douglasf13
New member
Looks good to me. Do you have any around f2.8-f4 by chance?
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!
Looks great to me.
Out of curiosity, is this Indonesia ? I might have to make a couple of trips there, to one of our manufacturing plants in the region (Batam, Indonesia).
I think by his f/11 picture, he eliminated the DOF issue right ? Thus proving that even the farthest corners have no smearing, per se ?
As far the 35/2 Biogon is concerned, it is a terrific performer even at f/2. By f/2.8, the whole field sharpens right up and by f/4 it is singing. Absolutely ZERO distortions (even onto the corners of Full-frame), which just amazed me.....you can shoot architectural stuff with absolutely no hesitation, with this lens.
The 25/2.8 Biogon on the other hand has some minimal (but slightly complex) distortions but for a wide-angle, it is also a star performer.
The only downside to the Biogons (vis-a-vis the Leica 35/2 Cron etc) is its slightly larger size (at least for a rangefinder lens) but there is no question in my mind, based on everything I read about it, that it is a superior all-round performer. Some people find the slightly larger size an advantage (ergonomically), when compared to the smaller (and controls tightly packed together) Leica 35/2.
douglasf13
New member
I'm just curious how the corners look at around f4, because I do shoot at infinity at that aperture for some things when the light goes down. It is really starting to look the CV 35 2.5 is the only 35mm M lens with the smearing problem.:thumbup:
deepdiver
New member
Looks great to me.
Out of curiosity, is this Indonesia ? I might have to make a couple of trips there, to one of our manufacturing plants in the region (Batam, Indonesia).
Hi Row,
yes this is Indonesia, where millions of crazy motorcycles drivers on the road
If the motorcycles hit ur car, then get ready to pay them some cash, no matter who is right or who is wrong.
Motorcycle = Always win
Car = Always Wrong in Indonesia
:grin::grin:
jonoslack
Active member
Yes, that's the oneLook forward to seeing how the 35 'Lux does on the NEX5 on some good proper English hedges.
Oh no . . . not going to do that :ROTFL: - impossible to prove anything sensible because of the different sensor size and resolution. So, if you can't make a good methodology, all it achieves is to offend one lot of people and irritate another! But, it's the messenger (in this case me) that always gets shot!
Two things are obvious:
1. the higher resolution and lack of an AA filter together with the angled microlenses have a big advantage in good light (without a doubt).
2. the NEX is much better at high ISO.
all the best
Good to know that before-hand !Hi Row,
yes this is Indonesia, where millions of crazy motorcycles drivers on the road
If the motorcycles hit ur car, then get ready to pay them some cash, no matter who is right or who is wrong.
Motorcycle = Always win
Car = Always Wrong in Indonesia
:grin::grin:
I doubt I would be driving when in Batam, and will just ask the local folks to arrange transportation and let them handle all/any situations that might arise.
Ok, don't want you to get shot at.
I thought people were pretty civil in this forum.
I think comparison shots with the same framing/AOV is an accepted way to handle the difference between the FF sensor and a cropped sensor. They do that in the MF forum all the time.
And upsizing the NEX 14MP image to the M9 18MP image size is the way to handle the MP difference of the two sensors. This way is the proper one but not everyone follows this when doing their high iso noise analysis comparisons.
The microlenses help with light fall off and performance in the corners but are obviously more needed on a FF sensor camera and not nearly as much on the 1.5 crop sensor.
What I wonder is whether the Leica M lenses can scale and not limit the IQ of the higher pixel density sensor of the NEX 5?