Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2010/01/12

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

Subject: [Leica] C/V 50/1.1 comment. NOW 35/1.2 also.
From: shino at panix.com (Rei Shinozuka)
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2010 22:57:20 -0500
References: <0a41d63b14e648532db4db080080bfdb.squirrel@mail.threshinc.com>

nice, is that beatles rockband?  (i think i saw the paul hofner base in 
the bokehfield.)

-rei


Peter Klein wrote:
> And Peter, too.
>
> If you'd like to compare the CV 35/1.2 with the 35/1.4 Summilux ASPH,
> check out these galleries.  Same friends' house, same lighting, some of
> the same people, different evening. Apples to apples, as much as the real
> world will allow.  M8 with IR filters on both lenses at all times.
>
> CV 35/1.2 mostly at f/1.4
> http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/pklein/friends/NewYear2010/
>
> Leica 35/1.4 ASPH mostly at f/1.4
> http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/pklein/friends/ErevXmas09/
>
> The Leica lens is visibly a little "better" from a technical point of
> view.  But the CV lens is no slouch, is certainly sharp enough, and is a
> little kinder to the elderly. The Leica has more contrast and harsher
> bokeh. The CV has a bit of what Erwin would call veiling flare, which
> actually can lift shadows a bit, but may make shaded faces look a little
> muddy.
>
> What I really like about the 35/1.2 is that it combines and balances the
> excellent performance of modern aspheric lenses with some of the smoother,
> "rounder" drawing and smoother bokeh associated with classic lenses. I
> really like it. The only things I don't like about it are the size and
> weight, and the fact that it will color fringe in extreme contrast
> situations (backlit tree branches against the sky).
>
> With the Leica lens, I notice the notorious focus shift on my M8 when
> stopping down. It is real, but isn't as bad as many people make it out to
> be.  The CV lens has a slight "oscillating" focus shift which goes back
> and forth *very* slightly across the place the RF is focused on as you
> stop down. It is so small that for all practical purposes, you can ignore
> it and say that the CV doesn't shift at all.
>
> When I saw the the 35/1.2's oscillating focus shift, I couldn't believe my
> eyes, and I emailed Erwin about it. Erwin confirmed my observations in a
> private email. He told me the 50/1.1 has similar behavior, which is due to
> some deliberately uncorrected spherical abberration. He says it's a less
> expensive, less perfect solution to focus shift than floating elements,
> and you pay a price in image contrast, which one can more easily
> compensate for in digital rather than film.
> -------------------
>
>   
>> And Michiel too
>>     
>
> 2010/1/12 Nathan Wajsman <photo at frozenlight.eu>
>
>   
>> And so is 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 Jan 12, 2010, at 5:52 PM, Ric Carter wrote:
>>
>>     
>>> Ric Carter is pretty positive about the 35/1.2
>>>
>>> ric
>>>
>>>
>>> On Jan 12, 2010, at 11:21 AM, Stan Yoder wrote:
>>>
>>>       
>>>> Erwin Puts is pretty negative about the 35/1.2
>>>>         
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>   


In reply to: Message from pklein at threshinc.com (Peter Klein) ([Leica] C/V 50/1.1 comment. NOW 35/1.2 also.)