Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2012/07/09
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]People insisted on the LUG when new ASPH's Leica came out that they had bad bokeh because they already owned and used the pre ASPH versions with much worse resolution and contrast especially wide open or stopped down one and they needed a reason to keep their old lens and not get a much better performer. That's human nature. We can't say "I don't feel like buying another 50 I already have one its not that big a deal to me" we have to come up with some lame justification.. So the consolation was their old lens was going to give them creamier bokeh. The logic perhaps being less sharpness means more creamier in the out of focus areas. It almost sounds like it might be true. So there is according to this an advantage to having an older less sopshicatcated worse performing optic. "my work is more dependent and better bokeh" so he holds onto the lens. Embarrassingly lame but tenuous. It been said on the LUG hundreds of times and went unquestioned. Perhaps spread to other lists. In reality there is no downside to the latest glass from Leica. Other than its hard to afford them. And a pain to re-buy a focal lengh from Leica we already had and thought we were set up and had the best for life. I did it once. Having gotten the 90 Elmarit a cutting edge lens from Leica in the 90s from a NASA influx of money the 90 APO ASPH Summicron came out and it got me all excited. I had an influx of money. And a short tele has always been my main money maker. So I got the AA Summicron 90.. I still have both lenes. A couple of years ago I got a LTM 90 Elmar made very long ago. Maybe the 50's. So that's three 90's. The last one with a whole different look as its several generations back as Leica M optics go. Sometimes its nice to have more than one look to choose from. The incredibly sharp 90 Elmarit from the 80's and 90's The dazzlingly sharper than sharp AA Summicron. And The not super sharp but smooth and interesting Elmar for the LTM IIIF I have. With an indelible Leica fingerprint. And by fingerprint what's really being said is filled with optical flaws which add interest to the final result. - - from my iRabs. Mark Rabiner http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/ > From: Jefffery Smith <jsmith342 at gmail.com> > Reply-To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org> > Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2012 21:36:01 -0500 > To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org> > Subject: Re: [Leica] Nikon forum advice (OT!) > > The Voigtlander 50/1.5 Nokton was perhaps the first really sharp, > afforable, > asph lens that people hated for its bokeh. The trend in thinking seemed to > be > that reducing aberrations with asph elements benefitted everything except > bokeh. > > I think every lens needs to be assessed on its own merit. I don't have any > bad > Leica lenses, though the old 50/3.5 Elmar performs like a Russian copy. > Wait, > maybe it is.... > > The 50/2.5 Hexanon is better. > > Sent from my iPad > > Jeffery L. Smith > New Orleans, Louisiana > USA > > On Jul 9, 2012, at 20:56, John McMaster <john at mcmaster.co.nz> wrote: > >> I think that is a widely held misconception.... >> >> john >> ________________________________________ >> >> >> By the way, George, you had some incredibly creamy-bokeh shots posted the >> other day, and one of them was with an aspherical Leica lens(!). It blew >> away >> my bias that aspherical = bad bokeh. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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