Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2009/03/25
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]As mentioned, This is just 50% of the original file and of course the DNG file was developed with exposure optimisation. It was sharpened to be printed (has capture and output sharpening) so Mark could make a print to hold in his hand. I didn't remove any EXIF data so you may well see all of the edit details, depending on how you are viewing this example. Its only part of the file anyway not the photo as I composed and presented it (here) http://www.pbase.com/hoppyman/image/101824440 For Clive, jpgs are very unsuitable if you are trying to make meaningful comparison deductions. Raw files are developed, of course but they have all of the original information in there. Any discussion on resolution and any direct comparison with the other shot are invalid anyway, different ISO's, different light, different shutter speeds and apertures, different subjects. Note the the Summilux shot was at f/1.4 and this one is stopped down at least a little. I think actually f/2.8 or more likely f/4. It is impossible to correct a lens as well at f/1.4 as at lesser apertures. Both shots are hand held anyway. Despite all of that, I think that you can see pretty clearly what the Summicron is capable of, which was the purpose of the post. There is absolutely nothing wrong the Summilux either. They are quite different lens designs. I've shot a little with a couple of examples of the Summilux and they are smooth and wonderful lenses, especially for flattering portraiture. 2009/3/26 Mark Rabiner <mark at rabinergroup.com> > My eyes again go right to the eyelashes... > And start counting. > In this example each eyelash seems to be pre calibrated with its own number > on it. > But wait! > I pull back and .... I cant! > Its a head and shoulder shot while the other one we were talking about was > a > waist up shot I think. > So a direct comparison is out. > Also this seems to have more light it. > For more natural contrast > And a probable higher shutter speed. > Maybe enough to allow for some stopping down.. > > But really a shot which almost has a medium format feel to it. > Overwhelming quality of image. > 3d almost. > > When I get real impressed by a lens in the past its when I'm taking a loupe > to an 8x10 or 11x14 darkroom print and checking out the eyelashes on a full > length shot. You can see the person from toe to head. And you can still > make > out individual lashes. Print it 20x24 and you'd not need the loupe to count > the eyelashes. > With my 90 APO Asph and my Balcar flash and 100 speed tab grain films you > could, Delta dawn or Fuji Acros. And an acutance developer dilution > combination. > Though Xtol 1:3 worked for me don't know if its quite in that category or > not. But acts as though it does at 1:3. > > 100 speed color neg films were nothing to apologize about for such a thing. > Or the slowest transparency films. I sure miss using Kodachrome 25 to test > my lenes with. > > > > Mark William Rabiner > > > > > From: Geoff Hopkinson <hopsternew at gmail.com> > > Reply-To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org> > > Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2009 16:50:43 +1000 > > To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org> > > Subject: Re: [Leica] Another 75mm-Summilux-on-M8 example > > > > Of course, the rest of the image chain also affects the quality. Most > stuff > > we post is hand held anyway. > > Here's a printable sample for you to compare the Summicron 75 ASPH. or > you > > can pixel peep. > > 100% crop (50% of the original frame) The file is still about 1MB for > > anyone averse to larger files. > > Caution file contains lady and beer. > > > > <http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/gh/a/ns/75sampleLARGEFILE.jpg.html> > > or http://tinyurl.com/dlo5h6 if the longer link is broken. > > -- > > Cheers > > Geoff > > 'Life's too short for mediocre glass' > > http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/gh/a/ > > http://www.pbase.com/hoppyman > > > > 2009/3/25 Nathan Wajsman <photo at frozenlight.eu> > > > >> While I do not disagree that it is risky to make judgments based on > 800x600 > >> pixel images on the web, I will still submit that I can see differences > >> between good and bad lenses even at that resulution. At least we can > regard > >> them as indications. The final decision has to be based on a full-size > >> image, as you say. > >> > >> My decision to buy an M8 was made after Hoppy the Aussie Leica Pusher > >> e-mailed me some DNG files from his camera. > >> > >> Nathan > >> > >> Nathan Wajsman > >> Alicante, Spain > >> http://www.frozenlight.eu > >> http://www.greatpix.eu > >> http://www.nathanfoto.com > >> > >> Books: http://www.blurb.com/bookstore/search?search=wajsman&x=0&y=0 > >> PICTURE OF THE WEEK: http://www.fotocycle.dk/paws > >> Blog: http://www.fotocycle.dk/blog > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> On Mar 25, 2009, at 4:49 AM, Mark Rabiner wrote: > >> > >> To me this is a scan of a size (1701 x 2048) which has some meaning; > >>> Unlike 99.9 of the posts of the lug which has people saying: > >>> "this lens took this picture ant that lens took that picture" > >>> Then people I assume run out and buy the lens having seen the shot. > >>> With rez good for a postage stamp. Could have been done with a > cardboard > >>> throw away digital camera. Once they start making them. > >>> Looking at this image I get what I think is a real feel for the lens; > >>> What it can do. Its real exciting and a real pleasure to behold. > >>> > >>> Is it the sharpest lens in the history of photography? > >>> I think so. > >>> > >>> I'm looking at eye lashes; > >>> Individual ones, you can count them. > >>> And the split ends at the ends of them > >>> > >>> Indoors wide open hand held. > >>> > >>> > >>> That's sharp. > >>> > >>> > >>> Mark William Rabiner > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> From: Jeff Moore <jbm at jbm.org> > >>>> Reply-To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org> > >>>> Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2009 15:57:19 -0400 > >>>> To: <lug at leica-users.org> > >>>> Subject: [Leica] Another 75mm-Summilux-on-M8 example > >>>> > >>>> Just grabbed this one last night. > >>>> > >>>> http://www.flickr.com/photos/jbm0/3358536031/sizes/o/ > >>>> > >>>> (Sure, it's handheld in room light at ISO 1250, so it's nothing like > as > >>>> preternaturally detailed as that frame Tina showed; but this shows > the > >>>> lens's usefulness for the way I've been working). > >>>> > >>>> This is part of the WFMU set I already pimped, so you needn't follow > the > >>>> link if you've already been there. > >>>> > >>>> By the way, about the M8 at 1250 -- does it seem to anyone else that > >>>> high ISOs look a lot better than they did when the camera was > released? > >>>> I'm thinking they've done some firmware magic or something. > >>>> > >>>> -Jeff > >>>> > >>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>> 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 > >>> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> 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 > > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > -- Cheers Geoff 'Life's too short for mediocre glass' http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/gh/a/ http://www.pbase.com/hoppyman