new, never opened Z7 and Z 35mm 1.8s. Just give me your address, the lens and a few days to order the Nikon stuff. 🤣 Edited January 22, 2020 by Tailwagger 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NRKstudio Posted January 25, 2020 Share #93 Posted January 25, 2020 On 1/22/2020 at 4:41 PM, Tailwagger said: This whole thing DXO thing makes me laugh. A lot. 🤔OTOH, perhaps its an opportunity. I'd be over the moon to take anyone's lightly used SL-35 off their hands to elevate their game and alleviate their sorrow by trading them a brand new, never opened Z7 and Z 35mm 1.8s. Just give me your address, the lens and a few days to order the Nikon stuff. 🤣 It’s not a criticism it was genuine surprise! I have the 50 Cron and even with my old A7r4 and the 50/1.4 Zony I couldn’t get this type of look. The 50 Cron reminds me more of the GFX50r with their 63mm GF lens. That may be the highest resolving 50mm combo out on the market now, obviously it’s because it’s medium format and Fuji follows Leica in their lens design ethos. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tailwagger Posted January 25, 2020 Share #94 Posted January 25, 2020 7 hours ago, NRKstudio said: It’s not a criticism it was genuine surprise! I have the 50 Cron and even with my old A7r4 and the 50/1.4 Zony I couldn’t get this type of look. Which is why I was laughing 😉 The fault, dear DXO, is not in our lens's sun stars, but in yourselves. Perhaps, just maybe, a firm with over a 100 years of optical design experience, one who not only has been testing and manufacturing lenses, but has pioneered multiple innovations in all these areas, knows a few things in this arena that the wiseass teenager hacker, DXO, has yet to understand and specifically how to measure. We've heard from Karbe on what they were trying to achieve in this series of lenses, much of which simply isn't accounted for by standard measurement. The result of that work has been a set of optics whose output can cause even casual observers to gasp at mere snapshots. If one is doing 'science', when an unexpected result is obtained, one questions the test methodology first, before publishing. If they indeed were surprised, then perhaps that was a moment to reflect and call into question their own methodology rather than just push the number out. Having chosen the latter confirms for me that their method and perhaps their agenda, is suspect. One further point in that regard. They chose to employ an S1R over the SL2, likely unavailable, but in particular over the SL, which clearly was. They, as we, are fully aware, and in fact mention in the article, that many corrections are being applied in camera. However, they conveniently leave out whether or not the S1R's set of corrections are known to be the exactly the same ones employed by Leica bodies. It seems completely obvious that they choose the S1R over the SL preferring its increased pixel count as more dots better suits their own brief. That decision, one oddly contrary to their own DNA given they earn their crust via software production, is quite telling. Especially so, given how crucial the partnership of software and hardware has become in the world of optics. If the goal is to generate a single, credible number for comparison, ignoring this variable is questionable. As an engineer myself, it suggests to me the level of fudge factor they are willing to entertain. One of many reasons why the report has so little meaning to one who continues to wait impatiently for his own copy of this optic. A someone who experiences a slight stabbing pain every time he shoots with an alternate 35mm lens on his SL2. Ettu DXO? Or as so often is the case with reviews of Leica's 'overpriced' offerings, did you come not to praise, but to bury them? 2 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agent M10 Posted January 25, 2020 Share #95 Posted January 25, 2020 (edited) 1 hour ago, Tailwagger said: One of many reasons why the report has so little meaning to one who continues to wait impatiently for his own copy of this optic. A someone who experiences a slight stabbing pain every time he shoots with an alternate 35mm lens on his SL2. I just put my 35mm FLE up for sale because I couldn't bear that stabbing pain any longer. Edited January 25, 2020 by Agent M10 2 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 25, 2020 Share #96 Posted January 25, 2020 2 hours ago, Tailwagger said: Which is why I was laughing 😉 The fault, dear DXO, is not in our lens's sun stars, but in yourselves. Perhaps, just maybe, a firm with over a 100 years of optical design experience, one who not only has been testing and manufacturing lenses, but has pioneered multiple innovations in all these areas, knows a few things in this arena that the wiseass teenager hacker, DXO, has yet to understand and specifically how to measure. We've heard from Karbe on what they were trying to achieve in this series of lenses, much of which simply isn't accounted for by standard measurement. The result of that work has been a set of optics whose output can cause even casual observers to gasp at mere snapshots. If one is doing 'science', when an unexpected result is obtained, one questions the test methodology first, before publishing. If they indeed were surprised, then perhaps that was a moment to reflect and call into question their own methodology rather than just push the number out. Having chosen the latter confirms for me that their method and perhaps their agenda, is suspect. One further point in that regard. They chose to employ an S1R over the SL2, likely unavailable, but in particular over the SL, which clearly was. They, as we, are fully aware, and in fact mention in the article, that many corrections are being applied in camera. However, they conveniently leave out whether or not the S1R's set of corrections are known to be the exactly the same ones employed by Leica bodies. It seems completely obvious that they choose the S1R over the SL preferring its increased pixel count as more dots better suits their own brief. That decision, one oddly contrary to their own DNA given they earn their crust via software production, is quite telling. Especially so, given how crucial the partnership of software and hardware has become in the world of optics. If the goal is to generate a single, credible number for comparison, ignoring this variable is questionable. As an engineer myself, it suggests to me the level of fudge factor they are willing to entertain. One of many reasons why the report has so little meaning to one who continues to wait impatiently for his own copy of this optic. A someone who experiences a slight stabbing pain every time he shoots with an alternate 35mm lens on his SL2. Ettu DXO? Or as so often is the case with reviews of Leica's 'overpriced' offerings, did you come not to praise, but to bury them? And be paid for by the undertaker? We have a saying in Dutch "The word one speaks comes from the one who provides the bread" ... 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exodies Posted January 25, 2020 Share #97 Posted January 25, 2020 He who pays the piper calls the tune. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 25, 2020 Share #98 Posted January 25, 2020 4 hours ago, Exodies said: He who pays the piper calls the tune. I know, but no itinerant pipers over here Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tailwagger Posted January 25, 2020 Share #99 Posted January 25, 2020 4 minutes ago, jaapv said: I know, but no itinerant pipers over here Just a bunch of agitated blowhards, like me. 🤣 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 25, 2020 Share #100 Posted January 25, 2020 59 minutes ago, Tailwagger said: Just a bunch of agitated blowhards, like me. 🤣 Let’s be nice to Andy 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.