k-hawinkler
Well-known member
+1.
FF and MFT systems complement each other and excell in different ways.
That's why I use both.
FF and MFT systems complement each other and excell in different ways.
That's why I use both.
The GetDPI Photography Forum
Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
Official launch Leica DG Nocticron 42.5mm F1.2 ASPH
- Thread starter Knorp
- Start date
Annna T
Active member
I sent it to Olympus support service, but it came back with the mention that the lens "was inside specifications" (however the whole service was very fast, about one week). Yet It is clearly decentered, having a very weak upper left corner and being best at the lower right corner.
It doesn't give good results unless I close it down to 5.6, while a friend's one shows already good corners at F2.8. I didn't want to pick a fight with Olympus and left it at that. But I shoot it less often and I'm careful to close it down at F5.6 when I use it. That's all.
I think that with these cheaper lenses the tolerances are wider. I prefer to use the Zeiss Contax G 45mm F2.8 when I have the time to MF. It is as sharp as the 75mm F1.8 on my E-M5.
Last edited:
Godfrey
Well-known member
IMO, you acquiesced too quickly. If I recelved a lens like that, I'd insist that the lens does not perform to expectations and I was not satisfied with it. Demand an exchange or money back. It's not a matter of "picking a fight," it's a matter of getting what you paid for.
There's no reason to accept poor performance from a less than stellar unit. Don't give up your money so willingly—that lens costs a fifth of buying the Panasonic-Leica, which is significant. Having to stop down to f/5.6 for decent results is clearly out of bounds.
An interesting comment on digilloyd's blog about this lens (http://diglloyd.com/blog/2014/20140107_3-Panasonic42_5f1_2.html):
"I’m not a fan of optical stabilization, because it does not improve imaging performance and in this case, I’d want to use it on the Olympus E-M1, which has superb in-body image stabilization. So those extra lens elements just make the lens heavier and more expensive and more complex and more prone to alignment errors. Well, it is what it is."
I agree with him in a very limited, mostly theoretical sense apart from his comment on the E-M1, with which I agree completely. Image stabilization won't improve IQ if the circumstances don't need image stabilization and OIS theoretically degrades such images. However, IS of whatever form has so improved the percentage of my keepers that the practical advantages of OIS were to me, when I first used it, the greatest advance in photography since in camera metering. When I switched from Nikon to Canon in the mid 90's, 50% of the reason was the OIS that Canon was starting to introduce in some lenses.
"I’m not a fan of optical stabilization, because it does not improve imaging performance and in this case, I’d want to use it on the Olympus E-M1, which has superb in-body image stabilization. So those extra lens elements just make the lens heavier and more expensive and more complex and more prone to alignment errors. Well, it is what it is."
I agree with him in a very limited, mostly theoretical sense apart from his comment on the E-M1, with which I agree completely. Image stabilization won't improve IQ if the circumstances don't need image stabilization and OIS theoretically degrades such images. However, IS of whatever form has so improved the percentage of my keepers that the practical advantages of OIS were to me, when I first used it, the greatest advance in photography since in camera metering. When I switched from Nikon to Canon in the mid 90's, 50% of the reason was the OIS that Canon was starting to introduce in some lenses.
Jorgen Udvang
Subscriber Member
Look at the samples on this page, particularly the second group:
Leica DG Nocticron 42,5 mm f1.2: análisis | Quesabesde
Anybody need a D700? I won't be able to afford a lens of this quality for 35mm anyway, so might as well sell the clunker... lol
Leica DG Nocticron 42,5 mm f1.2: análisis | Quesabesde
Anybody need a D700? I won't be able to afford a lens of this quality for 35mm anyway, so might as well sell the clunker... lol
Godfrey
Well-known member
I suspect that if I gave in and bought your D700, I wouldn't be able to afford the Nocticron 45mm ...
Jorgen Udvang
Subscriber Member
:ROTFL:
ptomsu
Workshop Member
These samples look pretty impressive!
Really tempted to get this lens, although I have now to decide to get either the Nocticron for my EM1, or the Fuji 1.2/56 for my XE2. Not sure which one would get more use ....
I generally find the EM1 with good lenses to be a stellar performer, although the XE2 is for sure superior once it comes to best IQ which I think is due to the XTrans sensor.
Decisions are really hard tough those days
Really tempted to get this lens, although I have now to decide to get either the Nocticron for my EM1, or the Fuji 1.2/56 for my XE2. Not sure which one would get more use ....
I generally find the EM1 with good lenses to be a stellar performer, although the XE2 is for sure superior once it comes to best IQ which I think is due to the XTrans sensor.
Decisions are really hard tough those days
Godfrey
Well-known member
They do, darn it. ;-)
I'm making my decision processes much simpler (and distraction much less..).Really tempted to get this lens, although I have now to decide to get either the Nocticron for my EM1, or the Fuji 1.2/56 for my XE2. Not sure which one would get more use ....
I generally find the EM1 with good lenses to be a stellar performer, although the XE2 is for sure superior once it comes to best IQ which I think is due to the XTrans sensor.
Decisions are really hard tough those days
I'm pretty much selling off everything other than the E-M1 and Micro-FourThirds system equipment for digital capture. It's at least good enough for my intended use, better than anything else in some contexts. (I'll keep a bunch of lovely old film gear for occasional use/entertainment... ;-)
Now I just have to do the sales, then I can afford the Nocticron 42.5 and upcoming Summilux 15/1.7 when they become available. Maybe buy a second E-M1 body too, along the way.
Concentrating on one set of equipment and the photography has always been the best strategy for actually getting photography done, for me at least.
G
Zlatko Batistich
New member
How does the autofocus compare on those two cameras? If the autofocus on one is better, will that influence your decision on which of those lenses to buy?
ptomsu
Workshop Member
AF is definitely better on the EM1 - faster and better tracking, which is important as I try to use it also as a wildlife camera, where I do need tracking.
Other than that I prefer the IQ and rendering of the Fuji. Now that the XE2 AF is fast and accurate enough for most situations (not as fast as the EM1 AF) I am using the XE2 more for portraits, family, casual shooting. As I said I intend to use the EM1 for wildlife, final goal to replace my Nikon D800E - I am not quite there yet.
So I will buy only one of these fast primes, currently I lean more to the Fuji, because of the areas I use the Fuji. But I am sure also the Panaleica will be excellent on any of the latest m43 bodies!
ptomsu
Workshop Member
I actually fully agree - so I am trying to minimize my systems always but after a while I find myself ending up with another additional great system again
Now maybe I will be able to get rid of my Nikon gear which is D800E based as soon as higher resolution camera types become available from Fuji and/or Olympus. I am using D800E currently as MFDB replacement and so far it does the job nicely!
Having said this, it is astonishing how good m43 (Oly based) and Fuji X have become today. So also waiting for some high speed super telephoto lenses and then my decision to get rid of Nikon will be very easy.
Godfrey
Well-known member
I'm very, very tempted to buy one of these lenses. I'm just not sure if it's the old Magpie Syndrome kicking in or whether I really want/will use one ... but there's no question that it is an absolutely superb lens, one of the best in the business.
Sheesh. Nocticron 42.5/1.2 or ZD 150/2 ...? Decisions, decisions. ;-)
G
The 150mm f2 is a specialty lens. It's heavy and large. I use it almost exclusively on a monopod for my son's sports. I used it for some fall leaf images and it is beautiful of course, but I can't imagine going for a meandering walk with the lens.
The images are spectacular and sharp from corner to corner at all focusing distances from wide open.
ptomsu
Workshop Member
I owned the 2/150 back when I shot the E1 (some 9 years ago?)!
I really loved this lens, but in the end it has its weight and finally I did not carry it around as much as I had planned. I would welcome a similar lens in m43 design, so also the wight would go down a bit - maybe make it just 2.4 or 2.5?
I really loved this lens, but in the end it has its weight and finally I did not carry it around as much as I had planned. I would welcome a similar lens in m43 design, so also the wight would go down a bit - maybe make it just 2.4 or 2.5?
dhsimmonds
New member
Indeed, we have a further growing land of luxuries
--surviving unless economic stresses cull out some options.
But, one counter-jab to your well-played hand above:
the EM-1 offers class-act stabilization --to which I guess
the Nikon answer is the class-act high-ISO to up shutter speed.
I remember looking at a shot of photo journalist Alison Wright
running, on the *job*, with a pair of pair of D3 Nikons and the
usual 24-70, 70-200? & whatever other ... ,
and thinking Shouldn't m4/3 greatly lighten her load?
The AF hadn't been adequate, I guess, nor the toughness.
Now, though, I should think that some such non-burly PJs
will re-think their gear list; having the tiny GM1 as both
an inconspicuous and low-wgt/size back-up camera must
count as a good option (as toughness doesn't help in the case
of theft or ...)!
Jorgen wrote:
But that sounds like a quite encumbered photographic outing
--at least, hardly "street"!
And would you be able to getwell acquainted with all the lovely gear that piqued interest?
In this regard, it's quite the contrast to read about (e.g.)
the late Willy Ronis (France) --to wit:
[ ]
"only 3 cameras" :: sounds like some of today's half-yearly quotas!
(with careers less durable) (Though along with "cameras"
should be mentioned "films".)
-d.