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!

leica 50mm apo advantages

V

Vivek

Guest
Cool, so will some people start using microfilm for street photography now to take advantage of their new Summicrons ;)
Hi Tom, If you are interested, I can spool and give you a color positive archival film rated at a whopping 0.1 ASA. It resolves >1000 lp/mm. The chemicals to develop it, it is up to you to find them and use them. :)
 

douglasf13

New member
He did not even do that (remove AA). Yes, he spun that little post to an extent that it gave that impression. It is quite possible he has no technical knowledge of what he was doing or writing about. Not a big deal.
How so? His blog post seems to clearly indicate that he did. What did he really do?
 
V

Vivek

Guest
How so? His blog post seems to clearly indicate that he did. What did he really do?
I re-read that blog post and find problems with almost every paragraph in that. I do not have the time nor the interest to rewite the whole thing which is an utter OT and a worthless discussion.

I think the person who posted originally on this topic in this thread is spot on!
 

douglasf13

New member
I re-read that blog post and find problems with almost every paragraph in that. I do not have the time nor the interest to rewite the whole thing which is an utter OT and a worthless discussion.

I think the person who posted originally on this topic in this thread is spot on!
Why bother posting about it in the first place. I only asked about the AA thing.

Why would you say the above poster is spot on, when he says that Thein claims to have removed the CFA, which I see no evidence of?? You can start another thread about it, if this isn't the place, but please don't leave us hanging.
 
V

Vivek

Guest
Doug, You arereferring to a part of his post but I was saying that his conclusion is spot on. :)

No AA was removed. I shoot with NEx bodies without the factory UV/ IR filters. I am yet to see any moire, even with some of the sharpest lenses ever made. Believe you me, i do have a few sharp lense that some of the bloggers out there have no clue about.

More to the point (shallwe consider this topic closed here for now?)- thecover glass on the sensor in a NEX is an AA filter. It is not a typical glass at all. A very esoteric material with unusual (for a glass) properties.
 

douglasf13

New member
Doug, You arereferring to a part of his post but I was saying that his conclusion is spot on. :)

No AA was removed. I shoot with NEx bodies without the factory UV/ IR filters. I am yet to see any moire, even with some of the sharpest lenses ever made. Believe you me, i do have a few sharp lense that some of the bloggers out there have no clue about.

More to the point (shallwe consider this topic closed here for now?)- thecover glass on the sensor in a NEX is an AA filter. It is not a typical glass at all. A very esoteric material with unusual (for a glass) properties.
Thanks for the info, Vivek, although moire was a rather typical problem with the old NEX-5 for many users, even with the AA in place. I certainly noticed it on occasion.
 
Last edited:

sven

New member
In order to see the benefits of this (admittedly awesome) lens, you need two things:

1) A medium that will capture the extra detail to begin with. That means an M Monochrom or M at least - or very fine grained film. The M9 platform won't cut it. You might see small differences at 100% but you don't buy a $7k lens for that. Well, maybe some do. ;)

2) You will need to print LARGE. Likely upscaling the image in the process. Little web-sized photos won't show the detail.

But the quality will appeal to anyone. I wouldn't think street so much (half the time they're out of focus, crooked or blurred anyway). Definitely landscape and architecture. Travel.
This is totally inaccurate, you cannot see a resolution difference between m and m9 for the most part. Your replies are also very rude. Just because you blog, do not assume you are an expert. NB23 is correct in his statements.

I like the way you blog, actually lot better than some other Leica bloggers. but look at Jono's response to critics in Leica rumors after they unjustly tore him apart. His response is classy and respectful. This is the way you earn respect.

Back to topic, I have used both lenses and the Apo50 has a different signature, more corrected for distortion and aberration. Resolution wise both lenses resolve more than current cameras. For M monochrome, I much prefer a low contrast lens than an apo50 but that's just me. This answet may not help you but this is how I feel about these two lenses
 
It's a shame this thread has gone off topic, I think the OP is a valid and interesting question.

is a 17x22 print big enough to see the brilliance of the 50 apo?
It's an APO lens, so in short, yes you would see the magnificence of colour and tonality, irrespective of the size of print. More than a large print you need very good light and a very good subject. You need to remain 16 bits and with a decent colour gamut through to printing.

The resolution of the printing process has more to do with rendering sharpness than the size of the print. Some 8x10 owners still refuse to enlarge because a disciplined photog creating contact prints are simply astounding. So in theory a smaller print can see significant differences, but it depends heavily on a disciplined process.

To max out my printer I can go to 600dpi, uni-directional printing and some super-high quality mode. At 600dpi, an image of 3472 x 5216 would print it's finest at 5.8" x 8.7". Assuming a disciplined capture process, good light and disciplined post (especially sharpening and local contrast control) you would could produce remarkable prints with this lens, the difference should be visible even on an M8.

- Paul
 

Double Negative

Not Available
This is totally inaccurate, you cannot see a resolution difference between m and m9 for the most part. Your replies are also very rude. Just because you blog, do not assume you are an expert. NB23 is correct in his statements.

I like the way you blog, actually lot better than some other Leica bloggers. but look at Jono's response to critics in Leica rumors after they unjustly tore him apart. His response is classy and respectful. This is the way you earn respect.
Who said anything about seeing a difference in resolution between the M and M9? I was talking about seeing a difference between lenses on a sensor that won't resolve those details in the first place. In looking at the numbers from Erwin, it would appear that even the M won't show the full capabilities of the APO.

As for my response... I'm not a "blogger" - nor do I claim to be an expert. But I've been doing this long enough, and certainly longer than those I was compared to in NB23's post. I don't take that kind of crap from real people, let alone some anonymous person on a forum.
 

algrove

Well-known member
You know what the real problem is today? No one prints. It's all pixel peeping.
I print since I consider it the last step in enjoying image capture. I do not print that many images per year, only the ones I like. 36x72, yes one to be done when I can afford it AND the mounting, 36x24 yes a few, 30x20 yes a few, but most prints I enjoy the most are those which I can print at home-they are 13x19 or 17x22.
 

sven

New member
Who said anything about seeing a difference in resolution between the M and M9? I was talking about seeing a difference between lenses on a sensor that won't resolve those details in the first place. In looking at the numbers from Erwin, it would appear that even the M won't show the full capabilities of the APO.

As for my response... I'm not a "blogger" - nor do I claim to be an expert. But I've been doing this long enough, and certainly longer than those I was compared to in NB23's post. I don't take that kind of crap from real people, let alone some anonymous person on a forum.
No comments..... Well let me repeat NB23's first response to you. "Misconceptions galore". Have fun
 

jonoslack

Active member
the mtf chart of this lens looks awesome, but in real photos, which type of photographer can really benefit from using this lens over the 50 lux asph?

not sure but i am thinking maybe a landscape photographer (although not really that wide) or maybe an architectural photographer?

maybe for large prints.....
HI There
Well . . . . I keep trying to persuade myself that my lovely 'lux is just as good. I'm lucky enough to have been able to borrow one of these lenses for a little while now. Soon the terrible moment is going to come when I have to give it back.

Truth is that for most photographs you don't really notice . . . and then there'll be one that smacks you in the face - I have no idea how to describe it. but it's there, and you can still see it in web sized jpgs - even facebook maulings don't completely remove it.

I don't have any grannies to sell, but the terrible moment is going to come when I have to decide to buy this lens . . . there is no escape . . . resistance is useless!

all the best
 

gooomz

Member
just recently tried my 21mm lux asph on the MM. While I have never noticed this before, while still great, my 21mm lux images are just less sharp as the ones i have taken with my M9. the sensor on the MM demands the most of the lens as while the 21mm asph is great, is is far from the sharpest 21mm and the MM shows it as the M9 wouldn't so much.
 
HI There
Well . . . . I keep trying to persuade myself that my lovely 'lux is just as good. I'm lucky enough to have been able to borrow one of these lenses for a little while now. Soon the terrible moment is going to come when I have to give it back.

Truth is that for most photographs you don't really notice . . . and then there'll be one that smacks you in the face - I have no idea how to describe it. but it's there, and you can still see it in web sized jpgs - even facebook maulings don't completely remove it.

I don't have any grannies to sell, but the terrible moment is going to come when I have to decide to buy this lens . . . there is no escape . . . resistance is useless!

all the best
I have the 50 LA and I don't know what to do , if I change for the AA or not
one day I say yes the next day no :)

You really think it is worth to change ?
 
Jono,

I'm still going back and forth. Is the APO's performance worth a Noct trade in? So many say no, but they seem to have their Nocts glued to their cameras. I find myself leaving it home because of its weight, and lack of close focusing distance. I'd like to have both but can't justify so much moola in two lenses, which are both 50mm.
 
Maybe, but I'd like to hear from some good photographers what they think of the lens before I pull the trigger. Jono's comments caught my attention because he has a Summilux, and he wishes he could keep the APO.
 

jonoslack

Active member
Jono,

I'm still going back and forth. Is the APO's performance worth a Noct trade in? So many say no, but they seem to have their Nocts glued to their cameras. I find myself leaving it home because of its weight, and lack of close focusing distance. I'd like to have both but can't justify so much moola in two lenses, which are both 50mm.
I have the 50 LA and I don't know what to do , if I change for the AA or not
one day I say yes the next day no :)

You really think it is worth to change ?
Hi There
Problem is that I still use my 50 'lux - I really like it for evening do's, pubs etc where I don't dare take my Noctilux, but I'd like the extra stop.

3 50's is clearly overkill . . . . except that probably 50% of my shots are taken with a 50.

Current feeling is to sell my 35 FLE and 24 'lux to fund the 50 AA, because I don't use them as much as either of the other 50s.

. . . . but if someone trod on my foot and said your Noct or your 50 'cron . . . . I think I'd keep the 50 'cron.

Sorry!
 
Hi There
Problem is that I still use my 50 'lux - I really like it for evening do's, pubs etc where I don't dare take my Noctilux, but I'd like the extra stop.

3 50's is clearly overkill . . . . except that probably 50% of my shots are taken with a 50.

Current feeling is to sell my 35 FLE and 24 'lux to fund the 50 AA, because I don't use them as much as either of the other 50s.

. . . . but if someone trod on my foot and said your Noct or your 50 'cron . . . . I think I'd keep the 50 'cron.

Sorry!
arrrrrrg ! :D

thanks Jono

I shall keep my 35 Summilux in any case
 
Thanks for the comment, Jono. I may regret it some day; I'm going to let the Noctilux go in favor of the APO. I have a Monochrom and I'll look forward to glueing it onto that.
 
Last edited:

jonoslack

Active member
arrrrrrg ! :D

thanks Jono

I shall keep my 35 Summilux in any case
I was thinking I might also sell my 35 summarit and get a 35 summicron asph . Rationalisation!
Apart from the Noct, I'm not really very keen on bigger lenses, and I wouldn't usually shoot a 35 at f1.4 anyway.

Madness - it's all Madness:shocked::LOL::banghead:
 
Top