Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/06/15

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

Subject: RE: [Leica] Re: Photos on the Web and seeing subtle differences
From: "Robert G. Stevens" <>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 21:42:03 -0300

The point of it was to show that you can see the difference on a web
picture.  I am glad that you see this difference.  The Elmar is superior to
the Noctilux at all apertures except 1, 1.4, 2. As for its use, I would
have killed for it when I was in the Notredame Cathedral taking pictures
inside with a Summicron 35mm R lens.

On the plus side, The difference between the Noctilux and the Elmar is not
that great at 5.6, and you could leave the Elmar ar home if you needed low
light capabilities along with brighter scenes.


Robert Stevens  

At 06:12 PM 6/15/98 -0400, B. D. Colen wrote:
>Well, not to tick off the NoctiCrowd, but to my ancient eye, all other
>things being equal, the Elmar seems superior at maximum apperature and at
>5.6. HOWEVER...The Noctilux will capture images in light in which you
>wouldn't even try to shoot with the Elmar. And that is the point of the
>Noctilux. So what's the point of the comparison, other than to suggest that
>the Noctilux is a less than ideal all-around 50?
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From:
>> []On Behalf Of Robert G.
>> Stevens
>> Sent: Monday, June 15, 1998 5:35 PM
>> To:
>> Subject: [Leica] Re: Photos on the Web and seeing subtle differences
>> Hi Lugnuts:
>> There was a thread a few days ago regarding the ability to see subtle
>> differences in lenses as mentioned in some tests.  I just got a used
>> Noctilux and decided to test it against a new style 50mm Elmar. My
>> conclusion was that it is possible to see differences, if the scans are
>> done to enough resolution and just a small portion of the larger scan is
>> displayed at web resolutions.  These differences may not show up on some
>> lower resolution video modes.
>> I took two pictures with each lens with the camera mounted on a tripod.  I
>> did not shoo a test pattern, but my back yard.  It has some big pine trees
>> which can really show the resolving power and contrast of a lens.  The day
>> was overcast and fairly even soft light.  These pictures were
>> taken with an
>> M6 and the film was Kodak Gold 100.  I must admit, this is the first print
>> film I have ever used in the M6, but I was taking some pictures of some
>> friends that visited my parents last week and slides would not do
>> them much
>> good.
>> As for the method.  The negatives were scanned at 2700dpi on a Canon 2700F
>> scanner.  A section showing some shadow detail differences was cut from
>> these 2700dpi scans and then reduced to 72dpi for monitor viewing.  The
>> original files were then resized to 480X320 and 72dpi.
>> The resulting files show that the Noctilux vignettes at F1, but seems fine
>> at 5.6.  This can be seen even at monitor resolutions.  You can ignore any
>> color differences, as the scanner was set to auto colour correction.  Now
>> for the fine details as you would see through a loupe.  In the files
>> elmar5.6detail.JPG, and noct5.6detail.jpg, you can see the very slight
>> increase in the detail of the area of tree trunk in the shadow of
>> the table.
>> These files are posted to some web space that my ISP provides.  I
>> apologize
>> for not having a HTML page, but if you cut and paste these links into your
>> browser, you should get these images.  Some email programs will just let
>> you click on these links below.
>You may want to open these in pairs in multiple browser windows, so you can
>have them side by side or quickly click from one to the other.
>Thanks for your time and excuse the bandwidth if it doesn't interest you.
>It is raining today and I didn't have anything better to do.
>Robert Stevens