Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2009/08/06

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] 50/1.1 Nokton
From: jsmith342 at gmail.com (Jefffery Smith)
Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 09:57:37 -0500
References: <C69FE021.526FE%mark@rabinergroup.com> <08999416-6F3F-4F8F-96D4-A1454923E573@gmail.com> <AB145C92-DE49-4390-9B7C-837D13F1F020@gmail.com> <AE0854C8-5496-420F-B200-90B4D8579E31@gmail.com>

I was being facetious.

On Aug 6, 2009, at 9:49 AM, Steve Barbour wrote:

>
> On Aug 6, 2009, at 7:15 AM, Jefffery Smith wrote:
>
>> You have to take into account that everyone in the photos is 59  
>> years old.
>
>
> oh ! they are 59 yo...
>
> that's why they look so good...
>
> so it's not the lens...
>
>
> Steve
>
>
>> ;-)
>>
>> Part of my enthusiasm is the dim lighting that was available to me  
>> in many of them. There is a big difference between f/1.4 and f/1.1,  
>> and many lesser lenses are soft wide open. I don't find the bokeh  
>> to be bad. Anyway, I'm happy with it.
>>
>> Jeffery
>>
>>
>> On Aug 6, 2009, at 12:48 AM, Steve Barbour wrote:
>>
>>> On Aug 5, 2009, at 10:19 PM, Mark Rabiner wrote:
>>>
>>>>> http://www.400tx.com/files/Hilltop/1.html
>>>>>
>>>>> They didn't need sharpening. This is a very sharp lens wide open.
>>>>>
>>>>> Jeffery
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Jeffrey I don't think in digital photography its a thing where  
>>>> some lenses
>>>> require sharpening and others do not because they're so sharp to  
>>>> begin with.
>>>> Sharpening is pretty much part of the process.
>>>> Though people are saying its not needed with an M8 because of the  
>>>> lack of
>>>> anti aliasing pane of glass. No idea of that's true or not. I'm  
>>>> guessing
>>>> they'd still need some slight sharpening.
>>>> At the size we're looking at it on the screen you cant really tell.
>>>> It could be resized.
>>>> But it looks real soft to me.
>>>> If the eyelashes are sharp they are too small to see.
>>>
>>> I took a look Jeffery, expecting to be blown away...
>>>
>>> truth to tell Jeffery, the images that I see look quite  
>>> fine...they should, they are jpegs that fill about 20% of my  
>>> screen...
>>> acceptable,  no more...not terribly impressive to me in any way,  
>>> you really can't tell more...nor should you.
>>>
>>> Not better than a dozen other 50mm lenses shot wide open, by you  
>>> and others over the years...my impression is if anything, I've  
>>> seen better.
>>>
>>> This lens may be great, these images don't prove it.
>>>
>>> Sorry, personally I can't see it, I always wonder how a new lens  
>>> would fare in a blinded taste test.
>>>
>>> Steve
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Leica Users Group.
>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Leica Users Group.
>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>
>
> best,
>
> Steve
>
> steve.barbour at gmail.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information



In reply to: Message from mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner) ([Leica] 50/1.1 Nokton)
Message from steve.barbour at gmail.com (Steve Barbour) ([Leica] 50/1.1 Nokton)
Message from jsmith342 at gmail.com (Jefffery Smith) ([Leica] 50/1.1 Nokton)
Message from steve.barbour at gmail.com (Steve Barbour) ([Leica] 50/1.1 Nokton)