Leica 75 Lux what a lens when you nail it

[woodyspedden]

Woody that image is spectacular and hopefully you have a nice large print of it.

Terry

I printed this at 22x36 and it held up remarkably well. There is nothing in the 135 world that matches the M8 files in my opinion.

Woody

 

[jaapv]

Inspiring. I love that lens, but don't use it enough. Into the "daily use" bag it goes tonight!:salute:

 

[Jack]

Inspiring. I love that lens, but don't use it enough. Into the "daily use" bag it goes tonight!:salute:

Yep... Mine's going back in too!

 

[Guy Mancuso]

We just need to get over the weight and bulk of it but it should be in the bag ,even on things that you would not associate using it for . It becomes a neat tool. I like the Cron also and the Summarit . The decision is a hard one in this arena

 

[LJL]

Guy, and others,
All great looking shots. Little doubt the 75 Lux is a nice piece of kit.

I did find it informative, and somewhat amusing, how things circled around the 75s for a bit. I think it does suggest that any of them are more than capable of delivering, and yet each has its own signature and attractive features, be it bokeh, sharpness, contrast, size, price, etc.

The Lux may be bigger and heavier, but it still can "wow" with images. And the other key point folks made.....the more you use any lens, the more comfortable you get with framing and other things. Something to be said for few lenses that get used more over lots of glass that gets used little ;-)

LJ

 

[Jack]

Woody:

What a difference 2 minutes can make LOLOLOL! Folks, I had just got through telling everybody that the light can pop at this location after sunset, so to hang tight for a few minutes after sunset. Most of the plethora of other photographers that usually hang around there had left after the first fade and I grabbed my shot in this light about 5 minutes later. It started to fade the second time so I began taking my gear down and putting it away. The group was busy talking and enjoying the sunset when two minutes later it popped for about 10 seconds more looking like you see it in Woody's capture. As you can see, he nailed it and i came away with a weak second

Congrats Woody!

My version, 2 minutes earlier -- and per my announcement on color accuracy, this image looks HORRIBLE if viewed in Safari!:

 

[Guy Mancuso]

I agree leica just makes great glass and some folks can argue about it all day long on which is better but that really is not what it is about. It's what you can draw from them is the key. Frankly the Lux is a old dog , old design and technically nowhere near that of the advanced Cron with floating elements Asph and Apo designs but it is a 30 year design that can produce great stuff. That is what i like to talk about more than anything when it comes to gear is what it can do for you with your work, not count resolution charts. LOL

Yes of course it is nice to compare them like i did in the Summarit tests but really what was i really doing, i was showing you how they draw more than anything else. This is the stuff that counts as a shooter, so threads like this are worth reading because they show you more than anything else.

 

[wparsons]

GET the STEER. It totally changes the handling of the 75 'lux.

Guy recommended this and I went for it. Not only inexpensive -- indispensable.

 

[LJL]

I agree leica just makes great glass and some folks can argue about it all day long on which is better but that really is not what it is about. It's what you can draw from them is the key. Frankly the Lux is a old dog , old design and technically nowhere near that of the advanced Cron with floating elements Asph and Apo designs but it is a 30 year design that can produce great stuff. That is what i like to talk about more than anything when it comes to gear is what it can do for you with your work, not count resolution charts. LOL

Yes of course it is nice to compare them like i did in the Summarit tests but really what was i really doing, i was showing you how they draw more than anything else. This is the stuff that counts as a shooter, so threads like this are worth reading because they show you more than anything else.

Guy,
I agree with what you are saying, and did not suggest any of this great stuff be diminished or overlooked at all, nor that one solution was the only way to go. Seeing how each lens is capable of delivering things in its own way and under a variety of shooting needs and conditions is extremely helpful and valuable. One of the points I was trying to make is how many of us can and do circle around things, for very valid reasons. Having every lens that draws differently would be wonderful, but also impractical, especially if most of them get left behind in the bag or at home. Being able to get the kinds of impressions about image delivery from different lenses is helpful to all. I still believe that the best most of us can do is to use all of our gear more, no matter how many or few pieces that may be

LJ

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Yes the comparisions are nice because it gives folks visually what they can do and help decide where to unload there pocket to get one. The 75mm lenses are tough because you face different things more than some other lenses size and weight are real big here the difference between the Lux and Summarit is very big and the Cron becomes the compromise size on one hand. The Lux has the speed and a certain look wide open , the Cron is sharp across the field at F2 and the differences keep mounting so yes I agree it is a tough call in this area. Than if you jump into the zeiss and Cv lenses than you add more to the decision. Even myself went back and forth in the R mount with the 80 and 90 more times than i care to admit at least 3 times. LOL

 

[woodyspedden]

Woody:

What a difference 2 minutes can make LOLOLOL! Folks, I had just got through telling everybody that the light can pop at this location after sunset, so to hang tight for a few minutes after sunset. Most of the plethora of other photographers that usually hang around there had left after the first fade and I grabbed my shot in this light about 5 minutes later. It started to fade the second time so I began taking my gear down and putting it away. The group was busy talking and enjoying the sunset when two minutes later it popped for about 10 seconds more looking like you see it in Woody's capture. As you can see, he nailed it and i came away with a weak second

Congrats Woody!

My version, 2 minutes earlier -- and per my announcement on color accuracy, this image looks HORRIBLE if viewed in Safari!:

Jack

I know this is weird but I opened this thread in both Safari and Firefox simultaneously so I could do a one click swap between them. On my Mac and Eizo monitor there is absolutely no differences between them far as i can tell. Go Figure

Woody

 

[Jack]

Jack

I know this is weird but I opened this thread in both Safari and Firefox simultaneously so I could do a one click swap between them. On my Mac and Eizo monitor there is absolutely no differences between them far as i can tell. Go Figure

Woody

Are you running Leopard? I had Guy confirm it on his machines too and he noted skintones were also way off. Guy and I are both running Leopard with the latest Safari build, 3.0.4 On both my PC with IE and new Mac with Firefox, it looks like it should, a perfect match to CS3.

Edit: This is weird. Safari is color managed, but doesn't render the jpeg above correctly. Firefox isn't color managed, but renders the jpeg above identically to CS3 (which is obviously color managed), when all are viewed side-by-side on my profiled monitor...

 

[Guy Mancuso]

I switched back to firefox , for some reason it looks better. Does not make sense

 

[TRSmith]

My safari and firefox browsers both show the same color on my Eizo (G5 with Tiger). I've yet to see any images on this site that appear to be "off". But if some are seeing it, then it must be something.

Is it possible that saving an image with an ICC profile might make a difference in how it's displayed in the newer versions of Safari? I found this on John Nack's blog: "Now there's a cross-platform way to present accurate color images on the Web. Check "ICC Profile" in Photoshop's Save for Web dialog to include the info needed for color management to do its thing."

Or, maybe it's just happening in Leopard.

 

[woodyspedden]

Are you running Leopard? I had Guy confirm it on his machines too and he noted skintones were also way off. Guy and I are both running Leopard with the latest Safari build, 3.0.4 On both my PC with IE and new Mac with Firefox, it looks like it should, a perfect match to CS3.

Edit: This is weird. Safari is color managed, but doesn't render the jpeg above correctly. Firefox isn't color managed, but renders the jpeg above identically to CS3 (which is obviously color managed), when all are viewed side-by-side on my profiled monitor...

Jack

I switched to Leopard for my MacBook Pro 17 inch, but when I tried to do it with my desktop MacPro I had horrible problems and switched back to Tiger. I won't try Leopard again until they fix some really awful problems. They either did not provide sufficient time for third party developers to get their Leopard compatible products on the market or whatever. Outcome is that the new Mac OS is full of bugs. Hope all gets well later

Woody

 

[robsteve]

My version, 2 minutes earlier -- and per my announcement on color accuracy, this image looks HORRIBLE if viewed in Safari!:

Jack:

It takes some people a long time to realize that photography is all about the light. I am referring to the photograhers that left after the sun set, not you or Woody.

Robert

 

[Jack]

Guy, Woody and TR: I suspect this is only a Leopard issue, something weird going on like maybe both Leopard and Safari trying to manage the image. Woody, can you do me a favor and browse the thread I posted in the processing section on your laptop and seeif you then see them displayed differently?

Thanks,

 

[Jack]

Jack:

It takes some people a long time to realize that photography is all about the light. I am referring to the photograhers that left after the sun set, not you or Woody.

Robert

Robert, you are so correct! That was the point of my post, how much better Woody's shot is for having waited for the light to actually disappear for good before putting his gear away. :thumbup:

Cheers,

 

[Jack]

Jack:

It takes some people a long time to realize that photography is all about the light. I am referring to the photograhers that left after the sun set, not you or Woody.

Robert

Robert, you are so correct! That was the point of my post, how much better Woody's shot is for having waited for the light to actually disappear for good before putting his gear away. Woody = :thumbup: Me = :banghead:

,

 

[woodyspedden]

Robert, you are so correct! That was the point of my post, how much better Woody's shot is for having waited for the light to actually disappear for good before putting his gear away. Woody = :thumbup: Me = :banghead:

,

jack

I finally got Phyllis off the MacBook long enough to do the test for you. I set things up so that images were the same size and in the same relative place on the screen so I could click back and forth to quickly see differences. There were definitely some subtle differences but very minor. I suspect that if you were not doing an A/B comparison that either image would strike you as being just fine. Certainly nothing like the raucous pink in the image you posted.

Of course this is only one sample so I am not sure if you can conclude that Leopard is an issue. Based on my view, I would say not.

Best
Woody