Jump to content

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Rick said:

Because, it is all about chickens!  :D

Fair enough.

 

 

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!

  • Like 9
Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, adan said:

Hmmm - I suspect "$8000 lens" > "chickens" must win some kind of award for thread drift........ ;)

Not quite, turns out it's the chicken photos that sell those $8,000 lenses...

I bought the 28 lux because of that chicken photo, and now, seeing Jono's 35 APO chickens I am tempted again... :)

Edited by ELAN
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, adan said:

That is the scariest thing I've heard in 50 years of photography.

It would be kinda fun if leica stores had pet chickens running around that you could test the gear out on while in store. 

  • Haha 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, adan said:

Hmmm - I suspect "$8000 lens" > "chickens" must win some kind of award for thread drift........ ;)

 

5 hours ago, ELAN said:

Not quite, turns out it's the chicken photos that sell those $8,000 lenses...

I bought the 28 lux because of that chicken photo, and now, seeing Jono's 35 APO chickens I am tempted again... :)

Hi Andy, Elan

As Elan says, not really a drift, and especially as there are now chicken pictures relating to the 35 APO . . . . On the other hand the drift to dog pooh on the other thread does seem a stretch!

 

1 hour ago, adan said:

That is the scariest thing I've heard in 50 years of photography.

It was to do with showing the bokeh of the 28 ‘Lux Asph wide open and close up I think . . .  Even Leica were impressed

Here’s one with the 28

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 here’s one with the 35 APO

Edited by jonoslack
  • Like 11
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 3/12/2021 at 7:18 AM, jonoslack said:

Okay - let's forget about Lloyd, because he is what he is, but let's address this

"why pay $3700 for a 255g Leica 35/2 when you can pay $1150 for a 240g ZEISS 35/2 with superior optics?"

For forgetting about Lloyd, this whole reply sure is focusing a lot on Lloyd 😂 The paraphrasing quote you're giving there strips it of its leading context and thus I think the entire intended point: "..His context is one of future-ready, meticulous execution of landscape shots with edge-to-edge excellence. So when he dogs the 35 Cron it is 1) in that context and 2) relative to its peers. e.g. "If you care about the same stuff I do.." That paraphrased comparison does not exist in a vacuum, it's extremely context-dependent.

Quote

I haven't really used either of these lenses, but there are various possible answers:

First of all Leica R10's answer above

Which basically means "I like using it and I get good pictures" the two sides may or may not be linked.

This, too, is very specifically and exactly covered in the post to which you're responding: "If someone said they want the 35 Cron just because they like the brand, or the way it draws, or enjoy its flaws, etc. I don't expect he'd have any grievance." I feel the same way described, and also have no grievance over what people like or why.

Quote

How do you define 'superior optics' . . . well, it would appear to be because it has good MTF and sharpness in a controlled test setup.

It's going to be defined by the author, for the author's stated or implied context. Given optics rather than preferences, it should be objectively demonstrated and repeatable.

Quote

But it really doesn't (at all) reflect LeicaR10's remarks about it being 'all about the photograph'. But worse than that - Lloyd as you said is complimentary about the 18/20/24 SEM lenses and most people would subscribe to that, but when I had the 24, I tested considerably at 20 metres and found it to be very soft at the corners - Leica confirmed it was 'within spec' Most testers wouldn't test a lens at that distance (too complicated to organise properly and repeatably). 

The 24 SEM was originally reviewed by him 11 years ago, and relative to the available options of that day. One quote of note from it: "Finally, it also shows that MTF by itself is almost silly: the results depend far more on the particular image than on absolute MTF. MTF is a good starting point for understanding performance characteristics, but real images teach a lot more." For one of many notes about the edges, "The outer edge area is visibly less crisp than the right side of the crop, showing that the 24/3.8 does decline to the edges" with the context that the lens still blew away most DSLR lenses of the day.

He has retested it more times over the years. From a retest earlier this year on the M10-M: "Wide open at f/3.8, outer zones are somewhat blurry; the lens cannot make a sharp image outside the central 2/3 or so of the frame. A good deal of the dropoff in performance is probably the direct result of ray angle degradation and not optical per se—even though Leica M lenses are at their best on M cameras, they still suffer from digital sensor application and this is true going way back to the M9—the 40MP sensor just make it more obvious. Stopping down to f/5.6 greatly improves performance to the edges, but corner areas even in the distance are still less than optimal."

More edge criticism on a more demanding camera, but given in fairness to sensor issues. And it was I'll leave it to you to decide to pay to see it all, but if it is the point to imply that the edges were missed - they certainly weren't, and it was tested on a wide amount of subject and focus distances.

Quote

Me? Well, you might be surprised to hear that I really do a lot of testing - and much of it as near to infinity as possible (where the rear element is closest to the sensor and most edge troubles will occur). But I don't publish it much because I think it's very difficult to read properly (and rather boring as well). I use it to inform my opinion about something . . . but what I'm really interested in is how the image actually looks - and that's a function of lots of things you can't really measure

I am not the least bit surprised. And they're your articles, so you certainly can and should do with them as you please. As I said, I enjoy them too!

Quote

What I try to do in my articles, rather than a severe technical approach is to give a proper feel for how a lens will look (draw if you like) and I do that by shooting at different apertures and different distances - then, hopefully the reader can draw their own conclusions.

That is how I take Lloyd's reviews too. They are images, images, images. More images, then some more images. Mostly beautiful landscapes displayed in full with later zoom analysis at all usable apertures, which the reader may read or not, and heed or not, according to their interests. This is not "severe" to me, but I'm reminded of it happening in pretty much all subject matters that anyone who cares more about a given thing is judged as obsessed, and that anyone who cares less is judged as undiscriminating.

Quote

There isn't a right way of doing this, but back to the Leica35/2 vs the Zeiss 35/2 - I don't doubt Lloyds results, but I question whether they have much relevance to which lens you actually decide to get. 

They have tremendous relevance for me, because I would rather "outsource" excellence to those who clearly know and care about it much more than I do. I do know that I want my images to be unsurprising representations of the reality I saw through my viewfinder, and to survive the inevitable progress of monitor sizes and resolution where I do most of my viewing. This is how I make most product decisions: find someone who knows and cares more but in the same direction as me, and heavily consider their advice. And where we disagree (e.g. Lloyd's hatred of rangefinders because of their imprecision compared to EVFs), I just ignore it.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, astrostl said:

 

They have tremendous relevance for me, because I would rather "outsource" excellence to those who clearly know and care about it much more than I do. I do know that I want my images to be unsurprising representations of the reality I saw through my viewfinder, and to survive the inevitable progress of monitor sizes and resolution where I do most of my viewing. This is how I make most product decisions: find someone who knows and cares more but in the same direction as me, and heavily consider their advice. And where we disagree (e.g. Lloyd's hatred of rangefinders because of their imprecision compared to EVFs), I just ignore it.

Hi There

Well, I stand corrected - I haven't subscribed, largely because I've been put off by the teasers - you've eloquently plead his case and I've never doubted his technical abilities (and I was aware of his landscape abilities). 

All the best

Jono Slack

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, Steven said:

Every time I see them I'm amazed. 

Jono, which 35mm lens would you think is a better match with the 28 Lux: the APO or the FLE? As in match, I mean the one capable to produce the most similar image wide open (not the one that would be the most complementary, as that might relate for the subjective realm). 

What an interesting question Steven. It might be logical to think it was the FLE, but I guess I've voted with my wallet and chosen the 35 APO - but I think either would be fine - the 28 'lux is a modern lens, and it's look is perhaps somewhere between the two 35s

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, ELAN said:

Not quite, turns out it's the chicken photos that sell those $8,000 lenses...

I bought the 28 lux because of that chicken photo, and now, seeing Jono's 35 APO chickens I am tempted again... :)

Perhaps cheaper to keep a few 🐔

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, jonoslack said:

 

Hi Andy, Elan

As Elan says, not really a drift, and especially as there are now chicken pictures relating to the 35 APO . . . . On the other hand the drift to dog pooh on the other thread does seem a stretch!

 

It was to do with showing the bokeh of the 28 ‘Lux Asph wide open and close up I think . . .  Even Leica were impressed

Here’s one with the 28

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 here’s one with the 35 APO

What a beautiful shot and testimony of how special the 28mm lux asph is.

I take this opportunity to thank you Jono for your reviews and pictures over the years.

Not just the sheer quality of your pictures and writing, and in particular how you render light (I imagine decades of shooting with film behind it), but also and quite importantly for how inspiring you have been. 

It feels to me that you thrive to share your passion and enthusiasm with objectivity and integrity. I find personally that the humility in your approach gives so much stature, calibre and credibility to your findings and reviews. I spent some amount of money after reading over and over your reviews and looking at your pictures over the years, simply because you portrayed an idea of the best a camera or lens could do. It pushes me to improve and do better. Actually, whenever I see your pictures, I feel the compulsive urge to leave home right away and shoot ! 😂

I imagine you as someone who focuses on the good you can see in someone. And it feels to me that is what you are doing with your reviews, whether lenses, cameras and bags (oh these Fogg, perfection on a strap, up to the little French flag on the side).

Many thanks again for sharing your work, and please keep shooting with Leica gear! 🙏☺️

Edited by Hanno
  • Like 8
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...