Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/09/20
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Peter: > Take a wide-open picture with a 35/1.4 Asph and its predecessor, or a 35/1.4 lens by Those Other Manufacturers, and you'll see a difference on a digital sensor. < Which digital camera did you use to make this comparison? Any samples from that occasion which you can show us? Thanks, Jim Peter Klein wrote: > Jonathan: What good it is to use a 35/1.4 'Lux Asph on a 6 mp sensor, > rather than a cheaper lens? At f/8 or 5.6, probably not much, unless > it's what you've got anyway. > > But at f/1.4 or f/2, the real benefit of the 'Lux Asph is not the > ultra-high resolution prized by the KTF8 group (Kodachrome, Tripod and > f/8). It's that you get a crisp, contrasy image that looks better than > pretty much any other f/1.4 lens out there. Just as > the differences are visible on Tri-X or even faster films, and on a > humble Web JPEG. > > --Peter Klein > Seattle, WA > >> B. D. Colen wrote: >> > What would be the point? Quite simply the point would be to use them >> > with whatever crop factor is necessary. I can think of allot worse >> > things than having the 35 Summilux ASPH morph into what might be the >> > world's best 50 mm lens. ;-) > > > Jonathan Borden wrote: > >> What is the point of wanting a hugely expensive lens like the 35 lux >> Asph on a mediocre sensor? >> >> Gosh, it's not like the many other much more reasonably priced lenses >> aren't adequate. Do you really think there is going to be a huge >> difference among any reasonably well designed 35mm lens on a 5 or 6 mp >> sensor (and a small one at that)? > > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >