Jump to content

Recommended Posts

The falloff difference isn't that big to my eyes, but what is big is:

 

1. Otus has a busier background oof rendering - look at the 24-90 lettering on the lens

2. Otus is not as well corrected, I see more green fringing around the 24-90 lens

3. The 50/1.4 has busier foreground oof- see the lettering on the summilux in the foreground

4. Lesser green fringing around the 24-90 lens than I see in the Otus shot

Edited by TheGodParticle
Link to post
Share on other sites

The falloff difference isn't that big to my eyes, but what is big is:

 

1. Otus has a busier background oof rendering - look at the 24-90 lettering on the lens

2. Otus is not as well corrected, I see more green fringing around the 24-90 lens

3. The 50/1.4 has busier foreground oof- see the lettering on the summilux in the foreground

4. Lesser green fringing around the 24-90 lens than I see in the Otus shot

Well observed. Agree on 2-4. On 1, call it busier if you like. The fall off is just faster with the Otus, smoother with the SL50. Look at the instruments at 9 o'clock behind the steering wheel in the following two. Again, full resolution here: https://www.smugmug.com/gallery/n-GGCRrg/

 

Otus

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!

 

SL50

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS

Comparing the Otus to the SL50 1.4 is like comparing apples to bandanas...................The Otus is in a league of its own, maybe one day Leica will give us something to brag about :) :) :) :) 

 

Neil

Link to post
Share on other sites

Comparing the Otus to the SL50 1.4 is like comparing apples to bandanas...................The Otus is in a league of its own, maybe one day Leica will give us something to brag about :) :) :) :)

 

Neil

 

The SL 50 is very close to my ideal 50mm (apart from its size and price). 

The Otus looks not particularly interesting to me compared to the SL 50. I prefer the Otus 28, but its weight is even worse. It is still an extraordinary lens for me and I wonder when Leica will produce anything similar (I hope for a Summicron 28).

 

But apart from all that what should ever give us bragging rights about a lens or camera ? (unless you are the designer of the item) ?

Spending a few K for the equipment does not mean you have done anything noteworthy or substantial to be connected to it.

Not more than any drinker in a bar who spent a few pounds on drinks to get the firm impression and the courage to sing out loud that "we are the champions of the world".

Edited by steppenw0lf
Link to post
Share on other sites

The falloff difference isn't that big to my eyes, but what is big is:

 

1. Otus has a busier background oof rendering - look at the 24-90 lettering on the lens

2. Otus is not as well corrected, I see more green fringing around the 24-90 lens

3. The 50/1.4 has busier foreground oof- see the lettering on the summilux in the foreground

4. Lesser green fringing around the 24-90 lens than I see in the Otus shot

But is Leica digital correct CA? And OTUS was designed with canikon sensor stack thickness. That makes big difference.

 

The 50sl seems have good rendering if you nail the focus. All latest great lens will be brutal on focus accuracy, if you miss the shot slightly, it is not useable and will be worse compare to old glass such as 50lux R or M, with those, slightly miss the shots are not as obvious because the focus plain never razor thin.

Edited by ZHNL
Link to post
Share on other sites

After some months of use, I'm a bit frustrated with this lens:

 

- AF hunts in low light, even with FW 3.0 - this is the most frustrating, after all this is what this lens was made for?

- AF totally unusable in backlit situations

- manual focussion not practicalbe with this lens.

 

I now mostly use my old Summicron R for those situations

 

and I find this "abrupt" falloff of the focus plane sometimes a bit carricatural.

 

Yes, it is very sharp, yes it is nicely corrected, but sometimes I have the impression that there are technocrats at Leica, not photographers

I agree with you and have said the same thing myself on this thread. You're the first person to agree with me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The SL 50 is very close to my ideal 50mm (apart from its size and price). 

The Otus looks not particularly interesting to me compared to the SL 50. I prefer the Otus 28, but its weight is even worse. It is still an extraordinary lens for me and I wonder when Leica will produce anything similar (I hope for a Summicron 28).

 

But apart from all that what should ever give us bragging rights about a lens or camera ? (unless you are the designer of the item) ?

Spending a few K for the equipment does not mean you have done anything noteworthy or substantial to be connected to it.

Not more than any drinker in a bar who spent a few pounds on drinks to get the firm impression and the courage to sing out loud that "we are the champions of the world".

 

 

On a side note, how do you see the Otus 28 compared to the Summilux M28?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fantastic colour, contrast and rendering in all your wedding images Dan (I only left one above). I am sure your clients were very happy with your skill and the final images.

 

Thanks!

 

 

The SL and the lens goes along way to help with that, but the client will probably received some alternative processing - since I'm only second shooting, and I don't deliver the images to the client.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks!

 

 

The SL and the lens goes along way to help with that, but the client will probably received some alternative processing - since I'm only second shooting, and I don't deliver the images to the client.

 

Out of curiosity what is the feedback of the main shooter with regards to the rendering of the SL 50/f1.4? Does he see anything special or is this a subject just for the Leica connoisseurs? :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Out of curiosity what is the feedback of the main shooter with regards to the rendering of the SL 50/f1.4? Does he see anything special or is this a subject just for the Leica connoisseurs? :)

 

I can understand the intrigue, but it's not something I really want to bring up. It can be such a contentious subject. I don't like to compare cameras with other people, unless I believe it will be an objective discussion, which it rarely is...

 

 

I'm going to go off topic now...

 

It kind of makes my blood boil, someone asks how I'm getting along with my Leica - "Yea, fine" if I wanted to expand on that, I might say "AF could be better, but I like the quality"

 

Just leads to them gushing about how great their Fuji is... 

 

Everything is so relative... their experiences are not comparable.

  • Like 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...